A/62/280 IV. Conclusions and recommendations 80. The discussion of the two substantive issues highlighted some concerns of refugees, asylum-seekers and internally displaced persons, as well as of persons with atheistic or non-theistic beliefs. Firstly, communications sent by the mandate regarding the situation of refugees, asylum-seekers and internally displaced persons show that these individuals are in a situation of vulnerability which may also have a link to their freedom of religion or belief. The situation of this vulnerable group requires particular attention and the Special Rapporteur has drawn up a specific subcategory in her framework for communications (see E/CN.4/2006/5, annex and A/HRC/6/5, paras. 30-31). Secondly, the Special Rapporteur takes the concerns of persons with atheistic or non-theistic beliefs seriously. Blasphemy laws and the concept of “defamation of religions” can be counterproductive since they may create an atmosphere of intolerance or fear and ultimately might establish a normative hierarchy of beliefs. Atheists and non-theists should not be discriminated against on the grounds of their adherence (or not) to a specific religion or belief, for example in publicly funded schools, at official consultations or by public service providers. 81. Freedom of religion or belief is a multifaceted human right. The different aspects of this fundamental human right are guaranteed by various international legal instruments, both in legally binding standards and in provisions of so-called soft law. The 21 years of mandate practice show that the effective protection and promotion of the right to freedom of religion or belief poses serious challenges to all States. Furthermore, the prevention of intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief requires proactive and creative approaches from all actors involved. 82. The central question in this regard is to determine the appropriate role of Governments in promoting freedom of religion or belief and in challenging intolerance or discrimination in society. According to the mandate experience after conducting 24 country visits and sending more than 1,000 individual communications to 130 States, wise and balanced decision-making at all governmental levels and cautious legislation are crucial for addressing the delicate issues involved in freedom of religion or belief. Furthermore, an independent and non-arbitrary judiciary is a prerequisite for safeguarding freedom of religion or belief. This was already emphasized by the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993, which recommended that priority be given to national and international action to promote democracy, development and human rights: “Strengthening the institutions of human rights and democracy, the legal protection of human rights, training of officials and others, broad-based education and public information aimed at promoting respect for human rights should all be available as components of these programmes.” 34 83. Instead of waiting until acts of intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief have been perpetrated, States should devise proactive strategies in order to prevent such violations. Identifying and adequately __________________ 34 07-48490 Report of the World Conference on Human Rights, Vienna, 14-25 June 1993 (A/CONF.157/24 (Part I)), chap. III, para. II.68. 23