A/71/269 While registration thus can have beneficial effects for those communities wishing to obtain such a status, it is highly problematic if the Government renders registration compulsory by turning it into a sine qua non of any communitarian enjoyment of freedom of religion or belief (see A/HRC/28/66/Add.1). It cannot be reiterated enough that freedom of religion or belief, qua its nature as a universal human right, inheres in all human beings prior to any process of administrative approval. It thus must be possible for individuals and groups of individuals to als o practise their religion or belief independently from any official status, if they prefer not to obtain any such status or if their application for registration has been unsuccessful. The situation can become even more complicated if Governments require t he periodic renewal of registration, which thus may become a never -ending bureaucratic exercise for certain communities. The more detailed information the Administration demands in such procedures, the easier it will be to find “shortcomings” in the application that the Administration may use as a pretext to impose sanctions, thereby creating a climate of intimidation for any unwelcome religious activities. 50. For many (not all) religious communities, it is important to obtain the appropriate legal personality status to exercise certain community functions, such as purchasing real estate, which they may need to establish a lasting religious infrastructure, employing teaching professionals or other staff and running their own schools or media or charitable organizations (see A/HRC/22/51). The denial of appropriate legal personality status or unreasonable stipulations connected with such a status may thus amount to a violation of freedom of religion or belief. 3. Discriminatory structures in family laws 51. In many countries, family laws reflect traditional religious hegemonies. Before discussing the negative repercussions that this may have for freedom of religion or belief, the Special Rapporteur would like to clarify that religious family laws differ conceptually from religious family values, rites and customs. Law in the narrow sense of the word carries with it the element of enforcement by the State. State enforced laws based on a particular religion or denomination can lead to problematic situations, for example, if an interreligious marriage cannot be contracted or if such a marriage breaks down and the spouse who had converted to the religion of her or his partner wishes to return to the religion he or s he professed previously. Such a return is usually difficult in itself, and it can be made even more complicated by legal insecurity, which a change of religion may incur with regard to important issues, such as inheritance, maintenance or custody of childr en. Moreover, apart from causing concerns under freedom of religion or belief, denominational family laws frequently reflect and reinforce inequalities between men and women concerning marriage, child-rearing, custody, maintenance, inheritance and other areas of family life (see A/HRC/25/58/Add.2). 52. From the specific viewpoint of freedom of religion or belief, State -enforced denominational family laws give rise to a number of serious concerns. Even tho ugh the structure may be pluralistic to a certain degree, the system typically does not easily, if at all, accommodate certain constellations of interreligious partnerships. On the basis of the widespread assumption that children have to follow the religio us orientation of the father, denominational family laws may allow some interreligious marriages, provided that the husband is of the predominant religion, while often ruling out any marriage between a woman from the traditionally hegemonic religion and a man professing another religion or belief. Thus, complicated cases of multiple 16-13296 15/22