A/HRC/37/49 apostasy laws amount to a de facto ban on the manifestation of humanism and non-religious beliefs. “Secular-like” States with official or favoured religion(s) (b) 59. Unlike religious States where there is a high degree of government entanglement with religion, there are a number of States that declare official religions or express preference for one or more religions, rendering other religions unequal in law, but not necessarily perpetuating inequality among adherents of religions or beliefs not supported by the State. These States tend to possess systems for separation between religion and State, often avoiding the notion that religious claims have any bearing on political, legal or policy choices. 60. In other cases, these States confer multi-tiered preference, whereby one religion receives the most benefits, while other religions receive less benefits than the preferred one, but still more than others. In other cases, multiple religions or belief groups are given benefits, although less than the preferred religion. Finally, multiple religions receive benefits that others do not. Many of these States actively cooperate with the institutions of the State religion, providing these bodies a protected and autonomous role in society that is recognized at a constitutional level. In such States, religious groups can play an important role in society and can work with civil authorities to achieve common goals.30 61. Some of these States have much in common with the non-identification category. However, even in the absence of overt forms of discrimination, there may be hidden or indirect forms of discrimination. This may occur, for example, in the education sector, either through discriminatory funding or ineffective opt-out options from compulsory religious education in public schools, or in the observance of days of rest. Certain forms of religious manifestation may also be privileged over others in these States by interpreting such exhibitions to be reflections of cultural heritage or by assigning secular meanings to them, such as “national values” or “tradition”. 2. States that have no identification to religion 62. A broad and diverse set of States (53 per cent) with varied cultures and covering all regions are characterized as having no identification with religion. A core feature of these States is the emphasis placed on the principle of non-discrimination and the need to maintain equidistance between all belief groups and the State — even in the field of religious practices or whether or not some religions and belief traditions are seen as part of the State’s cultural or historical heritage. 63. In some cases, these States support religion, providing a variety of arrangements, such as financial benefits, to all religions that maintain their independence from the State (the cooperationist variant). However, this may exclude non-religious belief groups. In other cases, direct funding is not provided but other forms of support, such as tax exemptions, is (the accommodationist variant). Some of these States advocate for separation from all religion as a means to protect both State and religious communities from interfering in the affairs of the other. While some States go beyond the promotion of separation and call for secularism per se, with manifestation of religious practices strictly relegated to the private sphere. In all cases, religious groups function autonomously.31 64. These States appear best positioned to respect a range of human rights, including the right to freedom of religion or belief. The separation between religion and politics in these States, for example, gives them a greater space to fulfil their role as impartial guarantors of freedom of religion or belief for all; authorities are more likely to confront hate crimes and incitement to religious hatred on equal grounds and to provide equal judicial assistance to all individuals regardless of their religious or belief communities. Secular schools are also more likely to equip their students with (neutrally taught) religious literacy, based on objective history, and the use of religious values and references can be part of the political 30 31 14 Dawood Ahmed, Religion-State Relations (see footnote 4), p. 11. Cole Durham, “Patterns of Religion State Relations” (see footnote 3).