A/HRC/21/29 intervention, executions for drug-related offences continue, UNODC may have no choice but to employ a temporary freeze or withdrawal of support”.29 28. The use of the death penalty for non-violent acts such as financial crimes, religious practice or expression of conscience and sexual relations between consenting adults that may not constitute “most serious crimes” under international human rights law is also a particular concern.30 For instance, in February 2012, a district court in Pakistan confirmed the death sentence of a Pakistani national, who is resident in the United States of America, for blasphemy crimes under its penal law. 29. In Saudi Arabia, the death penalty is applied in respect of a wide range of offences that cannot be considered “most serious crimes”, including apostasy and sorcery. Reportedly, in 2011, two individuals were executed for sorcery. In February 2012, a Saudi national was forcibly returned to Saudi Arabia from Malaysia, after he had left the country amid death threats for information posted on the social medium Twitter. He was accused of apostasy, punishable by the death penalty, for his statements on Twitter.31 30. According to some reports, the death sentence against an Iranian national residing in Canada for “insulting and desecrating Islam” was confirmed by the Supreme Court of the Islamic Republic of Iran on 17 January 2012.32 On 28 February 2012, the Amnesty and Clemency Commission of the Islamic Republic of Iran rejected a request for pardon for a death sentence against a Persian literature lecturer at the Payam-e Nour University for crimes of Moharebeh (fighter against God) for his alleged links with a banned opposition group.33 B. Fair trial guarantees 31. The death penalty may be carried out only pursuant to a final judgment rendered by a competent court after a process which gives all possible fair trial safeguards, at least equal to those contained in article 14 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including the right of anyone suspected of or charged with a crime for which capital punishment may be imposed to adequate legal assistance at all stages of the proceedings. 32. During the reporting period, human rights treaty bodies continued to address issues of fair trial standards relating to the death penalty in their dialogues with State parties during the consideration of their periodic reports. For instance, while acknowledging the de facto moratorium on the death penalty in Ethiopia, the Human Rights Committee stated that it remained concerned that death sentences were still imposed by Ethiopian courts for crimes which appear to have a political dimension, as well as following in absentia trials 29 30 31 32 33 UNODC, “UNODC and the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights”, p. 10. Available from www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-reform/UNODC_HR_position_paper.pdf Commission on Human Rights resolution 2005/59 on the question of death penalty called on States to ensure that that the notion of “most serious crimes” does not go beyond intentional crimes with lethal or extremely grave consequences and that the death penalty is not imposed for non-violent acts such as financial crimes, religious practice or expression of conscience and sexual relations between consenting adults nor as a mandatory sentence. Amnesty International, “Death penalty fear for Tweeter facing forcible return to Saudi Arabia from Malaysia”, 10 February 2012. Available from www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/deathpenalty-fear-tweeter-facing-forcible-return-saudi-arabia-malaysia-201. Amnesty International, “Web programmer at risk of execution in Iran”, 17 February 2012. Available from www.amnesty.org. Amnesty International, “Clemency denied for Iranian man on death row”, 23 March 2012. Available from www.amnesty.org. 9