A/HRC/25/33 situation, and it was increasingly tempting for them to deny it and hide their feelings. The Special Representative further noted that States sentencing a person to death tended to give little or no assistance for the care and protection of that person’s children. At the same time, the serious stigma associated with persons sentenced to death often made it difficult to find alternative caregivers, which further exacerbated the trauma endured by the child and heightened risk of homelessness and exposure to violence and to being manipulated into a criminal path. The Special Representative further stated that the sentencing of a parent to the death penalty or execution compromised the enjoyment of a wide spectrum of children’s rights. In that regard, she emphasized the critical importance of ensuring that the situation of children of parents facing the death penalty was given urgent attention and action to support them through a protective environment, and through services and recovery and reintegration measures. III. Contributions of the panel 9. In his introductory remarks, as the moderator of the panel, Bertrand se Crombrugghe stated that the negative impact of a parent’s execution on his or her children was a matter of concern. Since the execution of a parent was a direct result of a State action, the State in question had a responsibility to ensure that children received appropriate care and assistance. He highlighted that the Human Rights Council had opted for a human rights approach to the issue. In that regard, he noted that its resolution 22/11 referred to provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which enjoyed almost universal ratification. He also recalled previous relevant resolutions and discussions, in particular Council’s resolution 19/37 on the rights of the child and the day of general discussion on children of incarcerated parents convened by the Committee on the Rights of the Child held on 30 September 2011. 10. Jorge Cardona Llorens discussed the international human rights norms and standards legal framework relevant to the rights of children of parents sentenced to death. In that regard, he discussed the application of the concept of “best interests of the child”. That concept was aimed at ensuring both the full and effective enjoyment of all the rights recognized in the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the holistic development of the child. In particular, he noted that article 3, paragraph 1, of the Convention gives the child the right to have his or her best interests assessed and taken into account as a primary consideration in all actions or decisions that concern him or her, both in the public and private sphere, including in the court of law. The Committee on the Rights of the Child has identified article 3, paragraph 1, as one of the four general principles of the Convention for interpreting and implementing all the rights of the child.2 He further referred to general comment No. 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration.3 He highlighted that States parties to the Convention were legally obliged to carry out this assessment each time a decision concerning a child was taken; and such determination and assessment had to be singular, relevant and explicit. He emphasized that when the sentence was issued regarding the parent of a child, the decision-making process must include an evaluation of the possible impact (positive or negative) of the decision on the child or children concerned. The full application of the concept of the 2 3 The Committee’s general comment No. 5 (2003) on the general measures of implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, para. 12; and No. 12 (2009) on the right of the child to be heard, para. 2. The Committee expects States to interpret development as a “holistic concept, embracing the child´s physical, mental, spiritual, moral, psychological and social development” (general comment No. 5 (2003), para. 12). 5