A/HRC/4/26 page 10 guaranteed by article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). It is on this ground that the German Constitutional Court ruled that the Rasterfahndung initiative, described above, violates the constitutional right to privacy. The Court held that the preventive use of this profiling method would only be compatible with the proportionality requirement if it were shown that there was a “concrete danger” to national security or human life, rather than a general threat situation as it existed since 11 September 2001.14 39. Similarly, the Special Rapporteur takes the view that stops and searches of persons that are based on stereotypical assumptions that certain religious or ethnic groups are more likely to pose a terrorist threat than others may amount to a disproportionate and arbitrary interference with the freedom of movement, guaranteed by article 12 of ICCPR, the right to privacy, guaranteed by article 17 and/or the right to personal liberty, guaranteed by article 9. 40. In addition, the Special Rapporteur observes that any terrorist-profiling practices that are based on distinctions according to a person’s presumed “race”, ethnicity, national origin or religion raise the question as to their conformity with the principle of non-discrimination. Because of its relevance to different forms of terrorist profiling, the Special Rapporteur believes that the issue of discrimination deserves particular attention. The Special Rapporteur is concerned that profiling based on stereotypical assumptions may bolster sentiments of hostility and xenophobia in the general public towards persons of certain ethnic or religious background. 41. The guarantees of non-discrimination of articles 2 and 26 of ICCPR prohibit discrimination on grounds such as race, national origin and religion. Discrimination on the basis of race and national or ethnic origin is also prohibited by the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD). Article 5 of ICERD explicitly prohibits racial discrimination with respect to the “right to equal treatment before […] all […] organs administering justice” and to “freedom of movement”.15 Furthermore, the prohibition against discrimination on the grounds of race and religion is generally accepted as a peremptory norm of international law, which cannot be set aside by treaty or acquiescence.16 This view is supported by article 4, paragraph 1, of the ICCPR, which makes clear that the right to non-discrimination on the grounds of race and religion can never be derogated from, not even in times of an officially proclaimed public emergency. These binding obligations of non-discrimination have been reinforced and supplemented by a range of other international and regional standards. The Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, for example, provides that such officials must “maintain and uphold the human rights of all persons”, including the right to non-discrimination.17 Similarly, the European Code of Police Ethics of the Council of Europe recommends that “[t]he police shall carry out their tasks in a fair manner, guided, in 14 BVerfG, 1 BvR 518/02; see note 4 above. 15 ICERD, article 5 (a) and (d) (i); see also articles 1 (1), 2 (1) (a). 16 See Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, article 53. 17 Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, General Assembly resolution 34/169, 17 December 1979, article 2 and its Commentary (a).