The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area–Background Paper 2019 children.”269 In October 2018, a member of Parliament from the BBP party submitted a draft legislative proposal on this matter to parliament.270 In March 2019, this debate rose again in the aftermath of the attacks on two Christchurch mosques in New Zealand which killed 50 people.271 The President of Turkey vowed to approve legislation to restore the death penalty if parliament passes it, and openly stated his objection to providing food for those serving life sentences following the coup attempt in July 2016 and expressed his regret for abolishing the death penalty.272 Moreover, it is relevant to note states’ extraterritorial obligations when it comes to the death penalty as this affects the extent to which a state contributes to the global abolitionist trend. Most recently in General Comment No. 36, it is clearly stated that: “States parties that abolished the death penalty cannot deport, extradite or otherwise transfer persons to a country in which they are facing criminal charges that carry the death penalty, unless credible and effective assurances against the imposition of the death penalty have been obtained.”273 During the reporting period, on 31 May 2018, the European Court of Human Rights confirmed its judgement that Romania had violated its international obligations by assisting in the transfer of Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri in 2004 to the US.274 The Court found violations of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment because Romania had not sought assurances from the receiving authorities and there was a real risk that al-Nashiri could face the death penalty.275 The trial of Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri was ongoing at the United States naval base at Guantánamo Bay at the end of 2018.276 In a separate case, two men who are accused of committing crimes as members of the so-called “Islamic State”, and who have been stripped of their British citizenship, are facing possible extradition to the United States. This case, which was pending in the United Kingdom Supreme Court at the end of the reporting period, 269  “Turkish leaders agree to bring back death penalty”, Ahval news, 28 August 2018, <https://ahvalnews.com/ death-penalty/turkish-leaders-agree-bring-back-death-penalty>. 270  “The Spectre of Trexit: Proposal to Reintroduce the Death Penalty in Turkey”, EJIL: Talk!, 10 October 2018, <https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-spectre-of-trexit-proposal-to-reintroduce-the-death-penalty-in-turkey/>. 271  “Turkey’s Erdogan calls on New Zealand to restore death penalty over shooting”, Reuters, 19 March 2019, <https://www.reuters.com/article/us-newzealand-shootout-erdogan/turkeys-erdogan-calls-on-new-zealand-torestore-death-penalty-over-shooting-idUSKCN1R01O6>. 272  “Turkey’s Erdoğan says removing death penalty was ‘wrong’”, Hurriyet Daily News, 19 March 2019, <http:// www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkeys-erdogan-says-removing-death-penalty-was-wrong-142019>. 273  Ibid. 274  Al Nashiri v. Romania (33234/12), European Court of Human Rights (2018) paras 721-722, <https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-183685%22]}>. 275  Report of the Secretary-General, Moratorium on the use of the death penalty, op. cit., note 62, para. 34. 276  Amnesty International, “Amnesty International Global Report: Death Sentences and Executions 2018”, op. cit., note 74, p. 29. 52