A/62/280 constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence according to article 20 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In this regard it is noteworthy that recent legislation in the United Kingdom defines the meaning of “religious hatred” as “hatred against a group of persons defined by reference to religious belief or lack of religious belief”. 77. The Special Rapporteur would like to reiterate that criminalizing “defamation of religions” can be counterproductive, since it may create an atmosphere of intolerance and fear and may even increase the chances of a backlash. Accusations of “defamation of religions” might stifle legitimate criticism or even research on practices and laws appearing to be in violation of human rights but that are, or are at least perceived to be, sanctioned by religion. In the recent thematic report on incitement to racial and religious hatred and the promotion of tolerance, she emphasized that the “right to freedom of religion or belief protects primarily the individual and, to some extent, the collective rights of the community concerned but it does not protect religions or beliefs per se” (A/HRC/2/3, para. 38). In view of the huge number of religions and beliefs, genuine differences of opinion between their believers may arise. Furthermore, it would be difficult and potentially dangerous to define in abstracto what constitutes a “defamation of religion” as well as to find an impartial, independent and non-arbitrary body for adjudicating such cases. Finally, a recent report of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization emphasized that freedom of religion, thought, conscience and opinion “allows the same rights to atheists, agnostics and secular humanists to express their views, so an agreement which deals only with sacred beliefs would run counter to the fundamental principles of human rights and non-discrimination agreements”. 33 78. With regard to education, especially in publicly funded schools, pupils and teachers should not be discriminated against on grounds of their adherence (or not) to a specific religion or belief. The authorities should pay specific attention to the contents of syllabuses on religious education, which ideally should aim to be allembracing. In this context, the International Consultative Conference on School Education in Relation to Freedom of Religion or Belief, Tolerance and Non-Discrimination in its Final Document “[deemed] that each State, at the appropriate level of government, should promote and respect educational policies aimed at strengthening the promotion and protection of human rights, eradicating prejudices and conceptions incompatible with freedom of religion or belief, and ensuring respect for and acceptance of pluralism and diversity in the field of religion or belief as well as the right not to receive religious instruction inconsistent with his or her conviction” (E/CN.4/2002/73, appendix, para. 4). 79. Finally, when contracting out public services to faith-based organizations, the State needs to put in place effective safeguards against discriminatory practices of the contractor in the context of hiring and delivering services. Representatives of non-religious groups should not be deliberately excluded from official consultations where theistic views are prominently taken into account. The State should analyse the possibility of systemic religious bias in such official consultations due to a numerical strength of religious representations in comparison to non-hierarchical and non-institutional perspectives from atheists or non-theists. __________________ 33 22 Report on UNESCO action in favour of the respect for freedom of expression and respect for sacred beliefs and values and religious and cultural symbols (176 EX/23), 28 March 2007, para. 8). 07-48490