E/CN.4/1998/6/Add.2 page 25 99. On the question of the granting of the status of legal person in public law, the Special Rapporteur found that many representatives of non-governmental organizations with whom he spoke were confused and associate such status with recognition of religious status. However, in conformity with German legislation and legal precedent, granting of the status of legal person in public law does not depend on the religious nature of the organization concerned but on whether it is in the public interest. For this reason, the Jehovah's Witnesses are recognized as a religious community by the authorities, who have not in fact granted them the status of legal person in public law. Similarly, although the Mormons have been granted this legal status, they are nonetheless listed in a brochure on sects published by the State. What is indisputable is that freedom of religion and belief may not as such be challenged. 100. Where tax exemptions granted by the State to legal persons in public law are concerned, the Special Rapporteur wishes to point out that these privileges do not extend to their industrial or commercial activities. For this reason, a religious community recognized as being in the public interest has to keep its commercial activities separate from its non-commercial activities. In other words, the fact that an organization is religious in character and has been recognized as being in the public interest does not automatically mean that all its activities are exempt from taxation. 101. Generally speaking, and in conformity with international law, State intervention in the field of religion and belief cannot involve taking responsibility for people's conscience and promoting, imposing or censuring a particular faith or belief. And no group or community may arrogate to itself responsibility for the conscience of individuals. The State is, however, responsible for ensuring observance of the law, and in particular of criminal legislation relating to the preservation of public order, embezzlement, breach of trust, assault and battery, failure to assist a person in danger, indecent behaviour, procuring, unlawfully practising medicine, kidnapping and abduction of minors, etc. In other words, the State possesses a sufficiently broad range of legal instruments to combat the various guises adopted by groups and communities cloaking themselves under religion, and to deal with any misunderstandings that arise in respect of groups and communities involved in matters of religion and belief. The various legal instruments must be rigorously enforced, particularly in the social and tax spheres, in a substantiated and non-discriminatory manner. Likewise, any community or group that considers that its rights and freedoms have been undermined by the State must avail itself of legal procedures, i.e. the courts. In both situations, it is of vital importance, when conflicts arise, for the State and communities and groups in the field of religion and belief to put themselves in the hands of the judicial system, which decides on the facts, rather than to court the passions of the masses or to act on the spur of the moment. These principles of behaviour must be unequivocally observed and applied, so that persons are properly informed and shielded from confusion, suspicion and intolerance. It is equally necessary for everyone to be aware and duly informed of the nature of any measures taken by the Government in the field of religion and belief, of their mandate and their objectives. The purpose, ultimate goal and function of the Bundestag Study Commission should be further clarified. It should also be emphasized that the Commission is not a court of law responsible for conducting trials. Similarly, where surveillance of the