A/HRC/4/25 page 11 to justice. The denials of habeas corpus and amparo are particularly significant in cases of enforced disappearances. These matters were considered in the Special Rapporteur’s previous report on efforts to combat impunity and the right to the truth (E/CN.4/2006/52). 34. The death penalty has been especially controversial. For the purposes of this mandate, if a death sentence is handed down following a trial which did not comply with the relevant standards, not only is the right to a fair trial violated, so too is the right not to be deprived of one’s life arbitrarily. Many of the Special Rapporteur’s interventions have been aimed at preventing the infliction of the death penalty on juveniles, disabled persons or persons with mental health problems. 35. Regarding the right to asylum and the obligation on States not to return persons to their country of origin or to other places where they would be at risk of human rights violations, the Special Rapporteur notes that the allegations generally concern inappropriate recourse to national standards incompatible with international standards, or a profusion of diplomatic undertakings which are never a sufficient safeguard to justify removal. 36. A significant number of complaints reflect the difficulties many States have in reconciling modern, positive law and religious, traditional or tribal law. Communications received by the Special Rapporteur often mentioned stoning for adultery, honour crimes, the forced marriage of children and amputations for theft. Many of these issues have clear gender implications and have been the subject of joint action with the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences. The Special Rapporteur’s approach to all cases is to take international human rights law as a starting point, and while traditional justice systems are taken into account, they are regarded as having validity only insofar as their principles and practices conform to international standards. III. THE RULE OF LAW AND STATES OF EMERGENCY A. Legal regulation of states of emergency 37. All legal systems in the world provide for the adoption of emergency measures by Governments to deal with crisis situations. At present, a state of emergency may be declared only to maintain constitutional order and safeguard institutions when organized community life is threatened. This is the starting point for analysing the state of emergency, an institution which departs from the maxim necessitas legem non habet and is regarded as a fundamental tool of the rule of law. Prior to the establishment of the United Nations, and with it an international system for the protection of human rights, the prevailing view of states of emergency was distinctly absolutist. The declaration and maintenance of a state of emergency were associated with the exercise of State sovereignty, and what little legislation existed on the matter was generally confined to establishing a governing authority. 38. One of the main challenges facing international human rights law has been to change that view, by specifying the legal framework governing states of emergency. The basic text - on account of its universal scope with respect to countries, subjects and rights protected - is article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which lays down the formal and