A/71/269 between rule and exception. No one has to justify the exercise of his or her freedom of religion or belief, which, qua its nature as a universal human right, must be respected as inherent in all human beings. The burden of justification rather falls on those who deem limitations necessary. For limitations to be justifiable, they must meet all of the criteria set out in article 18 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other relevant norms of international human rights law. Accordingly, limitations must be prescribed by law and they must be necessary to pursue a legitimate aim: the protection of “public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others”. In addition, restrictions on manifestations of religion or belief (in the forum externum) must remain within the realm of proportionality, which means, inter alia, that they must be the least restrictive among all the adequate measures that could be applied. The internal dimension of freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief ( forum internum) even enjoys unconditional protection pursuant to article 18 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in which it is stated that: “No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a r eligion or belief of his choice”. 18. Respect for freedom of religion or belief — or lack of such respect — typically manifests itself in the ways in which Governments deal with grounds for limitations. Unfortunately, the Special Rapporteur has frequently noticed loose and overly broad invocations of grounds for limitations, which often seem to be undertaken without due empirical and normative diligence. He would like to reiterate paragraph 8 of general comment No. 22, in which the Human Rights Committee insists “that paragraph 3 of article 18 is to be strictly interpreted: restrictions are not allowed on grounds not specified there … Limitations may be applied only for those purposes for which they were prescribed and must be directly related and proportionate to the specific need on which they are predicated. Restrictions may not be imposed for discriminatory purposes or applied in a discriminatory manner”. 3. Equality and non-discrimination 19. Freedom of religion or belief does not only prohibit undue encroachments on the freedom of a person or a group of persons; it also prohibits discrimination — that is, the denial of equality — on the basis of religion or belief. For example, in article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights it is asserted that: “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status ”. Article 2 (1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights extends the same guarantee of non-discrimination to all individuals within the territory of a State party and to those subject to its jurisdiction. 1 Furthermore, it is confirmed in article 2 (1) of the 1981 Declaration that “no one shall be subject to discrimination by any State, institution, group of persons or person on the grounds of religion or belief”, thus the component of “belief” is also included. A strong message is sent in article 3 of the 1981 Declaration, in which it is stated that: “Discrimination between __________________ 1 16-13296 See Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 31 (2004), para. 10, and Heiner Bielefeldt, Nazila Ghanea and Michael Wiener, Freedom of Religion or Belief: An International Law Commentary (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 573 -574. 7/22