A/HRC/4/21/Add.1 page 32 Additional responses from the Government dated 31 January 2006, 3 February 2006 and 16 March 2006 126. Subsequent to its response dated 24 January 2006, which has already been reflected in the previous communications report (see E/CN.4/2006/5/Add.1, paras. 113-115), the Government informed the Special Rapporteurs in further letters dated 31 January 2006, 3 February 2006 and 16 March 2006 of recent developments concerning this issue. On 31 January 2006, the Danish Prime Minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, made a statement where he informed that the Danish Daily, Jyllands-Posten, had apologized for the indisputable offence to the Muslim world. He hopes that the apology made will contribute to comfort those who have been hurt. The Prime Minister also informs that the mentioned apology has been positively received by Muslim communities in Denmark and that these have pledged support for the efforts made. He also calls on all parties to abstain from any statement or action that will create further tension. In an interview on the TV news channel Al-Arabyia on 2 February 2006, the Danish Prime Minister stressed the value he attached to the close relationship based on mutual respect and friendship between Denmark and the Muslim world. 127. On 16 March 2006, the Government informed the Special Rapporteurs that the Danish Director of Public Prosecutions had decided not to institute criminal proceeding in the case of the article “The Face of Muhammed”, which was published on 30 September 2005. The Danish Director of Public Prosecutions explained that in his opinion there was neither violation of section 140 of the Danish Criminal Code (mockery or scorn of religious doctrines or acts of worship of any lawfully existing religious community in Denmark) nor of section 266b of the Danish Criminal Code (public statement or imparting other information by which a group of people are threatened, scorned or degraded on account of their race, colour, national or ethnic origin, religion or sexual inclination). The decision of the Danish Director of Public Prosecutions cannot be appealed to a higher administrative authority, as stipulated in Section 99(3) of the Danish Administration of Justice Act. Furthermore he stressed that although there was no basis for instituting criminal proceedings in this case, it should be noted that both provisions of the Danish Criminal Code contain a restriction of the freedom of expression. To the extent publicly made expressions fall within the scope of these rules there is, therefore, no free and unrestricted right to express opinions about religious subjects. It is thus not a correct description of existing law when the article in Jyllands-Posten states that it is incompatible with the right to freedom of expression to demand special consideration for religious feelings and one has to be ready to put up with “scorn, mockery and ridicule”. Observations 128. The Special Rapporteur is grateful for the Government’s additional responses and she encourages the Government to continue its efforts to increase mutual understanding and religious tolerance. She would like to refer to the joint press statement with Doudou Diène (Special Rapporteur for contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance) and Ambeyi Ligabo (Special Rapporteur for the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression) on 8 February 2006. Furthermore, she would like to reiterate the conclusions and recommendations from the joint report with Doudou Diène (A/HRC/2/3, paras. 51-66) further to Human Rights Council decision 1/107 on incitement to racial and religious hatred and the promotion of tolerance.