able system of merely requiring that notice be given to the authorities. Excessive penalties such as detention or high fines are often used to punish individuals who take part in peaceful assemblies. Finally, police conduct in the management of assemblies often exceeds permissible limits; there is frequently a lack of accountability when this occurs. 45. In many OSCE States, spontaneous assemblies are tolerated and managed by the police, not banned or dispersed. Authorities and would-be assembly organizers co-operate in a constructive way with one another without undue interference on the part of the authorities in the practicalities of the organization of the event. Best police practices in many States have developed significantly in the area of the management of assemblies in a way that is sensitive to the needs of both demonstrators and the wider public. There, the option of using force by the police has hence faded into the background. 46. The freedom of association is the subject of increasingly stringent regulation in many States. Non-governmental organizations seeking to exercise their right to freedom of association are faced with laws requiring them to comply with unnecessarily burdensome registration requirements, cumbersome reporting obligations, complex bureaucratic procedures, and the abuse of fiscal, economic, health-protection, and other ostensibly neutral legal regulations for political ends. This has contributed to a process that has widened the gap between civil society and the governments of some OSCE States. It is in this context pertinent to recall that freedom of assembly and association should be treated as a right that a state has to protect, not constrain. Restrictions are often justified by referring to the need to combat terrorism and prevent violent extremism, but they often come to undermine these very struggles by removing legitimate channels of expressing criticism and dissent. 47. It is, however, important to note that a number of participating States have instituted an environment conducive to the existence and operation of informal associations and other types of NGOs that do not choose to obtain formal legal personality. In instances where NGOs prefer to have a formal legal status, some participating States merely require notification to be filed with the responsible public body following a simple and non-cumbersome procedure. This procedure is to be preferred over a practice that requires authorization by the responsible public body before formal legal status is obtained. Many participating States manage this system through procedures that do not interfere with the essence of the freedom of association. Ñ Human rights and countering terrorism 48. The fight against terrorism has become a priority for the OSCE, as for other international organizations, especially since 2001. The Bucharest Plan of Action aimed “to establish a framework for comprehensive OSCE action to be taken by participating States and the Organization as a whole to combat terrorism, fully respecting international law, including the international law of human rights and other relevant norms of international law”.32 The OSCE 32  Bucharest Plan of Action for Combating Terrorism (MC(9).DEC/1), 4 December 2001, para. 3. As a part of the Bucharest Plan, participating States committed themselves, inter alia, to “provide for the timely detention and prosecution or extradition of persons charged with terrorist acts, in accordance with their obligations under international and national law” (id., para. 26). The 2001 Bishkek Programme of Action highlighted the importance of respect for human rights as a key element in prevention of terrorism, as participating States committed themselves to increase co-operation in the fields of human rights and fundamental freedoms and by strengthening the rule of law. 18 Common Responsibility: Commitments and Implementation