A/69/261 effects by enhancing the reputation of an institution or company, by reinforcing a sense of loyalty and identification within the staff and by facilitating a creative atmosphere in which diversity is appreciated as a positive asset. 4. Reasonable accommodation as a legal requirement 60. For all the significance and potential that reasonable accommodation holds to combat discrimination, legislators and courts have by and large been reluctant to apply the principle as a legal entitlement. The Special Rapporteur hopes that the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities may serve as a general door opener in this regard, including beyond the specific area of disability. 61. Those opposed to a legal approach on this issue argue t hat turning reasonable accommodation into a legally enforceable right could negatively backfire and reduce the readiness of public or private employers to experiment with creative measures. Instead of treating accommodation as a legal entitlement, they pre fer pragmatic policies of encouraging employers to use reasonable accommodation as a managerial tool outside the realm of law. However, the flipside of this non -legal approach is that employees would remain unilaterally dependent on the willingness of employers to accommodate their specific religious or belief-related needs at the workplace. They would not have any legal recourse against employers who, from the outset, reject any form of accommodation, even if the religious concerns at stake are high and the economic or managerial costs of the accommodating measures are merely minor. 62. The Special Rapporteur advocates for combining the advantages of a legal approach to reasonable accommodation with those of a more pragmatic managerial approach. In the spirit of article 5 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, as quoted in paragraph 49 above, the provision of reasonable accommodation should be understood as part of the legal responsibility of States, including as regards the guarantee of freedom of religion or belief. This also follows from article 4, paragraph 1, of the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, which proclaims: “All States shall take effective measures to prevent and eliminate discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief in the recognition, exercise and enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms in all fields of civil, economic, political, social and cultural life”. Denying a person acco mmodation in situations where such measures would not amount to a disproportionate or undue burden could accordingly qualify as discrimination, depending on the circumstances of the particular case. Moreover, individuals should have the option of resorting to legal remedies in order to challenge any denial of accommodating measures that could be reasonably enacted. The serious implications of indirect discrimination on the full enjoyment of freedom of religion or belief for all certainly call for a legal co urse, without which reasonable accommodation would remain a mere act of mercy. 63. At the same time, public and private employers, as well as other stakeholders, should be encouraged to further explore and expand the scope of reasonable accommodation beyond what is currently legally enforceable. Public and private employers, trade unions, representatives of staff and others should exchange positive experiences, discuss typical obstacles and set up contextualized pragmatic benchmarks. States should support such experiments by providing advice and establishing good practice examples in their own employment policies. 14-58756 19/23