A/HRC/33/20 occasions, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights urged the Government of Bangladesh not to implement death sentences in cases before the country’s International Crimes Tribunal, particularly given concerns over the fairness of the trials.24 The Office stated that, while recognizing the determination to tackle past crimes, the trials conducted before the Tribunal have not met international standards of fair trial and due process. Serious due process concerns, which have been repeatedly raised by various United Nations independent experts, include the lack of adequate access to legal assistance and a lack of equality of arms between the prosecution and the defence, among other issues.25 On previous occasions, the Office has emphasized that the Tribunal should ensure the highest standards of proceedings if it is to reinforce the rule of law in Bangladesh and the fight against impunity for the atrocities committed in 1971 (see A/HRC/27/23, para. 46). 38. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights also expressed concern about the imposition of the death penalty by courts in the Gaza Strip in the State of Palestine. The Office condemned the execution of three men by authorities in Gaza, despite serious and widespread concerns that international fair trial standards were not respected.26 The Office also expressed regret over executions in Afghanistan amid grave concerns regarding compliance with fair trial standards, and reports concerning the widespread use of torture and ill-treatment as a means of extracting confessions. 27 39. The Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and other special procedure mandate holders of the Human Rights Council expressed concern over the lack of a fair trial in death penalty cases in a number of States, including Afghanistan, Belarus, Chad, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. D. Right to seek pardon or commutation 40. Pursuant to article 6 (4) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, States parties to the Covenant are required to allow individuals sentenced to death to seek pardon or commutation and to ensure that amnesties, pardons and commutations can be granted to them in appropriate circumstances. In accordance with the jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee, State parties to the Covenant should also ensure that sentences are not carried out before requests for pardon or commutation have been conclusively decided upon,28 and no category of convicts can be a priori excluded from such measures of relief, nor should the conditions for attainment of relief be ineffective, exceptionally burdensome, discriminatory in nature or applied in an arbitrary manner.29 41. During the reporting period, commutations or pardons of death sentences have been granted by both the judiciary and executive authorities. A common reason for commutation by the executive is as a means of enforcing a moratorium on the death penalty. For example, the President of Zambia commuted the death sentences of 332 people to life imprisonment, a decision welcomed in a joint statement by special procedure mandate 24 25 26 27 28 29 See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=15809&. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=19796&LangID=E. See www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=54102#.V1aUDk1f3cs. See www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=53894#.V1aVEU1f3cs. Communication No. 1043/2002, Chikunova v. Uzbekistan, Views adopted on 16 March 2007, para. 7.6, and draft general comment No. 36, 2015. Communication No. 1132/2002, Chisanga v. Zambia, Views adopted on 18 October 2005, para. 7.5, and draft general comment No. 36, 2015. 11