A/HRC/27/23 8. In Benin,3 Comoros (A/HRC/26/11, para. 10), Mongolia4 and Suriname,5 draft laws to remove the death penalty from national laws are currently under consideration. Viet Nam reported that it is drafting amendments to its Penal Code to reduce the number of crimes punishable by death. 9. In Sri Lanka, the Ministry of Justice appointed a special committee in October 2013 to review the Penal Code with a view to abolishing the death penalty. In June 2013, the National Assembly of Tajikistan established a working group to study public opinion on the death penalty. In China, the authorities passed a resolution affirming their intention to progressively reduce the number of crimes punishable by death. As part of its reporting to the Human Rights Council, China noted that it would continue its efforts in that regard in accordance with its economic and social development (A/HRC/25/5/Add.1, para. 186.17). Thailand reported that it intended to propose legislation to abolish the death penalty.6 10. In many States, a constitutional reform process provided an opportunity for discussions on the death penalty and led to proposals to abolish or restrict the use of the death penalty. For example, in Zimbabwe, a new Constitution was adopted in 2013. It provides for the death penalty only for murder committed in aggravating circumstances and prohibits its imposition on women or on men who were under 21 or over 70 years at the time of the commission of the crime. In Ghana, the Constitutional Review Implementation Committee submitted a draft bill for the amendment of the 1992 Constitution, in which it recommended replacing the death penalty with life imprisonment.7 Sierra Leone indicated that the current review of its Constitution would present an opportunity for the examination of the question of the death penalty.8 11. In some States, the judiciary restricted the scope of the use of the death penalty. For instance, the High Court of Botswana declared that the mandatory death penalty (sect. 203 of the Penal Code) was unconstitutional.9 In India, the Supreme Court issued a ruling recognizing that poverty, socioeconomic or psychic compulsions and undeserved adversities in life are some of the mitigating factors to be considered as a basis for commuting a convict’s death sentence to life imprisonment.10 The Supreme Court of India also adopted guidelines on clemency and the treatment of death row prisoners.11 In Uganda, sentencing guidelines for courts of judicature were issued with the aim of strengthening humane, predictable and consistent sentencing. The guidelines include special rules on 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 4 Statement of the Minister of Justice, Human Rights and Legislation of Benin, delivered at the Human Rights Council on 5 March 2014. Statement of the State Minister of Justice of Mongolia, delivered at the Human Rights Council on 5 March 2014. Reported in April 2014 by the International Commission against the Death Penalty. Information provided at a seminar on moving away from the death penalty in South-East Asia, jointly organized in Bangkok in October 2013 by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the Ministry of Justice of Thailand. See Ghana, Constitution Review Commission, Report of the Constitution Review Commission: From a political to a developmental constitution, executive summary and p. 644, para. 69 ( 2014). Available from www.ghana.gov.gh/images/documents/crc_report.pdf. Statement of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Sierra Leone, delivered on 5 March 2014. High Court of Botswana, State v. Rodney Masok, case No. CTHFT-000008-07, judgement delivered by Justice Tshepo Motsagole on 2 October 2013. Supreme Court of India, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction, Sunil Damodar Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra, criminal appeal Nos. 165-166 of 2011, judgement issued on 10 September 2013. Shatrughan Chauan and Anr v. Union of India and Ors, writ petition (criminal) No. 55 of 2013, decided on 21 January 2014.