A/79/182 groups, but also State agencies, or a combination of both. 40 This can be detailed with a whole range of recent examples of allegation letters sent by the current mandate holder and other special rapporteurs raising precisely the same concerns. 41 In addition, further recent examples include violence, or potential exposure to violence, stemming from refoulement of those escaping religious persecution, 42 stigmatization in public authorities’ language and the popular consciousness, 43 and instances in which vandalization, land-grabbing or threats to security are led by State agents themselves. 44 31. The current mandate holder has regularly used the phrase “discrimination and violence in the name of religion” and distinguished this from “discrimination and violence on the grounds of religion or belief”. A previous mandate defined the former as being “based on or arrogated to religious tenets of the perpetrator” and the latter as being “based on the religious affiliation of the victim”. 45 32. Another approach to this distinction, however, is the question of who determines whether an act is “due” to religion or belief or falsely arrogated to be on the basis of religion or belief. The determination of whether a particular act is genuinely “religious” or not is highly consequential politically. 33. The mandate is mindful to not be seen as an arbiter of which violence, conflict or war is “due” to religion and which is merely “in the name of religion”. After all, the mandate holder is carrying out a human rights mandate and not one that offers either religious expertise or determinations on all religions and beliefs. Furthermore, as a special procedures mandate appointed by the Human Rights Council, the mandate is fundamentally and unapologetically in favour of human rights and peace for all. 34. Treading this path with responsibility, however, requires that any possible link with religion not be rejected altogether. This mandate has observed that “acts of violence cannot be attributed to religions per se or to any particular religion”, yet “human agency comprises a broad range of motives, including religious ones”. 46 Regrettably, “there are obviously religious fanatics who seem to believe that, by __________________ 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 8/22 Ibid. For example, since the adoption of Human Rights Council resolution 49/5 (31 March 2022). OHCHR, communications sent to the following Governments: Brazil ( BRA 2/2023 (government responses received 10 and 21 July and 29 August 2023)); China (CHN 8/2023 (government response received on 31 August 2023) and CHN 12/2022 (government response received 7 March 2023)); India (IND 9/2023 (government response received 25 October 2023 ), IND 8/2023, IND 9/2022 and IND 5/2022); Iran (Islamic Republic of Iran) (IRN 27/2022 (government response received 25 May 2023) and IRN 15/2022 (government response received 9 March 2023)); Israel (ISR 8/2022); Nigeria (NGA 1/2023); Nicaragua (NIC 2/2023); Pakistan (PAK 4/2023 and PAK 2/2023); Somalia (SOM 4/2022); and Viet Nam (VNM 2/2023). See also communication OTH 108/2022 sent to Khan Muttaqi (response received 12 January 2023). OHCHR, communications sent to the following Governments: Bangladesh (BGD 5/2023); China (CHN 12/2022 (government response received 7 March 2023, which referenced further communication CHN 7/2017, to which a government response was received on 19 September 2017)); Egypt (EGY 10/2017 (government response received 15 September 2017) and EGY 4/2022)); Japan (JPN 1/2023 (government response received 11 October 2023)); France (FRA 2/2022 (government response received 7 July 2023 )); Pakistan (PAK 11/2023); Thailand (THA 2/2024 (government response received 27 February 2024) and THA 2/2022 (government response received 2 November 2022)); and Türkiye (TUR 3/2023 (government response received 8 August 2023)). OHCHR, communications sent to the following Governments: Japan ( JPN 1/2024 (government response received 27 June 2024)); Kyrgyzstan (KGZ 4/2021); Nicaragua (NIC 2/2023); and Pakistan (PAK 2/2023). OHCHR, communications sent to the following Governments: Bangladesh ( BGD 1/2022); Guatemala (GTM 8/2022); India (IND 5/2022); and Pakistan (PAK 2/2022). A/HRC/13/40, summary. A/HRC/28/66, para. 18. 24-13239