A/HRC/39/19 B. Prohibition of the mandatory use of the death penalty 24. According to United Nations human rights mechanisms, the mandatory use of the death penalty constitutes an arbitrary deprivation of life, in violation of article 6 (1) of the Covenant, in circumstances where it is imposed without any possibility of taking into account the defendant’s personal circumstances or the circumstances of the particular offence.90 Mandatory death sentences do not permit distinctions to be made between degrees of seriousness and individual circumstances of the particular crime for which the penalty is imposed and, hence, are not compatible with the limitation of capital punishment to the “most serious crimes”.91 25. During the reporting period, mandatory death sentences reportedly continued to be imposed in Brunei, Ghana, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore and Trinidad and Tobago, 92 with some positive trends seen in the Islamic Republic of Iran and Malaysia where the mandatory requirements were removed for certain crimes.93 26. In December 2017, the Kenya Supreme Court declared the mandatory nature of the death penalty for murder unconstitutional and tasked relevant authorities to set up a framework to deal with sentence rehearing cases.94 Furthermore, the Kenya Attorney-General set up a task force to implement this judgment which will consider and prepare proposals based upon comparative studies with other jurisdictions and consult with all key stakeholders, including the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, religious leaders, relevant parliamentary committees and civil society organizations. 95 The Kenya Law Reform Commission has also recommended that the death penalty be repealed in its entirety.96 Zambia announced that it was working on ways to amend the Penal Code “so that the death penalty could be handed down at the discretion of judges, rather than being mandatory”.97 In June 2018, the Caribbean Court of Justice struck down the mandatory death penalty for murder in Barbados on the grounds that it breached the right to protection of the law by depriving a court the opportunity to exercise the judicial function of tailoring the punishment to fit the crime.98 27. In Uganda, while the mandatory death penalty was declared unconstitutional in 200999 ⸻ the court deeming that the mandatory nature of the sentence undermined the right to fair trial ⸻ the majority of prisoners convicted prior to the repeal of the mandatory sentence are reportedly still waiting for mitigation hearings. In its submission, the Uganda Human Rights Commission called for this situation to be addressed urgently through reinforcement of dedicated legal aid, systematic screening of the cases and a coherent strategy for addressing the outcomes of the mitigations. 28. During the reporting period, Antigua and Barbuda resentenced all those who had been subject to mandatory death sentences.100 The Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court imposed fixed- 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 10 Se E/2015/49, para. 63; A/67/275, para. 67; CCPR/C/GHA/CO/1, paras. 19−20; and CCPR/C/98/D/1520/2006, para. 6.3. See E/2015/49, para. 63. See www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/ACT5079552018ENGLISH.PDF, p. 8. See also paragraph 8 above. Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another v. Republic & 5 others (2017). Gazette Notice No. 2610, Vol. CXX—No. 37, 23 March 2018. See www.statelaw.go.ke/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/KLRC-Opinion-on-Death-Penalty-and-LifeImprisonment.pdf. See A/HRC/37/14, para. 123. See Nervais v. The Queen and Severin v. The Queen (2018); and www.ccj.org/news/ccj-strikes-downmandatory-death-penalty-in-barbados. Kigula & 419 others v. Attorney-General (Constitutional Petition No. 6 of 2003). See www.deathpenaltyproject.org/2016/11/23/antigua-prisoner-released-after-20-years-on-death-row/; and www.deathpenaltyproject.org/2016/12/01/antigua-empties-death-row/.