A/HRC/4/21/Add.1 page 52 to determine the genuineness of the conversion, its first hearing would only take place on 29 December 2005 without having stayed the funerals. Observations 218. The Special Rapporteur is concerned that she has not received a response from the Government and she would be grateful if the Government provided details of any judicial and other inquiries carried out in relation to this case. Communication sent on 18 July 2006 jointly with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression 219. The Special Rapporteurs brought to the attention of the Government information concerning the allegation that the Internal Security Ministry of Malaysia has banned over the last month eighteen books, mainly devoted to the study of inter-religious matters, on the grounds that they could have ‘disrupted peace and harmony’. Twelve of these books were printed in English and the rest in Malay. The books have been banned under the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 section 9(1), by which the Internal Security Ministry of Malaysia may forbid any publication, article, caricature, photograph, report, notes, writing, sound, music, statement or any other expression which it considers: (a) country; To be prejudicial to public order, morality, security, the relationship with any other (b) To alarm public opinion or be contrary to any law; or (c) Is otherwise prejudicial to public interest or national interest. 220. The ban was enforced despite the recent approval, by the Malaysian Government, of the Media Council Bill (2006) which seeks to ameliorate the most restrictive provisions included in the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984. It was also reported that more than forty-five books have been banned by the Malaysian authorities since 2003. Observations 221. The Special Rapporteur is concerned that she has not received a response from the Government and she would like to refer to her framework for communications, more specifically to the international human rights norms and to the mandate practice concerning “Freedom of expression including questions related to religious conflicts, religious intolerance and extremism” (see above para. 1, category IV. 1.). Moreover, she reminds the Government that she is still awaiting a reply to her request to visit the country. Urgent appeal sent on 23 August 2006 jointly with the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers and the Special Representative of the SecretaryGeneral on the situation of human rights defenders 222. The Special Procedures mandate holders brought to the attention of the Government information they had received concerning Mr. Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, one of two lawyers currently representing Ms. Lina Joy, in the Federal Court of Malaysia. Ms. Joy is a Malay