A/HRC/34/50/Add.1 variance with good morals or public order shall be taught or done” sounds very restrictive in that it gives the State a broad margin for imposing limitations. International standards cover a wider range of aspects of freedom of religion or belief, including the rights to have or to adopt a religion or belief and to manifest it in worship, observance, practice and teaching. Furthermore, they include theistic and non-theistic beliefs, in contrast to the reference in the Danish Constitution to “the worship of God”. In order to remain in line with European and international conventions that Denmark has ratified — in particular article 9 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — article 67 of the Constitution requires a broad interpretation of the scope of protection (i.e. beyond “the worship of God”) and a cautious interpretation of the limitation clause. 6. Freedom of religion or belief has a strong community dimension, which explicitly comes to the fore in the constitutional right to “form congregations”. In Denmark, religious communities do not need any registration or official permission to run their community affairs. When wishing to obtain a legal personality status that would allow them to develop a more sustainable community infrastructure, they have various options. Those who prefer to keep a certain distance from the State can register as private associations without difficulty. Those who wish to celebrate marriages within their communities with immediate legal effect under the Danish marriage law (which is a secular law) need the status of a “recognized” or “acknowledged” religious community. Until 1970, such an act of “recognition” was given by royal decree; since 1970 it is the Ministry for Ecclesiastical Affairs that grants “acknowledgment”, the effects of which come close to those of the previous recognition procedure. One of the advantages connected to such a status is the possibility to deduct contributions from the annual tax declaration. 7. Currently, around 160 communities from very diverse backgrounds enjoy recognition or acknowledgement status. Cases of denial of acknowledgement have been rare; one example is the Church of Scientology, whose applications were turned down in 1971 and 1984; another application by Scientology was withdrawn by the applicant organization itself in 2000. The criteria for granting acknowledgment are currently in a process of evaluation and reform led by a special commission. There is suspicion among certain groups that it could be used to strip religious communities of their recognition, which, under the existing law, is possible only in exceptional circumstances. 8. The three-tier system of different status positions culminates in the special rank occupied by the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Article 4 of the Constitution provides “the Evangelical Lutheran Church shall be the Established Church of Denmark, and as such shall be supported by the State”. That article is in the first part of the Constitution, which defines the pillars on which the entire State rests: the Danish territory (article 1); the constitutional monarchy (article 2); the legislative, executive and judicial powers (article 3); and the Established Church of Denmark (article 4), usually referred to as the “People’s Church” (or “Folkekirke”). 9. The existing system is obviously non-egalitarian. While virtually no one questions the spirit of freedom that prevails in Denmark, including in the area of religion or belief, the principle of equality certainly does not govern the treatment of diverse religious communities. This is in stark contrast to the everyday culture in Denmark, which indeed is markedly egalitarian. However, while the principles of equality and non-discrimination chiefly apply to individuals, they obviously do not define the way in which the diversity of religious communities is normatively structured in Denmark. In some discussions, the Special Rapporteur heard this turned into a Danish rhyme: “frihed, men ikke lighed” (meaning “freedom, but not equality”). This non-egalitarian treatment has caused frustration felt by religious or belief-related minorities. 4