A/HRC/13/40/Add.3 registration. Article 19 of the 2006 Law on Churches and Religious Communities is allegedly used by the authorities to arbitrarily prevent the registration of religious organizations whose name contains a name or part of a name expressing the identity of a church, religious community or religious organization which is already registered. The Special Rapporteur is also concerned that the Ministry of Religious Affairs seems to interpret substantive rules of internal laws and orders of “traditional” churches to the detriment of other groups. For example, when rejecting the application for registration of the “Montenegrin Orthodox Church Eparchy for the Republic of Serbia”, the Ministry argued that only a church with a centuries-long continuity and a canonical priesthood could be a constituent part of the universal, ecumenical Christian community, and therefore recognized as an Orthodox church.6 The Ministry of Religious Affairs claimed that the religious community “Montenegrin Orthodox Church” had never existed and therefore could not have been recognized by other Orthodox churches.7 In this regard, the Special Rapporteur would like to emphasize that the State has a duty to remain neutral and impartial in exercising its regulatory power and in its relations with the various religions, denominations and beliefs.8 The autonomy of religious communities is an essential component of pluralism in a democratic society, where several religions or denominations of the same religion coexist.9 20. Reportedly, the Romanian Orthodox Diocese of Dacia Felix was registered in April 2009 and accorded equality with other “traditional” churches and religious communities recognized by the 2006 Law on Churches and Religious Communities. Previously, article 2 of the relevant regulations already provided that “with the consent of the Serbian Orthodox Church, the Romanian Orthodox Church’s organizational unit of Banat shall be entered in the register.”10 The Special Rapporteur would like to emphasize that the State must not condition the granting of certain rights, including the registration of a religious community and the recognition of its legal status, on the agreement of another religious community. However, that appears to be part of the standard approach taken by the Ministry of Religious Affairs. 21. During the Universal Periodic Review session held in December 2008, the Government of Serbia stressed that the question of the law on churches and religious communities should be observed as a transitional law that is subject to changes, and that churches and religious communities could submit complaints regarding its implementation to the Supreme Court (A/HRC/10/78, para. 55). However, the Government also indicated that changes in the law or the bringing of a new law that would allow automatic 6 7 8 9 10 8 Ministry of Religious Affairs, decision 080-00-45/2007-01 of 18 June 2008. On 11 December 2009, the Government of Serbia informed the Special Rapporteur that this decision was annulled by the Supreme Court on procedural grounds and that the Ministry of Religious Affairs has called on the applicants to amend the documentation. Ibid. In its letter of 11 December 2009 to the Special Rapporteur, the Government emphasized that the registration of the Montenegrin Orthodox Church was rejected “not only because of the term ‘Orthodox’ in its name, but also because of the fact that an organizational unit of the Serbian Orthodox Church, the Montenegrin Metropolitanate, would allow the name Montenegrin Orthodox Church, at whose head is also a Metropolitan, to be interchangeable with the organizational unit of the Serbian Orthodox Church causing confusion about that Church, its goals and type of association involved”. See European Court of Human Rights, judgment of 13 December 2001, application no. 45701/99. See European Court of Human Rights, judgment of 15 September 2009, application no. 798/05. Regulations on the content and keeping of the register of churches and religious communities, Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, No. 43/2006 of 26 July 2006. See also the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, doc. 11528 of 14 February 2008, paras. 87-99.