A/70/212 for example, may be culturally acceptable within the minority culture but may seem unusual or even rude to others. 72. Judges should be equipped — through training, guidance and awarenessraising — to grasp possible explanations for behaviour that might otherwise appear uncooperative. For example, witnesses from certain indigenous or other minority communities might face cultural obstacles to confronting and condemning an accused from the community, particularly an elder or religio us leader. Without this contextualization, a court might move swiftly to invoke contempt of court against a witness who refuses to answer in such circumstances, instead of seeking a means of resolving or of at least tackling the witness’s culture-related dilemma. 73. Each witness should be free to choose a form of oath that he or she considers appropriate to his or her religion, or to make a secular affirmation. 101 74. Rules of general application concerning formalities, such as appropriate dress in the courtroom (removal of headwear for instance), may, if applied without exception, be perceived as means of excluding or denigrating minorities, negatively impacting on their participation, cooperation and attitude towards the court. I. Supporting diversity and non-discrimination 1. Collection of disaggregated data 75. Systematic collection of data disaggregated by ethnic or national, linguistic and religious background (as well as by age and gender) should be the starting point for addressing discrimination and improving participation of minorities in the administration of justice. 102 Such data are crucial for identifying the characteristics and scope of any such discrimination, measuring progress (or regression) and developing effective strategies. Individuals should be allowed to self-identify and privacy should be respected. 103 The information should be collected at each stage of the criminal process. Unfortunately, few States make the required effort. 104 76. In the United Kingdom and parts of Canada and Spain, police are required to record and issue a receipt to anyone they stop, question or search, indicating the person’s ethnic origin (where possible, self-identified), the name of the police __________________ 101 102 103 104 20/27 See, e.g., Judicial College, England and Wales. “Discrimination on the basis of belief or non-belief”, in Equal Treatment Bench Book, 2013. See, e.g., Sentencing Project, “Reducing racial disparity in the criminal justice system: a manual for practitioners and policy makers” (2008), p. 28; A/HRC/27/68 (WGPAD report on access to justice, 2014), para 60 (o); CERD/C/FRA/CO/17-19 (CERD, 2010); Committee against Torture General Comment 2, para. 23; CAT/C/NLD/CO/5-6 (Committee against Torture, 2013); A/HRC/24/52/Add.2 (WGPAD mission to Panama, 2013); and A/HRC/29/46 (report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, 2015). On privacy and appropriate use of data, see Timo Mak konen, Measuring Discrimination: Data Collection and EU Equality Law (Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2006), p. 49. Almost none of the 25 respondents to the questionnaire declared that they collected any such data. Most either did not answer the question, said no such data were available, or said collection of such data were prohibited. See also A/HRC/24/52/Add.1 (WGPAD visit to the United Kingdom, 2013), paras. 24, 57 and 101; T. Makkonen, Measuring Discrimination: Data Collection and EU Equality Law, p. 9. 15-12578