A/56/253 2. The Special Rapporteur stresses that the wearing of the hijab or any other distinguishing elements causes a problem only insofar as it uses religion for other purposes, directly or indirectly expresses attitudes of intolerance towards others or can reasonably cause serious threats to the public order. If it blends in with the country’s form of dress, and is observed normally, it should not give rise to limitations, reservations or objections, even where official documents are concerned. 3. In view of the above elements, it should be noted that the decision of the Supreme Court is in accordance with the laws of the Azerbaijani Republic with regard to departures, arrivals and passports, on the one hand, and the issuance of identification papers to Azerbaijani citizens, according to which these citizens must be represented without a head covering in the photographs affixed to the passports and other identification papers. Belarus 4. Regarding the communication of the Special Rapporteur (para. 18), Belarus replied: “The question of the fulfilment of military service in Belarus is governed by article 57 of the Constitution and by the law of 5 November 1992 on compulsory universal military service. “Under article 57 of the Constitution, it is the responsibility and sacred duty of every citizen of the Republic of Belarus to defend the Republic of Belarus. The procedure governing military service, the grounds and conditions for exemption from military service and the substitution thereof by alternative service are determined by law. “The law on compulsory universal military service and military service provides for both conscription into the military service and conscription into alternative service and the fulfilment of such service in one form or another (article 1, sect. 5 and article 14, sect. 3). “Since the draft law on alternative service is in the process of being adopted by the organs of the State, the question is governed by decision No. R98/2000 of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Belarus of 26 May 2000, concerning certain aspects of the application of article 57 of the Constitution. “The provisions of this decision are as follows: “(a) The Constitutional Court notes that, in accordance with the Constitution and the law on compulsory universal military service (articles 1 and 14), Belarusians are entitled, inter alia on grounds of religious beliefs, to do alternative military service, in accordance with modalities governed by an appropriate mechanism. There is thus an urgent need to adopt the draft law on alternative service or to supplement the law on compulsory universal military service by amending it as necessary in order to set up an appropriate mechanism for ensuring the exercise of the right to do alternative service. Pending the legal settlement of the questions concerning the grounds and conditions of alternative service, and the fulfilment of alternative service, the Constitutional Court agrees, in view of the exceptional circumstances, that the competent authorities, in accordance with articles 31, 57 and 59 and other 48