A/HRC/52/38 to advance this freedom at home. Connecting of the local and the international allows for a sharing of experiences and grounds the universality of this freedom. Furthermore, a foreign policy approach that overshadows other actions carries certain risks. In many areas, there are historical and cynical accusations that religious minorities are somehow “foreign” or suspect. A foreign policy approach may play into and heighten such accusations. One of the great achievements of human rights over the last 75 years is its call for everyone’s entitlement to rights, including of freedom of religion or belief, as a birthright for all. The failure to achieve coherence between a State’s domestic performance and external advocacy affects the credibility of international efforts. Freedom of religion or belief certainly can, and does, benefit from foreign policy engagement, but its foundational human rights rationale does not rest on political preference, but on entitlements and birthrights. 76. Foreign policy actions in freedom of religion or belief must seek to be as inclusive as possible. A singular focus on one religious or belief community in foreign policy efforts, though necessary at times, can even prove counterproductive and harmful to the target community. Human rights promoters have long grappled with the question of whether special measures or special rights for the benefit of some rather than all can be compliant with legal standards. Regarding special measures, it has been observed that any steps taken should be context specific, not prejudice the universality of human rights, pursuant to a legitimate aim and proportional to the achievement of that aim.91 It may therefore be considered necessary as part of strategies directed towards the achievement of de facto or substantive equality, where a purely formal legal or programmatic approach is not sufficient to achieve substantive equality and an equality of results.92 This requires careful calibration, since discrimination is constituted not simply by an unjustifiable distinction, exclusion or restriction, but also by an unjustifiable preference, making it especially important to distinguish special measures from unjustifiable preferences.93 Special rights are additional rights pertaining to certain categories of person or community, such as the rights of persons belonging to minority groups to enjoy their own culture, profess and practise their own religion and use their own language.94 77. Consideration of the human rights-based approach to preference, through special measures and special rights, calls on foreign policy preference to be elaborated and assessed in human rights terms, rather than States focusing on singular so-called “kin” religious or belief communities without attention to legitimacy and proportionality, thereby risking discrimination. This does not problematize focusing on responding to violations against particular target communities, but it does problematize only taking action on a single target group and setting aside many instances of violations against those of other religions or beliefs. This also seriously jeopardizes the protection of religious or belief minorities who do not have so-called “kin” States that would advocate for them on the grounds of historical or belief commonalities.95 Such a stance would take us back decades and erase the whole ethos of international human rights. 78. Another point for consideration is the need for foreign policy approaches to freedom of religion or belief to be mindful of its multidimensionality (discrimination on grounds of religion or belief, violations of freedom of religion or belief or violations in the name of religion or belief) and considering its promotion, protection and fulfilment. 96 91 92 93 94 95 96 16 Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, general recommendation No. 32 (2009) on the meaning and scope of special measures in the Convention, paras. 5 and 8. Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, general recommendation No. 25 (2004) on temporary special measures, paras. 8 and 18. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, general recommendation No. 32 (2009), para. 7. See also Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, article 2 (2). Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, general recommendation No. 32 (2009), para. 15. See https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2022-03/Annex-Bahai-minorities.docx. See also A/HRC/49/44, para. 5. The Special Rapporteur would like to express her deep appreciation to the students of the International Center for Law and Religion Studies of Brigham Young University who diligently carried out academic research as background support to the present report, under the guidance of David Moore, and wishes them the very best for the future. GE.23-00741