A/HRC/33/20 mandatory use of the death penalty was incompatible with international law. He urged the Government of Singapore to pursue legal reform that would put an end to mandatory death sentences, in line with international human rights and fair trial standards.20 33. Prisoners who have received a mandatory death sentence should promptly have their sentence reviewed by a competent body and have the right to seek pardon or commutation (see CCPR/C/MWI/CO/1/Add.1, para. 11). During the reporting period, a number of initiatives were undertaken to re-sentence those who were the subject of a mandatory death sentence. Those initiatives resulted in the commutation of the death sentence in a number of cases. In Singapore, the High Court commuted a death sentence after the prisoner applied for re-sentencing following the 2012 reforms to mandatory death penalty laws. Courts in Malawi have been conducting sentencing hearings in the cases of prisoners who received mandatory death sentences prior to a 2007 landmark case striking down the mandatory death penalty. Overall, the country’s courts have completed 63 hearings, resulting in the immediate release of 51 prisoners in the light of the time they had already spent on death row. C. Fair trial guarantees 34. The imposition of a death sentence upon the conclusion of a trial in which the provisions of article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights have not been respected constitutes a violation of the right to life. 21 Furthermore, forcing an individual to make or sign, under duress, a confession admitting guilt violates both article 7 (prohibiting torture and inhuman, cruel or degrading treatment) and article 14 (3) (g) (prohibiting compulsion to testify against oneself or confess guilt) of the Covenant.22 35. Algeria, Bahrain, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Morocco and Qatar provided information regarding the legal guarantees and safeguards provided in their respective jurisdictions. Such guarantees and safeguards include the right to public trial, the right to legal representation and counsel, including the provision of a counsel financed by the State, respect for the principle of presumption of innocence, the right to appeal and freedom from torture.23 36. The Supreme People’s Court of China issued new guidelines aimed at facilitating the participation of defence lawyers during the final review of death sentences. The Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of State Security and the Ministry of Justice jointly issued another set of guidelines that guarantee the rights of lawyers to have full access to their clients, as well as greater participation by defence lawyers during police investigations. That enhanced safeguard, however, did not extend to cases involving State security, “terrorism” or corruption. 37. However, United Nations human rights mechanisms have continued to express concern over the lack of a fair trial in death penalty cases in a number of States. On several 20 21 22 23 10 “UN human rights experts urge Singapore not to execute a Malaysian national”, press release, 18 May 2015. Available at www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID= 19988&LangID=E. Human Rights Committee, communications No. 1044/2002, Shakurova v. Tajikistan, Views adopted on 17 March 2006; No. 915/200, Ruzmetov v. Uzbekistan, Views adopted on 30 March 2006; No. 913/2000, Chan v. Guyana, Views adopted on 31 October 2005; No. 1167/2003, Rayos v. Philippines, Views adopted on 27 July 2004. See also its general comment No. 32 (2007) on the right to equality before courts and tribunals and to a fair trial. Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 32. Submissions from those States are in the files of the Secretariat and are available for consultation.