A/HRC/37/49/Add.1 culture by the State. The Special Rapporteur notes, however, that the Government has taken some steps to limit the scope of restrictions on public manifestations of religion in Albania, including in relation to the exercise of rites and rituals relating to sacred events. Examples of Government action include recent efforts to provide greater autonomy to religious groups with regard to burial and funeral rites in cemeteries and exemptions granted to groups to hold religious ceremonies in public spaces, including monuments of culture that are important or sacred to them, despite a general prohibition on such practices. IV. Challenges and areas of concern 36. The Special Rapporteur considers that the observations made and the information gathered during his visit corroborate many of the Government’s claims about the many positive achievements in Albania with regard to the right to freedom of religion and interfaith harmony. However, no State or Government is without challenge when it comes to realizing this right, a fact that was readily admitted by the Government of Albania. A number of the challenges observed during the visit are identified below without prejudice. The Special Rapporteur is mindful that the issues enumerated below may not represent an exhaustive list of challenges and potential concerns, but they do illustrate some of the most notable concerns that should be addressed. Those challenges were discussed with the Government at the end of his visit. A. Restitution of religious property 37. One of the most difficult challenges facing the Government relates to the restitution of property seized from Albanians, including religious communities, during the Communist era (1945–1990). All the traditional religious communities — Muslim, Roman Catholic, Orthodox Christian and Bektashi — expressed concern and frustration over what they perceived to be ongoing delays regarding the State’s full or satisfactory restitution or compensation for their communities’ lost property. 38. That property, also referred to as objects of cult by the State, include buildings and structures that were once used as places of worship (i.e. churches, cathedrals, mosques or shrines (teqes)), but are now owned and/or regulated by the State — often for the enjoyment of all Albanians — and have been declared as monuments of culture by the Ministry of Culture. Such property also includes buildings and structures that were once places of worship, but which have since been demolished or repurposed for public use. 39. Government officials reported that some 16,000 individual property requests or claims (corresponding to 9,000 active case files) have been filed with the Government, and that approximately 700 of those claims (or 400 files) concerned religious property. A small number have either been returned or compensation has been made to their rightful owners. The majority of applications for restitution, however, reportedly remains unaddressed and/or under review. Nearly all the communities affected by seizures conveyed their regret that, while some of the seized property could never be returned (for example, due to demolition or destruction), they were nonetheless seeking some form of compensation for their loss. Some believed that the delays were not a result of logistical or even bureaucratic complexities, but a lack of sufficient political will on the part of the State. 40. A majority of representatives of the Government agencies with which the Special Rapporteur engaged on this issue acknowledged that the restitution process has been a complicated and difficult one. They, however, asserted that new and aggressive steps had recently been initiated to better provide for an equitable and transparent process in an effort to more effectively facilitate restitution or compensation for all valid claims. In that regard, the Property Management Agency informed the Special Rapporteur that, pursuant to the new Law on the Treatment of Property and Finalization of the Process of Compensation of Property, passed in 2016 to establish a more streamlined and effective regulatory framework, all outstanding restitution claims must be adjudicated within three years of the passage of the legislation. The law also requires that judgments on individual claims be 9