A/HRC/12/50 A. Consideration of universal periodic review outcomes 211. In accordance with paragraph 4.3 of President’s statement 8/1, the section below contains a summary of the views expressed on the outcome by States under review, Member and observer States of the Council, as well as general comments made by other relevant stakeholders before the adoption of the outcome by the plenary. Central African Republic 212. The review of the Central African Republic was held on 4 May 2009 in conformity with all the relevant provisions contained in Council resolution 5/1, and was based on the national report submitted by the Central African Republic in accordance with the annex to Council resolution 5/1, paragraph 15 (a) (A/HRC/WG.6/5/CAF/1); the compilation prepared by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in accordance with paragraph 15 (b) (A/HRC/WG.6/5/CAF/2); and the summary prepared by OHCHR in accordance with paragraph 15 (c) (A/HRC/WG.6/5/CAF/3). 213. At its 14th meeting, on 23 September 2009, the Council considered and adopted the outcome of the review on the Central African Republic (see section C below). 214. The outcome of the review on the Central African Republic comprises the report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review (A/HRC/12/2), the views of the Central African Republic concerning the recommendations and/or conclusions, and its voluntary commitments and replies presented before the adoption of the outcome by the plenary to questions or issues that were not sufficiently addressed during the interactive dialogue in the Working Group. 1. Views expressed by the State under review on the recommendations and/or conclusions as well as on its voluntary commitments and on the outcome 215. The delegation of the Central African Republic welcomed the opportunity given to provide responses to the recommendations addressed to it. The delegation stressed the readiness of the State to ratify all relevant international instruments, provided that the political, economic, social and cultural conditions were in place, adding that implementing international instruments at the national level came up against the obstacles of mobilizing the necessary resources and disruptions in the process of depositing ratification instruments. 216. Regarding recommendations 20 to 24 (para. 75) on the abolition of the death penalty, the delegation stressed that the matter was still under discussion, indicating that the majority was opposed to such an abolition because of the high rate of crime. The delegation indicated which crimes were still punishable with the death penalty, and stressed that the last executions had taken place in 1981. 217. With regard to recommendation 35, the delegation indicated that all press offences had been abolished, while noting that journalists may be guilty of common law offences, such as defamation and press offences defined by the High Communication Council. 218. Regarding recommendation 34, the delegation indicated that judicial authorities had made an exhaustive assessment of the massive human rights and humanitarian law violations committed in the period 2002–2003. This had enabled the authorities to seize the International Criminal Court. A truth and reconciliation commission and a compensation fund had been adopted during the national dialogue of 2008. However, implementation of this recommendation was delayed owing to financial difficulties. 219. Regarding recommendations 25 and 33, the delegation underlined the fact that, in accordance with the Constitution, the judiciary was a branch power whose independence 94