A/HRC/30/21 Abolition of the Death Penalty in Africa that had taken place in late 2014 in Benin, a declaration on the abolition of the death penalty in Africa had been adopted, known as the Cotonou Declaration.2 Ms. Zainabo Kayitesi also emphasized that the Commission had adopted two resolutions urging States to implement moratoriums and abolish the death penalty, in 19993 and in 20084 respectively 9. Ms. Zainabo Kayitesi welcomed the significant progress made towards universal abolition in Africa, indicating that in 1999, 10 countries had abolished the death penalty and 11 had de-facto moratoriums, whereas currently 19 African countries had abolished the death penalty, and 23 had de-facto moratoriums. She also indicated that 10 African countries had ratified the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, the most recent one being Gabon. 10. In response to questions from the moderator, Mr. Lambrinidis’s remarks focused on issues linked to the legal and philosophical bases of the European Union’s policy on the universal abolition of the death penalty. 11. Mr. Lambrinidis underlined Europe’s strong commitment to the abolition of the death penalty, which was without asterisks, and without any reservation. He highlighted the fact that abolition was required before a State could join the European Union, as abolition defined European values. He also rejected attempts to view the abolition debate from a cultural perspective, drawing attention to the diversity of cultures among members of the Council of Europe, as well as the fact that many countries with different cultural backgrounds in all regions of the world had abolished the death penalty. Mr. Lambrinidis expressed the view that those countries that had gone through terrible atrocities tended to realize the cruelty of imposing the death penalty themselves. In that regard, he referred to the Holocaust in Europe, and to the commitment of European nations that that should never happen again which had contributed to Europe’s firm abolitionist position. He further indicated that, as the people of Europe emerged from dictatorships, they realized that judges could make mistakes and that fundamental principles of due process were violated on occasion. Irreversible life and death decisions should, therefore, not be left in the hands of any State institution, including the judiciary, as long as the death penalty was allowed. Mr. Lambrinidis also pointed out that in those States that were not open and democratic, and/or where judges and other officers in the system of administration of justice were not sufficiently trained, the risk was even greater. He concluded by emphasizing that the death penalty violated the dignity of all individuals. Everybody and every State should defend their dignity through the abolition of the death penalty. 12. In response to questions from the moderator, Ms. Robinson’s remarks focused on issues linked to the regional efforts in the Americas to abolish the death penalty, and the challenges that States had faced prior to ratifying the Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to abolish the death penalty, adopted in 1990. 13. Ms. Robinson noted that nearly half of the member States of the Organization of American States (OAS) had ratified the Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to abolish the death penalty. In 2011, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights had published a report on the death penalty entitled “From restrictions to abolition”. Also, at the request of a third of the OAS member States, both in 2013 and 2014, the Commission had held hearings to exchange views on the need for OAS-wide abolition of the death penalty. 2 3 4 4 Available from www.achpr.org/news/2014/07/d150. Resolution ACHPR/Res. 42(XXVI) 99. Resolution ACHPR/Res.136 (XXXXIIII) 08.