A/HRC/38/44/Add.3 intergovernmental organizations and other actors to implement the recommendations in her report on the subject (A/72/335). C. Observations on the death penalty and communications transmitted to States concerning alleged violations of safeguards (tabulation B) 28. Because of the urgency of the cases brought to her attention, the Special Rapporteur sends many communications concerning possible instances of the unlawful application of the death penalty. During the reporting period, the Special Rapporteur sent 34 communications on the death penalty to 16 States and one non-State actor. 29. In its resolution 35/15, the Human Rights Council requested the Special Rapporteur in carrying out her mandate “[t]o continue to monitor the implementation of existing international standards on safeguards and restrictions relating to the imposition of capital punishment, bearing in mind the comments made by the Human Rights Committee in its interpretation of article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the Second Optional Protocol thereto.” In this respect, the Special Rapporteur has included in tabulation B the status of individuals who were the subject of communications with regard to the application of the death penalty. She urges all States concerned to provide updated information on the status of the subjects of these urgent appeals. 30. The Special Rapporteur applauds those countries that have added their names to the list of States that have abolished the death penalty. Data for 2017 show an overall decrease in the use of the death penalty, as well as a fall in the number of States imposing the death sentence and carrying out executions. 31. The Special Rapporteur is highly concerned that a minority of States resort to the death penalty in their anti-terrorism campaigns disregarding international law and standards for the imposition of the death penalty and the protection of the right to life in their quest to thwart a real or perceived threat posed by terrorism. In many cases brought to her attention, the death penalty is imposed for offences related to “terrorism” that do not involve intentional killing. She recalls that being affiliated with, being a member of, or simply supporting the causes of a group defined as “terrorist” under domestic law cannot be equated to having committed a heinous crime, let alone an intentional murder. Furthermore, there are a number of examples of journalists, human rights defenders and individuals calling for equal rights being sentenced to death under elastic definitions of “terrorism.” 32. The Special Rapporteur is seriously concerned that some governments have resumed executions for terrorist-related offences after years of death penalty moratoriums and that several states have considered resuming executions or even re-introducing the death penalty after having abolished it. She reminds Member States that reintroducing the death penalty in countries that were de jure or de facto abolitionist runs contrary to the repeated resolutions by the United Nations General Assembly12 calling on States that maintain the death penalty to progressively reduce its use, establish a moratorium, and for those that have abolished the death penalty, not to re-introduce it. Such a re-introduction is also contrary to article 6 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR for the states who have ratified it and runs contrary to international trends towards the progressive abolition of the death penalty. 12 12 See for instance General Assembly resolution 71(187 (A/RES/71/187), resolution 69/186 (A/RES/69/186), resolution 67/176 (A/RES/67/176), resolution 65/206 (A/RES/65/206), resolution 63/168 (A/RES/63/168) and resolution 62/149 (A/RES/62/149).