A/HRC/26/29 accommodation for their specific needs. Physical barriers, such as a lack of access to public buildings and amenities such as transportation, distances that must be travelled to gather at officially sanctioned protest sites, and a lack of accommodation for facilitated communication, including in the online environment, may hinder the participation of persons with disabilities in peaceful gatherings. As stated previously, the practice of kettling — when police form large cordons and contain a crowd within a limited area, either preventing protesters from leaving or allowing only one exit — is “intrinsically detrimental to the exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, due to its indiscriminate and disproportionate nature” (A/HRC/23/39/Add.1, para. 37). In that regard, it may be particularly detrimental to individuals with disabilities, especially if those disabilities affect mobility. Societal attitudes that promote a lack of understanding or accommodation for persons with disabilities also constitute a significant barrier to their exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly. 4. Practices that threaten or impede the enjoyment of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly 41. Finally, some groups face a greater risk of discrimination and retribution when exercising their assembly rights due to practices which are not explicitly contained in the law (and which may, in fact, deviate from the law). In Indonesia for example, religious minority groups such as Ahmadis (the Ahmadiyah), Baha’is, Christians and Shias face physical attacks from militant Islamic groups with little intervention from the Government. Despite a Supreme Court ruling upholding the right of the Taman Yasmin Indonesian Christian Church congregation to put up their church building, in Bogor, West Java, local authorities sealed the building in 2010 and, since then, have prevented church members from gaining access to their church. 42. The Special Rapporteur is deeply concerned about the use of police violence, harassment and judicial intimidation against assemblies held by women in many parts of the world. In Cambodia, for example, female land-rights activists have been targeted for violence, harassment and arrest on numerous occasions. In India, in the State of Orissa, 42 women human rights defenders were arrested and detained for peacefully protesting against the building of a dam. In Sri Lanka, women advocating for investigations into the enforced disappearance of their loved ones face considerable opposition from the Government. In Cuba, women defenders promoting and protecting human rights (Damas de Blanco) have repeatedly been targeted by security forces when peacefully demonstrating for the rights of detainees. Similarly, in Zimbabwe, members of a local women’s group, Women of Zimbabwe Arise, were beaten and arrested in September 2013 after staging a peaceful demonstration outside Parliament. 43. The Special Rapporteur reminds Member States that the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women guarantees the equality of men and women in the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field (art. 1). Cultural notions, family obligations and perceived vulnerability should never be used as grounds on which to deny or limit the right of women to assembly. 44. Moreover, arbitrary differences in the policing of peaceful assemblies are a concern in some Member States. In 2012, for example, the Minister for Ethics and Integrity of Uganda allegedly intervened to disrupt two private civil society workshops: one on the monitoring of human rights violations, and another on the human rights of LGBTI people. Participants say that both workshops were targeted because they addressed the rights of LGBTI people. 45. Surveillance tactics ostensibly designed to prevent criminal activity are also often used selectively to target certain groups who plan to stage peaceful public assemblies. In 13