A/HRC/6/5 page 7 8. Violations and limitations of the freedom to adopt, change or renounce a religion or belief are unacceptable and still occur too often. The Special Rapporteur has identified four broad types of situations in this regard: − Situations, where State agents try to convert, reconvert or prevent the conversion of persons, for example by threatening to kill them or their relatives, depriving them of their liberty, torturing and ill-treating them or threatening to dismiss them from their jobs; − Situations, where religious conversion is prohibited by law and punished accordingly, e.g. through arrests for “apostasy” charges, suspension of all contracts and inheritance rights, the annulment of marriages, loss of property or the removal of children; − Situations, where members of majority religious groups seek to convert or reconvert members of religious minorities by violent means, including cases where believers attack members of minority religious groups or their places of worship with the aim of converting them; − Situations, where so-called “unethical” conversions have been reported, i.e. where members of religious groups try to convert other people by “unethical” means such as the promise of material benefit or by taking advantage of the vulnerable situation of the person whose conversion is sought. In the view of the Special Rapporteur, it would not be advisable to criminalize non-violent acts performed by non-State actors in the context of the propagation of their religion, because that may pave the way for persecution of religious minorities. She recommends that cases of alleged “unethical” conversion be addressed on a case-by-case basis, examining the context and circumstances in each individual situation and dealt with in accordance with the common criminal and civil legislation. The Special Rapporteur is therefore of the opinion that the adoption of laws criminalizing in abstracto certain acts leading to “unethical” conversion should be avoided, in particular where these laws could apply even in the absence of a complaint by the converted person. 2. Freedom from coercion 9. Article 18 (2) of ICCPR states that “[n]o one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice”. The term “coercion” is to be broadly interpreted and includes the use of threat of physical force or penal sanctions by a State to compel believers or non-believers to adhere to their religious beliefs and congregations, to recant their religion or belief or to convert as well as policies or practices having the same intention or effect. Consequently, a law prohibiting conversion would constitute a State policy aiming at influencing individual’s desire to have or adopt a religion or belief and is therefore not acceptable under human rights law. Furthermore, each State also has the positive obligation of ensuring that the persons on their territory and under their jurisdiction, including members of religious minorities, can practise the religion or belief of their choice free of coercion and fear.