A/HRC/19/60 53. The Human Rights Committee has also expressed concern about the use of criminal laws to penalize the apparently peaceful exercise of religious freedom and that a large number of individuals have been charged, detained and sentenced in this context (CCPR/CO/83/UZB, para. 22). Moreover, the Human Rights Committee has dealt with registration issues in individual cases, for example by finding a violation of article 18, paragraph 1, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights following a State‟s refusal to register a community as a religious association, which made impossible such activities as establishing educational institutions and inviting foreign religious dignitaries to visit the country.21 54. Providing non-discriminatory registration procedures therefore falls within the responsibility of States under international human rights law. Even though a standard procedure for all States does not exist, it is clear that such domestic procedures should be established and implemented in the service of the human right to freedom of religion or belief. From this it follows that any procedures for the registration of religious or belief communities as legal persons should be quick, transparent, fair, inclusive and nondiscriminatory.22 55. Members of religious or belief communities interested in obtaining such a status should not be confronted with unnecessary bureaucratic burdens or with lengthy or even unpredictable waiting periods. Indeed as repeatedly highlighted by the Special Rapporteur, a number of existing registration practices need to be reviewed by States to ensure that such practices do not limit the right of all persons to manifest their religion or belief, either alone or in community with others and in public or private. Domestic registration requirements often appear to be used as a means to limit the rights of members of certain religious minorities.23 Such procedures should not be used as control instruments but, rather, should be enacted in the interest of enabling members of religious or belief communities to fully exercise their human rights. 56. For these reasons, the registration procedures must be accessible – on the basis of fairness, inclusiveness and non-discrimination – to all those who wish to achieve legal personality status for their communities. No religious community should have the possibility to exercise a “veto” or otherwise influence the decision to register or not to register another religious or belief group. All registration decisions must be based on clearly defined formal elements of law and in conformity with international law. Registration should neither depend on extensive formal requirements in terms of the number of members and the time a particular community has existed, nor should it depend on the review of the substantive content of the belief, the structure of the community and methods of appointment of the clergy. In addition, provisions which are vague or which grant excessive governmental discretion in giving registration approvals should be avoided. Members of religious or belief communities who have been denied registration must have access to remedies, including informal conflict management and formal legal measures to challenge a negative registration decision. 21 22 23 Human Rights Committee, communication No. 1207/2003, Malakhovsky and Pikul v. Belarus, Views adopted on 23 August 2005, para. 7.6. See report submitted by Asma Jahangir, Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, E/CN.4/2005/61, paras. 56–58; and the “Guidelines for Review of Legislation Pertaining to Religion or Belief”, prepared by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe/Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) Advisory Panel of Experts on Freedom of Religion and Belief in consultation with the Council of Europe‟s Venice Commission. Available from www.osce.org/odihr/13993. Interim report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Asma Jahangir,A/65/207, paras. 20–23. 15