A/HRC/29/25 37. The Special Rapporteur strongly urges all Governments to weigh carefully their involvement in natural resource exploitation activities that have the potential to violate human rights. Introspection is especially needed in view of the State practice of merging foreign affairs, trade and international development portfolios and thus encouraging the alignment of sometimes disparate objectives. 38. As a starting point, he commends the decisions of various State institutions, such as the government pension funds of Norway and Sweden, to divest themselves of interests in corporations deemed to engage in acts of environmental degradation or violations of human rights and labour standards.16 Some States have enacted laws that prohibit and punish the bribery of foreign public officials and sanction companies that do not prevent bribery. 17 The Special Rapporteur notes that these laws are a step in the right direction but more still needs to be done. He encourages similar initiatives in respect of violations of human rights abroad. E. Challenges to the right to freedom of peaceful assembly 39. International human rights law affirms the right of individuals to express their opinions, even if these opinions are unpopular or in opposition to government views or policies.18 The right to freedom of peaceful assembly is an essential vehicle for people to express their opinions, and this right cannot be limited based solely upon an assembly’s message or content. Despite this, the Special Rapporteur has found that content often plays a decisive role in whether peaceful assemblies are facilitated or suppressed. Assemblies that support the Government’s position are rarely, if ever, obstructed, while those that oppose the Government’s position are at much greater risk for suppression. This is true generally, but particularly in the context of natural resource exploitation. 40. The Special Rapporteur holds the view that as long as such an assembly is peaceful, States have the obligation to facilitate the gathering whether or not authorities agree with the content of the message. Any interference with such peaceful assemblies, including dispersal, should meet the strict tests of necessity and proportionality stipulated in international human rights standards. 41. The Special Rapporteur reiterates that the guarantees provided by international human rights standards relate only to assemblies that are peaceful (see A/HRC/20/27, para. 25). When violent incidents occur within otherwise peaceful assemblies, authorities have a duty to distinguish between peaceful and non-peaceful demonstrators, take measures to de-escalate tensions and hold the violent individuals — not the organizers — to account for their actions. The potential for violence is not an excuse to interfere with or disperse otherwise peaceful assemblies. This principle is all the more important because violence in the course of peaceful protests may be instigated to justify the dispersal of a protest. 16 17 18 Norway, Ministry of Finance, “The Management of the Government Pension Fund in 2013” (available from www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/5434cb3d2ff04441a 21a2c9b1d55ea06/en-gb/pdfs/stm201320140019000engpdfs.pdf), p. 108; Second Swedish National Pension Fund, “Swedish AP Funds exclude four companies accused of contravening international conventions”, 30 September 2013 (available from www.ap2.se/en/Financial-information/Pressreleases/2013/swedish-ap-funds-exclude-four-companies-accused-of-contravening-internationalconventions-/). The United Kingdom Bribery Act 2010 and the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977. In the United States of America, under the 2010 Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, section 1502, the enhancement of transparency over conflict minerals from the Democratic Republic of Congo is sought. See International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 19. 13