The importance of community-led initiatives and effective interlocutors stands alongside the need for broader partnerships. An approach that encompasses the “whole of society” has been championed by the UN and other inter-governmental and non-governmental organizations. Such an approach requires engagement of civil society across the board, including women and youth groups. The OSCE emphasizes the importance of fostering “multi-stakeholder partnerships” involving community-based initiatives that engage civil society and local leaders. “Public-private partnerships” also have a role to play to strengthen co-operation with leaders of religious or belief communities, schools, academia, the media, the business community, and industry. Care must be taken, however, to ensure that community participation in state initiatives is genuinely voluntary and effective. This is particularly important in the case of religious or belief communities, given the stigma that may be attached to their engagement on FTF-related issues. States should also carefully identify the appropriate state agencies to engage in outreach and partnerships and ensure adequate training in sensitive, informed approaches to community engagement and human rights compliant approaches to combatting FTF threats. It is important to guard against the “risk that humanitarian organizations associated with CVE/PVE programmes be seen by some states and non-state actors as politically motivated and therefore incapable to carry out a neutral, independent and impartial humanitarian action.”213 The same applies in other fields than the humanitarian sector. It is critical to avoid unduly securitizing and instrumentalizing engagement with community actors and organizations for political or intelligence-gathering purposes, and the potentially harmful gendered effect some of those policies may have.214 Experience also points to the need to safeguard the role of educators, social service professionals and others. Imposing broad reporting requirements on interlocutors may be counter-productive to providing young people with the guidance and support associated with effective prevention.215 213  C. Beerli, “Terrorism, counter-terrorism and international humanitarian law. Statement of Christine Beerli, ICRC Vice-President at the 17th edition Bruges Colloquium”, ICRC, 20-21 October 2016, <www.icrc.org/ en/document/terrorism-counter-terrorism-and-international-humanitarian-law>. 214 See: Preventing Terrorism and Countering Violent Extremism and Radicalization that Lead to Terrorism, OSCE, op. cit., note 73; “Women and Terrorist Radicalization: Final Report, OSCE Secretariat – OSCE ODIHR Expert Roundtables”, OSCE, February 2013, <www.osce.org/atu/99919>. 215  For concerns that have been expressed in this context see for example “Eroding Trust: The UK’s Prevent Counter-Extremism Strategy in Health and Education”, Open Society Justice Initiative, October 2016, (hereafter, “Eroding Trust: The UK’s Prevent Counter-Extremism Strategy in Health and Education”, Open Society Justice Initiative). The UN CTITF Guidance recommends: ‘When a statutory obligation exists for civil servants engaged in education, social and health services to share information about those with whom they interact with law enforcement officers, this should be made clear to beneficiaries from the outset”. See: UN CTITF Guidance 2018, p. 56, op. cit., note 10. Guidelines for Addressing the Threats and Challenges of “Foreign Terrorist Fighters” 59