A/HRC/13/40/Add.1 choose and practice the religion of their choice, as well as guaranteeing the freedom of worship of each person according to his or her own religion or belief. The Government emphasized that it was not at liberty to interfere in the religious affairs and choices of its citizens, nor could it be expected to intervene in the decision by certain individuals to follow a certain religious faith or to abandon it, or to subsequently voluntarily modify their original choice. The Government noted that the Pancasila State protects and facilitates the development of all religions adhered to by the people, without any difference in treatment. Therefore, allegations that certain individuals would seek to force others to choose a different faith than the one they have voluntarily adopted was as unconscionable as it was illicit. 112. The Government underlined that Indonesia was a country with a rich multi-cultural, multi-ethnic and multi-religious history. The Indonesian Constitution guarantees that every individual has the right to choose to practise any religion of his or her choice, just as he is free to leave it or to subsequently return to it if he should so choose. Therefore, the Government argued, allegations of intimidation and coercion were incorrect. It was particularly concerned that the communication alleges that Government officials would attempt to force certain individuals to recant their faith, whereas there were no videos or other media to show any evidence of pressure and intimidation. In the case of the men mentioned above, while two voluntarily chose to publicly revert to Islam, at least four others stated their desire to remain in the Bahá’í faith. The entire process was conducted openly and dispassionately, for information purposes and in order to defuse any wrong interpretations that might fuel controversy, on the understanding that not all people were necessarily familiar with the tenets of the Bahá’í faith among a population that was predominantly mainstream Muslim. (c) Observations of the Special Rapporteur 113. The Special Rapporteur is grateful that the Government of Indonesia replied to the communication of 26 November 2007. She would like to take the opportunity to refer to her framework for communications, more specifically to the international human rights norms and to the mandate practice concerning “Freedom to adopt, change or renounce a religion or belief” (see para. 1 above, category A. 1.) and “Freedom from coercion” (ibid., category A. 2.). Furthermore, the Human Rights Committee in its general comment no. 22 emphasized that article 18, paragraph 2, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights bars coercion that would impair the right to have or adopt a religion or belief as well as policies or practices having the same intention or effect. 2. (a) Urgent appeal sent on 2 October 2009 jointly with the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, and the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions Allegations transmitted to the Government 114. The Special Rapporteurs brought to the attention of the Government information they had received regarding the adoption of the new Islamic Criminal Code (Qanun Jinayah) in Aceh. On 14 September 2009, the Aceh Legislative Council adopted a new Islamic Criminal Code which imposes severe sentences for consensual extra-marital sexual relations, rape, homosexuality, alcohol consumption and gambling. Among other sanctions, the Code imposes the punishment of stoning to death for adultery; 100 cane lashes for sexual intercourse outside marriage; between 100 and 300 cane lashes or imprisonment for rape; and 100 lashes for homosexuality. In addition, the new Code legalizes marital rape. 31