A/HRC/61/50 them during the emotive time of the burial of their dead and forcing them to dishonour their dead. Limitations on manifestation of religion or belief can be legitimate only if the restrictions are “prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others”.8 The tripartite test of legality, necessity and proportionality applies; limitations must be enshrined in a law that is not discriminatory, there must be an absolute necessity for the limitation, proportionality must be applied through the least intrusive measure possible and, where morality is the ground, the purpose of protecting morals must be based on principles not deriving exclusively from a single tradition.9 16. The overall imperative for governmental authorities to regulate or manage religion – and hence manifestation of religion or belief – should be subject to much scepticism and careful scrutiny. Such regulations should be assessed carefully to evaluate the impact on the actual enjoyment of everyone to freedom of religion or belief. Although the overall principle that public authorities regulate burial and cremation is well understood, violations of funeral rights should not be overlooked. B. Equality and differential treatment 17. A human rights-based approach to funeral rights cannot rest on blind equality since – at best – that would assume that all religions and beliefs can be assimilated into government-directed uniform regulations, which may result in indirect discrimination. They may, of course, also result in direct discrimination. In most circumstances, such uniform default government regulations draw from majoritarian practices and the myth of a monolithic history, but they do not suffice. Specific provisions need to be facilitated where funeral practices are not identical to the generally available provisions. While underpinned by universal dignity, equality requires respect of differences, and difference of treatment gives effect to equality. 18. Any limitations on funeral rights – as with all manifestation – must be subject to the justifications outlined above. III. Significance of freedom of religion or belief to funeral rights A. Rights holder(s) 19. Freedom of religion or belief sheds light on who the rights holders should be in relation to funeral rights. Freedom of religion or belief relates to everyone, with manifestation carried out individually or in community with others. Next of kin, loved ones and one’s community of practice necessarily carry out the wishes of the deceased according to the religion or belief, culture and practices to which the deceased aligned. Although the deceased is no longer, strictly speaking, the rights holder in justiciable terms, it is their wishes that inform the funeral rights. This can be considered an ongoing manifestation of religion or belief, the last manifestation of one’s observance and practice from the temporal to beyond one’s passing. 20. The rights holders of funeral rights are, therefore, as concentric circles from the core and stretching out: (a) the deceased and their stated funeral preferences; (b) their next of kin and family; and (c) their community of practice, that is, those who hold the same funeral practices. 21. The three concentric circles may not align in terms of religion or belief, culture and practice. Most domestic systems give priority to next of kin and family to carry out the funeral as they deem best; they can overturn the wishes of the deceased. Nevertheless, where individuals have pronounced funeral wishes distinctive to their kin and community, every 8 9 4 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 18 (3), and Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 22 (1993), para. 8. Human Rights Committee, general comments No. 34 (2011), para. 32, and No. 22 (1993), para. 8. GE.25-21055