A/HRC/24/18 39. The United Nations Political Office in Somalia reported that military courts in Puntland and Somaliland continued to impose the death penalty against individuals accused of a broad range of crimes provided under their anti-terrorism laws. For instance, in March 2013, the Nugaal Military Court in Puntland sentenced to death two men who were accused of possession of explosives, wires and detonators under Section 7 of the Puntland AntiTerrorism Law of 2010. In April 2013, the military authority in Puntland executed 13 individuals suspected of links with a terrorist organization. 3. Mandatory use of the death penalty 40. In accordance with international human rights jurisprudence, the mandatory use of the death penalty is not compatible with the limitation of capital punishment to the “most serious crimes”.36 However, mandatory death sentences continued to be imposed in Barbados, India, Malaysia, Maldives, Pakistan, Singapore, Thailand, and Trinidad and Tobago.37 41. During the period under review, human rights treaty bodies continued to address the issue of mandatory death penalty. For instance, the Human Rights Committee recommended that Maldives remove mandatory death penalties from its statute (CCPR/C/MDV/CO/1, para.13). 42. In October 2012, the High Court of Lagos in Nigeria ruled that the mandatory imposition of the death penalty was unconstitutional. The Court declared that “the prescription of mandatory death penalty for offences such as armed robbery and murder contravenes the right of the applicants to dignity of human person and their right not to be subjected to inhuman or degrading punishment under S.34 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999”.38 43. In January 2013, the High Court at Kisumu in Kenya ruled that the death penalty for robbery with violence and attempted robbery with violence should be interpreted as a discretionary, and not a mandatory, sentence. The Court held that the mandatory death sentence does not provide the individual concerned with an opportunity to mitigate and therefore attain a fair trial. 39 44. In Uganda, a bill is reported to have been proposed to amend the Penal Code Act, the Anti-Terrorism Act and the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces Act, which impose mandatory death penalty sentences. Efforts are also currently underway to develop sentencing guidelines intended to facilitate the exercise of judicial sentencing powers. In particular, the draft Guidelines include special rules of mitigation and encourage the death sentence to be issued only in exceptional circumstances. 36 37 38 39 10 See Rolando v. Philippines (CCPR/C/82/D/1110/2002, para. 5.2); Rayos v. Philippines (CCPR/C/81/D/1167/2003, para. 7.2); Hussain and Singh v. Guyana (CCPR/C/85/D/862/1999, para. 6.2); Chisanga v. Zambia (CCPR/C/85/D/1132/2002, para. 7.4); Chan v. Guyana (CCPR/C/85/D/913/2000, para. 6.5); Larrañaga v. Philippines (CCPR/C/87/D/1421/2005, para. 7.2); Persaud and Rampersaud v. Guyana (CCPR/C/86/D/812/1998/Rev.1, para. 7.2); Weerawansa v. Sri Lanka (CCPR/C/95/D/1406/2005, para. 7.2). Amnesty International, op. cit., p. 11. James Ajulu & others v. Attorney General of Lagos State, Suit No. ID/76M/2008, October 2012 Ayub Bainito & others v. Attorney General of Kenya, Petition No.2 of 211 in the High Court of Kenya at Kisumu, Republic of Kenya; judgement issued on 28 January 2013.