49. 另一个风险在于，联合国不加批判地接受这一概念以及现实中对这一个概念的各种理解。对一些国家而言，防止和打击暴力极端主义是外交政策工具，例如，通过发展援助进行部署，或是用以影响宗教或政治意识形态或身份认同的工具，使防止和打击暴力极端主义带上固有的主观色彩。如果没有任何审查或问责机制，这会导致联合国对明显侵犯基本人权和基本自由的旨在防止和打击暴力极端主义的行动采取合法化、纵容和推动的态度，从而无视联合国在维护国际人权法方面的根本作用。特别报告员亲眼目睹了联合国和区域实体如何根据国家法律中的定义和相关实践，参与并支持违反国际人权条约、直接侵犯基本权利的旨在防止和打击暴力极端主义的方案，如应对“极端主义”的方案，该方案是对联合国尽职政策的完整性和落实的直接挑战。
49. A further risk lies with the United Nations uncritically embracing the concept together with its myriad understandings on the ground. For some States, preventing and countering violent extremism is a foreign policy tool, deployed through development aid for example, or a tool to affect religious or political ideology or identity, rendering it inherently subjective. Absent any scrutiny or accountability mechanism, it can lead to the United Nations legitimizing, condoning and enabling action aimed at preventing and countering violent extremism that is in clear violation of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms and disregarding its fundamental role in safeguarding international human rights law. The Special Rapporteur has seen first-hand how the United Nations and regional entities are engaging and supporting programmes aimed at preventing and countering violent extremism based on the definition in national law and related practice that are in violation of international human rights treaties and directly impinging on fundamental rights, such as programmes that address 94 A/70/674, para. 7. 95 UNDP, “Report on Oslo II”. 96 UNODC, “Guidelines for the Central Asian preventing violent extremism network”, 2019. 97 UNESCO, “Preventing violent extremism through education: a guide for policymakers”, 2017. 98 UNESCO, “UNESCO in action: preventing violent extremism worldwide”, 2018. “extremism” – a direct challenge to the integrity and implementation of the UnitedNations due diligence policy.