the way they are conducted. Their purpose should not be to forcibly change a prisoners’ religion or belief but, rather, to offer alternative arguments to the views of violent extremist groups using religious faith to justify violence. The UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief has recognized the important role religious communities and scholars may play in rehabilitation and reintegration programmes, including for violent extremist 411 offenders and “foreign terrorist fighters”. In his view, religious communities and leaders should promote empathy, respect, tolerance and non-discrimination, and should challenge the authenticity claims of those advocating for violence in the name of religion by exposing their views as being ignorant of the charitable core messages contained in 412 religious traditions. These principles could similarly apply to faith-based interventions in 413 prisons. The involvement of religious representatives in rehabilitation interventions also presents a number of practical challenges. Their organizational status (for example, as employees of the prison service or a relevant ministry) can impact on perceptions of their independence 414 and credibility. In a number of European countries and in the United States, the institutionalization of prison imams has also prompted concerns related to the introduction 415 of a state-sanctioned form of Islam and the failure to reflect the diversity within Islam. As stated by the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, it is not for the state to define the contents of a religion or belief; this has to be done by worshippers 416 themselves. Where possible, ensuring that religious representatives or scholars involved in rehabilitation programmes come from the same tribal, ethnic and linguistic groups 417 of the prisoners will also be more effective. It is recommended that religious leaders receive specialized (psychological) training on working in a therapeutic role in the prison 418 setting with (suspected) violent extremist prisoners or those deemed “at risk” of VERLT. It is also crucial that an individual’s right to hold opinions without interference is 419 respected. The coercive nature of an ideology conversion system that is “applied in discriminatory fashion with a view to alter the political opinion of an inmate by offering 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, “Report on Preventing Violence Committed in the Name of Religion”, A/HRC/28/66, 29 December 2014, para. 65. Ibid., para. 105. On the general importance of educational and other measures that foster respect for religious or belief diversity, understanding and mutual respect see also: ODIHR, Freedom of Religion or Belief and Security: Policy Guidance, op. cit., note 32, pp 20-27. Due to the potential importance of religion for prisoners, as noted earlier, and the fact that faith-based interventions can aid prisoner rehabilitation and reintegration, it is also important to note that undue interferences of freedom of religion or belief, which result from the imposition of specific security measures/ prison regimes or the use of indicators to identify people who are vulnerable to VERLT, are not only contrary to international human rights standards but also counter-productive. See sections 2.1. and 2.2 and supra note 163. Council of Europe, “Council of Europe Handbook”, op. cit., note 2, para. 161. ICSR, “Prisons and Terrorism – Radicalization and Deradicalization in 15 Countries”, op. cit., note 60, p. 33. UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, “Report of the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Asma Jahangir - Report to the Human Rights Council”, A/HRC/7/10/Add.3, 7 February 2008, para. 76. GCTF, “Rome Memorandum on Good Practices for Rehabilitation and Reintegration of Violent Extremist Offenders” op. cit., note 174, Good Practice 10; Council of Europe, “Guidelines for Prison and Probation Services regarding Radicalisation and Violent Extremism”, op. cit., note 56, Guidelines 24-25. United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute, “Building on the GCTF’s Rome Memorandum: Additional Guidance on the Role of Religious Scholars and other Ideological Experts in Rehabilitation and Reintegration Programmes”, p. 2. Recalling Article 19, ICCPR, op. cit., note 85. See also section 2.1, “use of indicators.” 83