A/HRC/27/23 period, at least 4 of the 14 States, namely the Islamic Republic of Iran, Saudi Arabia, the State of Palestine (Gaza) and Yemen, executed children. 60. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) estimated that, in the Islamic Republic of Iran, over 160 persons, who allegedly committed crimes before the age of 18, face the risk of execution. The adoption of the revised penal code in 2013 in the country (specifically its child-related provisions that prohibit the application of the death penalty to children in certain cases) created a more enabling environment for the implementation of juvenile justice standards for children in conflict with the law. In partnership with the judiciary, UNICEF supported the implementation of child-related provisions of the revised penal code. It noted, however, that it was still too early to assess the extent to which the revised penal code contributed to reducing the number of capital sentences issued in cases involving juveniles. It recommended that the Government, prior to its adoption of the new penal code, ensure a special review of the cases of those children who had been sentenced to death. 61. Saudi Arabia reportedly executed two individuals for crimes they had committed before the age of 18. Saudi Arabia justifies the execution of juveniles on the ground that their childhoods end when they reach puberty, according to the concept of bulugh under sharia. It also carried out qisas (retaliatory punishment). UNICEF reported that the Saudi Shura Council had recently approved a law on the protection of children from abuse which defines children as individuals under the age 18, in accordance with the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The law is currently awaiting the approval of the Head of State. B. Persons with mental or intellectual disabilities 62. In accordance with international human rights standards, the death penalty should not be imposed on persons with mental or intellectual disabilities.55 The judiciary in several States took the initiative of addressing the issue of the use of the death penalty against persons with mental or intellectual disabilities. For instance, the Supreme Court of India commuted the death sentences of two individuals to life imprisonment on the ground of mental illness. It also ruled that all death row prisoners should have regular mental health checks and appropriate medical care.56 In Japan, in March 2014, a district court released Iwao Hakamada, who had been on death row since 1968 and developed mental illness as a result of the decades he had spent in isolation. 63. Some States, however, reportedly continued to execute persons with mental and intellectual disabilities. In the United States of America, after the Supreme Court rejected a stay of execution, the State of Florida executed an individual in August 2013 despite his decades-long history of mental illness.57 In April 2014, the State of Texas executed Ramiro Hernández Llanas, a Mexican national whose IQ level fell within the parameters of intellectual disability. Despite precautionary measures issued by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Mr. Hernández’s case, the United States failed to preserve his life pending a petition before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in violation of its international legal obligations derived from the Charter of the Organization 55 56 57 See E/2010/10 for detailed discussion on the relevant international standards. Shatrughan Chauan and Anr v. Union of India and Ors, writ petition (criminal) No. 55 of 2013, decided on 21 January 2014. Florida Department of Corrections John Ferguson v. Secretary, No. 13-5507. 15