E/CN.4/1998/6 page 28 may come - by working on both its causes and its effects, without selectivity or ambivalence. Tolerance of extremism is tolerance of the intolerable. States in general, and the international community in particular, are bound to condemn it unequivocally and to combat it relentlessly until it is finally condemned by history. Accordingly, the Special Rapporteur recommends that a study be made of religious extremism and that a “minimum set of standard rules and principles of conduct and behaviour in respect of religious extremism” should be defined and adopted by the international community. 115. As the Special Rapporteur's reports, including mission reports, have shown, the issue of “sects” or “new religious movements”, is complicated by the fact that international human rights instruments provide no definition of the concept of religion and do not mention the concepts of sect and new religious movement. The Special Rapporteur recalls that, in its general comment 22 of 20 July 1993 concerning article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Human Rights Committee states that the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion is far-reaching. It notes that freedom of thought and conscience are protected equally with freedom of religion and belief. The fundamental character of these freedoms is also reflected in the fact that this provision cannot be derogated from, even in time of public emergency, as stated in article 4 (2) of the Covenant. The Committee also points out that restrictions on the freedom to manifest religion or belief are permitted only if limitations are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others and are not applied in a manner that vitiates the rights of freedom of thought, conscience and religion. The Committee also states that “limitations may be applied only for those purposes for which they were prescribed and must be directly related and proportionate to the specific need on which they are predicated. Restrictions may not be imposed for discriminatory purposes or applied in a discriminatory manner”. 116. Added to this legal dimension is the general confusion regarding the term “sect” in particular. Although the idea of a sect was originally a neutral one and meant a community of individuals constituting a minority within a religion and having split from it, it often now has a pejorative connotation so that it is frequently regarded as synonymous with danger, and sometimes a non-religious dimension when it is identified as a commercial enterprise. The term “sect” is therefore in need of further clarification, as are the terms “religions”, “new religious movements” and “commercial enterprise”. 117. It is crucial to look at this phenomenon objectively so as to avoid the two pitfalls of either infringing the freedom of religion and belief or exploiting freedom of religion and belief for purposes other than those for which it has been recognized and protected. Any action on this phenomenon presupposes understanding it by, first and foremost, determining its place in society and culture. The Special Rapporteur therefore recommends that the necessary resources be made available to enable him to initiate studies of the problem “of sects and new religious movements”. Consideration might also usefully be given to holding high-level intergovernmental meetings to work out a joint human rights-oriented approach and deal with any potential infringements of the freedom of religion and belief.