A/HRC/38/44/Add.3 Death penalty safeguards - Number of communications by alleged violation DP against individual with disability 1 Method of execution 2 Legislation 3 Child at time of offense 6 Extraction of confessions under torture/duress 12 Not " most serious crimes" 12 Fair trial concerns 26 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35. The Special Rapporteur continues to be alarmed at the number of cases in which the death sentence was allegedly imposed following judicial procedures that fall short of international standards of fair trial and due process, a necessary requirement for the lawful imposition of this type of punishment. Twenty-six out of the 34 communications considered in Tabulation (B) address this issue (76%). 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. 36. The Special Rapporteur recalls that the implementation of the death penalty may amount to an arbitrary execution if there is evidence that it was imposed as a result of systemic biases in the judicial process, from the investigation to sentencing. Evidence indicates that the death penalty disproportionately affects people living in poverty, for a number of reasons, including the high cost of legal advice, fees and associated costs, the lack of adequate legal aid for the poor, corruption, unfamiliarity with the laws and procedures; insufficient knowledge of the language in which proceedings are conducted. Poverty further compounds the obstacles faced by certain groups who already face inherent discrimination due to their gender, ethnicity, race, or migration status. 37. The Special Rapporteur also recalls that women are often sentenced to death against a backdrop of gender-based violence, and long-term abuse, and because of judicial biases, including the failure of the Courts to recognise persistent domestic violence as grounds of self-defence. 38. She is also concerned that in ten communications sent to States, the conviction of the defendant relied upon confessions extracted under torture or duress. 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 (ICCPR) and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). 14