72 Legal Digest of International Fair Trial Rights 3.3.6 Religious courts, or courts based on customary law In some countries, the legal order recognizes religious courts, or courts based on customary law, and entrusts them with judicial tasks that might involve the determination of civil rights or obligations (See also 1.2). Where this occurs, the Human Rights Committee has commented that: “It must be ensured that such courts cannot hand down binding judgments recognized by the State, unless the following requirements are met: proceedings before such courts are limited to minor civil and criminal matters, meet the basic requirements of fair trial and other relevant guarantees of the Covenant, and their judgments are validated by State courts in light of the guarantees set out in the Covenant and can be challenged by the parties concerned in a procedure meeting the requirements of article 14 of the Covenant. These principles are notwithstanding the general obligation of the State to protect the rights under the Covenant of any persons affected by the operation of customary and religious courts.” 283 3.4 Independent and impartial prosecution in criminal cases Prosecutors play a crucial role in the administration of criminal justice and sometimes form part of the same judicial corps of civil servants as judges. Although there is no specific jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee or European Court of Human Rights on the subject, it should be recalled that prosecutors should be able to operate autonomously and in a manner that is absent of personal bias or undue influence from the executive. Prosecutorial authorities often guard their independence and impartiality with great vigour. In 1990, the United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders adopted the UN Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors, formulated for the purpose of assisting States to secure and promote the effectiveness, impartiality and fairness of prosecutors.284 3.5 Contempt of court Deriving from the inherent power of judicial authorities to ensure the proper and orderly functioning of proceedings is the ability of judicial officers to hold persons in contempt of court.285 Measures ordered by courts under contempt of court procedures have been described as akin to the exercise of disciplinary powers.286 They must be exercised only for their legitimate purpose, i.e., ensuring the proper and orderly functioning of proceedings, and must not be used by judicial officers in a way that would undermine the actual or appar- 283 UN Human Rights Committee, CCPR General Comment 32 (2007), para 24. 284 UN Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors, adopted by the UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, Havana, Cuba, 27 August to 7 September 1990. For further information on the role of prosecutors, see International Principles on the Independence and Accountability of Judges, Lawyers and Prosecutors – Practitioners Guide No. 1 (Geneva: International Commission of Jurists, 2007), especially p.71–76. 285 Ravnsborg v Sweden [1994] ECHR 11, para 34. 286 Ravnsborg v Sweden [1994] ECHR 11, para 34.