The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area–Background Paper 2019 which the death penalty may be imposed.27 General Comment No. 36, as described in the introductory essay, extensively prescribes the exact safeguards foreseen in Article 6, as well as the evocation in Article 6 (6) to abolish the death penalty. The fact that the death penalty is defined as an exception under the right to life is one of the main arguments of retentionist states, including in the OSCE region, to defend its existence. Furthermore, in the politically binding OSCE commitments, the death penalty is, to a certain extent, accepted. In the 1990 Copenhagen Document, participating States reaffirmed that they will keep the question of capital punishment under consideration and recognise the restrictions and safeguards regarding the use of the death penalty, mentioning specifically Article 6 of the ICCPR. However, OSCE commitments also refer specifically to the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR (entered into force 1991), aiming at the abolition of the death penalty and the Sixth Protocol to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), also concerning the abolition of the death penalty. As highlighted in ODIHR’s 2016 background paper,28 and in the introductory essay of this report, there is a trend on the international, regional and national levels, to consider the death penalty in connection with the absolute prohibition against torture and other ill-treatment (Article 7 ICCPR). In 2017, ODIHR also highlighted the impact of capital punishment on children of parents sentenced to death or executed, including the psychological stress experienced by family members of death row prisoners, especially due to transparency issues.29 Some aspects of capital punishment have already been declared a form of ill-treatment or even torture and there is therefore no legal basis for such occurrences.30 In addition, there seems to be an evolving standard to consider the death penalty per se as running afoul of the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, no 27  See Article 6, ICCPR: 1. Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life. 2. In countries which have not abolished the death penalty, sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes in accordance with the law in force at the time of the commission of the crime and not contrary to the provisions of the present Covenant and to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. This penalty can only be carried out pursuant to a final judgement rendered by a competent court. 3. When deprivation of life constitutes the crime of genocide, it is understood that nothing in this article shall authorize any State Party to the present Covenant to derogate in any way from any obligation assumed under the provisions of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 4. Anyone sentenced to death shall have the right to seek pardon or commutation of the sentence. Amnesty, pardon or commutation of the sentence of death may be granted in all cases. 5. Sentence of death shall not be imposed for crimes committed by persons below eighteen years of age and shall not be carried out on pregnant women. 6. Nothing in this article shall be invoked to delay or to prevent the abolition of capital punishment by any State Party to the present Covenant. Article 7: No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation. 28  “The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area: Background Paper 2016”, op. cit., note 3. 29  “The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area: Background Paper 2017”, op. cit., note 3. 30  General Comment No. 36, op. cit., note 10, para. 40. 14