A/HRC/35/23/Add.2 considered in Tabulation (B) address this issue. The Special Rapporteur wishes to remind States that have retained this form of punishment that the death penalty may only be carried out following a legal process that provides all possible safeguards to ensure a fair trial, and that only full respect of these guarantees distinguishes capital punishment as possibly permitted under international law from an arbitrary execution. 30. She is also concerned that in eight communications sent to States, the conviction of the defendant relied upon confessions extracted under torture. This manifestly undermines the credibility that the sentence was imposed during a fair trial. The extraction of confessions under torture and the acceptance of such confessions as evidence of guilt constitute flagrant violations of both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 31. The Special Rapporteur is further concerned that again during this reporting period, several communications addressed the imposition of the death penalty for offences that do not meet the threshold of “most serious crime”, in particular for drug offenses, terrorism related offences, adultery, unintentional murder, disobedience, treason, apostasy and “enmity against god”. Amongst those, drug and terrorism related offences were the charges most frequently imposed. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur would like to restate that under international law, the death penalty may only be imposed for the “most serious crimes” which has been interpreted to mean “intentional killing”. Drug related offences and many terrorism-related offences do not involve killing, much less intentional killing, and as such may not constitute the basis of any sentence to death. 32. The Special Rapporteur has also frequently sent communications regarding the planned execution of individuals who must be protected from the death penalty (16): most commonly those suffering from a psycho-social disability (2), or those who have been convicted for crimes committed as juveniles, in some cases those who are still juveniles (14 communications). In this latter case, the Special Rapporteur underlines that the burden of proof should rest on the prosecution to demonstrate that a defendant was an adult at the time of the commission of the alleged crime. 33. The Special Rapporteur would like to restate, as did her predecessors, that any death sentence undertaken in contravention of a Government’s international obligations is tantamount to an arbitrary execution. 32