A/HRC/13/40/Add.2 55. The Special Rapporteur is conscious of the fact that religious instruction at public schools may raise all forms of controversy in many societies. In this regard, she would like to make a distinction between religious instruction and the teaching of history of religions. From a human rights perspective, the latter is less problematic provided that classes on history of religions are given in a neutral and objective way. The Toledo Guiding Principles on Teaching about Religions and Beliefs in Public Schools29 provide practical guidance for preparing curricula for teaching about religions and beliefs, as well as preferred procedures for assuring fairness in the development of such curricula. However, public education, which includes instruction in a particular religion or belief, is only consistent with article 18, paragraph 4, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights if provision is made for nondiscriminatory exemptions or alternatives accommodating the wishes of parents and legal guardians. 56. The Special Rapporteur would like to emphasize that it is vital that the independence of the judiciary be fully respected and that courts be able to adjudicate upon religious matters without fear or favour. In this regard, she wishes to remind those religious leaders and politicians who publicly voiced their outrage about the recent judgement of the Constitutional Court concerning religious instruction in public schools that an independent judiciary is crucial to safeguard freedom of religion or belief and ultimately as a foundation for democratic governance. The Special Rapporteur welcomes the Government’s affirmation during the universal periodic review session held in September 2009 that the promotion of the judiciary’s independence and efficiency remain its major priorities (A/HRC/12/15/Add.1, para. 36). 57. With regard to the issue of wearing religious symbols, especially in public schools, the Special Rapporteur would like to emphasize that each case has to be decided according to its own circumstances. In general, however, restrictions on the wearing of religious symbols should not be applied in a discriminatory manner. Limitations must be directly related and proportionate to the specific need on which they are predicated. The burden of justifying a limitation upon the freedom to manifest one’s religion or belief lies with the State. The chosen measures should promote religious tolerance and avoid stigmatizing any particular religious community. Furthermore, the principles of appropriateness and proportionality need to be thoroughly respected both by the administration and during possible legal review. 58. With regard to intra-religious tensions both within the Orthodox Church and within the Islamic community, the Special Rapporteur would like to remind the Government of its obligations to remain neutral and non-discriminatory, especially concerning the registration procedure. As outlined in her report submitted to the Commission on Human Rights (E/CN.4/2005/61, para. 58), registration should not be a precondition for practising one’s religion, but only for the acquisition of a legal personality and related benefits. In the latter case, registration procedures should be easy and quick, and not depend on extensive formal requirements in terms of the number of members or the time a particular religious group has existed. Registration should not depend on reviews of the substantive content of the belief, the structure or the clergy. In addition, no religious group should be empowered to decide about the registration of another religious group. 29 18 Prepared by the OSCE/ODIHR Advisory Council of Experts on Freedom of Religion or Belief, available at the address www.osce.org/publications/odihr/2007/11/28314_993_en.pdf.