Some  observations         The  Special  Rapporteur  welcomes  the  many  recommendations  made  regarding  various   minority  groups  globally  in  the  1st  cycle  of  the  UPR  process  and  she  observes  a  growing   number  of  recommendations  regarding  minorities.  At  the  time  of  the  writing  of  this   analysis,  the  2nd  UPR  cycle  already  produced  788  minority  recommendations  although  it   is  only  half  way  through.  She  wishes  to  draw  comparisons  between  the  attention  given   to  various  minority  groups  and  country  situations  in  the  UPR  process  and  the  complaints   she  receives  and  the  communications  she  issues  to  the  various  Member  States   accordingly,  but  since  she  took  office  as  of  1  August  2011  and  the  1st  UPR  cycle  ended  in   October  2011,  she  can  only  make  such  an  analysis  after  the  2nd  cycle  will  be  ended.       The  Special  Rapporteur  can  nevertheless  make  certain  observations.  First  of  all,  it  is   clear  that  geopolitical  factors  played  a  significant  role  in  who  is  recommending  what  to   whom.  With  no  doubt,  those  minorities  that  have  a  kin  state  enjoyed  a  stronger   attention  and  received  more  recommendations  for  the  protection  of  their  human  and   minority  rights  than  those  who  do  not  have  a  kin  state.  One  exception  is  the  Roma   population;  attention  given  to  their  situation  is  remarkable.  And  while  the  overall   situation  of  Roma  in  Europe  is  certainly  of  high  concern,  it  is  interesting  that  Member   States  outside  of  Europe  who  also  have  Roma  populations  received  no  recommendation   on  them.       Intersectionality  between  freedom  of  religion  or  belief  and  religious ��minorities  is  rather   complex  as  is  the  case  always.  There  were  very  few  recommendations  that  referred   explicitly  to  the  freedom  of  religion  of  minorities:  for  example  to  “ensure  that  persons   belonging  to  religious  minorities  are  free  to  practice  their  faith”  which  was  accepted  by   Comoros.  Many  recommendations  contained  references  to  religious  groups  that   constitute  a  minority,  for  example  to  “work  to  combat  the  danger  of  Islamophobia  in   society”  accepted  by  Austria.  And  quite  many  recommendations  used  general   expressions  and,  therefore,  did  not  get  labelled  under  ‘minorities’  in  the  database,  for   example  “adopt  legislation  and  measures  to  allow  the  free  practice  of  religions  in  Sudan   and  in  South  Sudan”  accepted  both  by  South  Sudan  and  Sudan  which  clearly  expressed  a   concern  regarding  those  religious  groups  which  became  a  minority  after  the  emergence   of  the  two  separate  States.  This  is  why  the  above  analysis  on  religious  minorities  should   not  be  regarded  comprehensive  –  many  more  recommendations  labelled  under   ‘freedom  of  religion  or  belief’  could  be  relevant  to  minorities  as  well.  In  any  case,  it  is   somewhat  surprising  how  little  attention  was  given  to  certain  religious  minorities  who   are  clearly  persecuted  in  several  countries.         59