A/72/365 24. Of significant note is the frequency in which a State’s adherence to faith -based claims interferes with its capacity to protect the human rights of women. The many religious-based reservations entered by States parties to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women are a case in point. 8 The breadth of restrictions or impositions on women’s human rights, including thos e which limit their full participation in political, social and economic life, leaves States unprepared to promote gender equality and creates an environment in which harmful practices against women can occur. This includes the denial of access to sexual a nd reproductive health services and the refusal to provide adequate legal and policy safeguards against various forms of gender-based violence, including marital rape. 25. The importance of religion as an identity marker has fanned intolerant attitudes towards various religions or beliefs, encouraging States to favour certain types of values or religious affiliations as essential to the assertion of national status or citizenship. In addition to perpetuating discrimination, such policies and practices politicize religion and have a negative impact on individuals in vulnerable situations, including those belonging to religious minorities and refugees, who already suffer from a high degree of legal, economic and social disenfranchisement. B. Anti-blasphemy and anti-apostasy laws 26. More than 70 States have anti-blasphemy laws on the books (25 per cent in the Middle East and North Africa, 25 per cent in the Asia -Pacific region, 23 per cent in Europe, 16 per cent in Sub-Saharan Africa and 11 per cent in the Americas). 9 Many States have adopted these measures to promote and strengthen “social harmony” and “public order” between and across various communities. By and large, those efforts are effectively measures meant to protect majority religious sentiments o r Stateimposed religious or belief orthodoxies. 27. Anti-blasphemy, anti-apostasy and anti-conversion laws, some of which are falsely presented as “anti-incitement” legislation, often serve as platforms for enabling incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence against persons based on religion or belief. Such laws also frequently afford varying levels of protection to different religions and are often applied in a discriminatory manner. Those who support criminalizing blasphemy argue that criticism of religion or defamation of religious figures is a variant of hate speech. In reality, however, anti -blasphemy laws are generally focused on the degree to which speech causes offence or outrage to religious sentiments, and not the extent to which that spe ech undermines the safety and equality of individuals holding those religious views. 28. Anti-blasphemy laws often give States licence to determine which conversations on religion are admissible and which ones are too controversial to be voiced. The Special Rapporteur notes that when governments restrict freedom of expression on the grounds of “insult to religion”, any peaceful expression of political or religious views is subject to potential prohibition. In practice, those laws can be used for the suppression of any dissenting view in violation of international human rights standards protecting freedom of opinion and expression and freedom of religion or belief. Consequently, the international community, in several recent action plans, have called upon States that still have blasphemy laws on the books to __________________ 8 9 17-14822 See Başak Çalı and Mariana Montoya, The March of Universality? Religion-Based Reservations to the Core UN Treaties and What They Tell Us About Human Rights and Universality in the 21st Century (Geneva, Universal Rights Group, 2017). See Joelle Fiss and Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum, “Respecting rights? Measuring the world ’s blasphemy laws” (Washington, D.C., United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, July 2017), table 2. 9/24