A/HRC/34/50 for example, maintain the traditional religious make-up of a State or to appease populist responses to the “other”. It must be emphasized that this action amounts to a “territorialization” of religion or belief, which goes against both the spirit and the letter of the right to freedom of religion or belief (A/71/269, para. 78). C. Incitement to violence based on religion or belief 54. The rise of violence in the name of religion, and its association with extremism, have necessitated the formulation of strategies and policies to counter violent extremism. The Special Rapporteur recognizes that it is essential for security agencies to be empowered to carry out their obligation to combat terrorism and to protect communities against violence and serious rights abuses. Indeed, terrorist groups have been responsible for some of the most egregious human rights violations. Non-State actors, such as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, or Daesh), have been responsible for widespread and brutal attacks against Yazidis, Christians, Shia and other persons and groups in vulnerable situations in the territories they control, reportedly involving up to 10 million people in Iraq and the Syrian Arab Republic alone. Attacks have included killings, torture, enslavement and trafficking, rape and other sexual abuse. Similarly, Boko Haram has been responsible for, inter alia, killings, torture, abductions, violence against children and the use of children in hostilities. 55. There are, however, also concerns that some of the policies designed to make communities secure are having a negative impact on human rights and fundamental freedoms. While the quest for security and efforts to promote human rights are often seen as conflicting priorities, the failure to reconcile and resolve such tensions might actually make communities less secure, as acknowledged in pillar IV of the United Nations Global Counter Terrorism Strategy. 8 It is axiomatic that, rather than impose undue restrictions on the right to freedom of religion or belief, promoting and protecting this right can more effectively serve to prevent or counter violent extremism. Indeed, respect for the right to freedom of religion or belief not only sets the context for democratic ideals to thrive but can also strengthen societal resilience against extremist discourse. Furthermore, measures to prevent and counter violent extremism must not have any direct or incidental effects that would result in discrimination, stigmatization or religious profiling (A/HRC/33/29, paras. 31 and 64). 56. The Special Rapporteur believes that certain groups of people in vulnerable situations, either on account of their faith or because of their exposure to a high risk of violation of their rights, require additional attention. He also notes that the apparent trend towards identity-based politics worldwide, which has been accompanied by calls for laws and practices that effectively discriminate against minorities on account of their religion or belief, may lead to intolerance, discrimination and incitement to violence based on religion or belief. The climate of intolerance requires greater attention to the implementation of the Rabat Plan of Action and its advocacy of a multi-pronged approach, including nonrestrictive measures to address incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. 57. Unfortunately, the lack of prosecution of “real” incitement cases and the persecution of minorities under the guise of domestic incitement laws is pervasive. The Special Rapporteur notes that the protections afforded in article 20 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights against incitement to hatred are subject to strict criteria to ensure that they do not vitiate other rights, including freedom of expression and religion. As noted above, the Rabat Plan of Action clarifies that article 20 of the Covenant requires a 8 General Assembly resolution 60/288. 17