A/HRC/14/24 prosecute and punish perpetrators. In addition, in reports detailing Governmental violations in response to violence by non-State actors (including gangs or sects), it is important to report on non-State actor violations in order to provide a fair picture of the situation facing the Government. This is reflected in the reports on Brazil, Kenya and Nigeria. 47. In order to understand the dynamics of killings by non-State actors, which are often underreported and under-studied, reports to the Council and the General Assembly have included global studies of particular phenomena such as killings by vigilantes and mob justice (A/64/187, paras. 15-83) and killings of “witches” (A/HRC/11/2, paras. 43-59). My predecessor, Ms. Jahangir, contributed substantially with respect to the issue of “honour killings” (E/CN.4/2000/3, paras. 78-84). E. Deaths in custody 48. Communications to Governments and country mission reports often address deaths in custody, which encompass guards killing prisoners, inter-prisoner violence, suicides, death resulting from torture in custody and deaths resulting from prison conditions, including poor health care, overcrowding and inadequate food. 49. I have analysed in detail the nature of the State’s responsibility in a custodial setting (A/61/311, paras. 49-54). States have a heightened level of responsibility in protecting the rights of detained individuals. Indeed, when an individual dies in State custody, there is a presumption of State responsibility. The obligation of the State is not only to prohibit and prosecute killings by guards or other officials, but also to prevent deaths and to respond effectively to the causes of the deaths. The specific content of the obligations of the State include: ensuring appropriate prison oversight and monitoring; providing adequate health care to detainees (A/HRC/11/2/Add.5) and appropriate budgets to prisons (A/HRC/14/24/Add.3); stopping practices of prisoners running prisons (A/HRC/8/3); ensuring accurate records of detainees and their sentences (A/HRC/14/24/Add.3); and exercising due diligence to prevent inter-prisoner violence. F. The death penalty 50. International law does not prohibit the application of the death penalty. However, given the fundamental nature of the right to life, the circumstances in which the death penalty may lawfully be applied are strictly circumscribed. Executions carried out in violation of those limits are unlawful killings. 51. Various reports examining the legal limits on the application of the death penalty show that: (a) The death penalty is only lawful if imposed after a trial conducted in accordance with fair trial guarantees, including judicial independence, the right to counsel, an effective right to appeal, and the right not to be coerced or tortured to give evidence (A/HRC/11/2/Add.5). When a State’s judicial system cannot ensure respect for fair trials, the Government should impose a moratorium on executions (A/HRC/11/2/Add.4, paras. 65 and 89); (b) States that impose the death penalty must provide transparency in relation to the specifics of the processes and procedures under which it is imposed.17 This obligation is firmly grounded in existing law (E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.3). States retaining the death penalty 17 12 E/CN.4/2005/7; E/CN.4/2006/53, para. 28; and A/HRC/8/3/Add.3, para. 81.