A/58/296 V. Conclusions and recommendations 132. The communications referred to in the present report and States’ replies show that, nearly two years later, the events of 11 September 2001 have had a profound impact on the exercise of human rights, especially the right to freedom of religion or belief. Some of the positive trends mentioned in the report submitted to the General Assembly in 2001 (A/56/253) have not been pursued and new problems have arisen. This means that any study of States’ conduct with respect to matters directly or indirectly related to freedom of religion or belief must inevitably take into account the events of 11 September 2001 as an essential benchmark. 133. A distinction must be made between States’ direct violations of the right to freedom of religion or belief and measures taken by them in response to acts of intolerance, discrimination and religious violence committed by non-State actors or entities. 134. First, many States have taken the simplistic view that, since religions are at the root of many terrorist acts, the most direct means of preventing such acts is to limit the existence of religion and have focused their genuinely or purportedly counter-terrorist activities on limiting the exercise of civil and political rights, including the right to freedom of religion or belief. By choosing that path, these States have clearly misinterpreted the non-derogable nature of the right to freedom of religion or belief under article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that even “in time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation” no derogation is permitted from article 18 of the Covenant (see also General Comment 22 of the Human Rights Committee). Specifically, it appears that, by imposing restrictions which in practice were equivalent to actual derogations, at least in their effects, various State authorities have often failed to understand the essential difference between the restrictions that can be made under specific conditions and for specific purposes under article 18, paragraph 3, of the Covenant and the non-derogable nature of the right to freedom of religion or belief. 135. In this connection, the Special Rapporteur has observed a new upsurge in administrative regulations on freedom of religion; many States, especially those of Central Asia, have used the compulsory registration of religious groups and the imposition of specific regulations governing them to restrict the exercise of freedom of religion or belief, often in violation of the international standards concerning the right to freedom of religion or belief. On several occasions, the Special Rapporteur has pointed out that registration procedures can be legitimate and consistent with international law on freedom of religion only if they are specified by law, objective, reasonable and transparent and, consequently, if they do not have the aim or the result of creating discrimination; naturally, refusals to register must be well-founded and subject to judicial review. 136. The Special Rapporteur has also noted that in some cases the events of 11 September 2001 have been used to legitimate, and even to strengthen, preexisting policies for the persecution of religious groups. 22