A/79/182 objectives that can and must be advanced together”. 62 This is most evident when security is understood in its many dimensions 63 and not reduced to “national security”. Sustainable security unequivocally requires full respect for human rights, equality and the trust of those in that jurisdiction. 64 45. Whether implicitly or explicitly, many States select between “good religion” and “bad religion”, creating hierarchies of protection of the freedom of religion or belief of some, and perpetuating discrimination and inequality. Challenges include States that offer recognition to only one religion or ideology, or to a closed list of several communities. Others are not recognized, and this necessarily leads to discrimination against them, albeit along a gradient of infringements and exclusions. States create hierarchies in other ways, too, by criminalizing some religions or beliefs or the defining religious practices of their members. This may be by wholesale accusations of extremism and terrorism, prohibiting their activities or not allowing them to assemble and observe as members of a community. Some national penal laws also prohibit blasphemy or apostasy, with severe penalties, including capital punishment, contrary to the explicit protection of the freedom to change religion or belief for everyone, without any form of coercion, in international human rights law. The refusal to allow registration of communities can render them unable to hold activities, or to assemble and associate, and curb their ability to manifest their religion or belief as protected under international human rights law. 65 Furthermore, limitations on manifesting one’s religion or belief are often imposed by States in a manner that stands in stark violation of the international framework for legitimate limitations. Any limitations must be as provided by law, necessary, propo rtionate and non-discriminatory, and be imposed in the least restrictive manner solely in order to protect public order, health or morals 66 or the rights and freedoms of others. States should also respect the rights of persons belonging to religious or belief minorities 67 without discrimination, and in a context of equal enjoyment of other human rights, including due process and the equal protection of the law and equality before the law. 46. Country visit reports and allegation letters by the mandate holder over the years have highlighted a range of restrictions and violations of freedom of religion or belief that are pursued in the name of advancing security. The denial of registration and the de-registration of religious or belief communities on the grounds of national security remain a concern in a number of States. In 2017, the mandate expressed concern at a Supreme Court decision to liquidate a centre belonging to a religio us or belief community and all its local entities on grounds of “extremism”, 68 grounded in the view that the religious materials they disseminated “[incited] religious strife promoting the exclusivity, superiority or inferiority of citizens on the basis of their attitude to religion”. 69 This precipitated a wave of judicial harassment against its members transnationally. 70 In August 2023, the mandate expressed concern at the __________________ 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 24-13239 OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, Freedom of Religion or Belief and Security: Policy Guidance (see footnote 20). Ibid., p. 9. Ibid., p. 7. General Assembly resolution 36/55, art. 6; and CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.4, para. 4. They must not, however, be based on the morals of only a single religion or belief (CCPR/C/GC/34, para. 32). General Assembly resolution 47/135, arts. 2–4. OHCHR, communications sent to the Government of the Russian Federation: AL RUS 2/2017 (government response received 25 May 2017) and AL RUS 19/2018 (government response received 5 October 2018). Response of the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations Office and other international organizations in Geneva to OHCHR communication AL RUS 2/2017. OHCHR, communications sent to the Government of the Russian Federation: AL RUS 19/2018 (government response received 5 October 2018); AL RUS 22/2018 (government response received 16 January 2019); and AL RUS 2/2020 (government response received 5 August 2020). 11/22