A/HRC/31/57/Add.1 to the attention that Mr. Badawi’s sentence was upheld by the Supreme Court on 7 June 2015. The Special Rapporteur hence finds that the Government does not sufficiently address the concerns, legal obligations, and questions raised in the initial communication, which prompts him to infer that the Government fails to fully and expeditiously cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13. 468. The Special Rapporteur wishes to stress that corporal punishment of any sort, even if judicially imposed, is always torture in violation of articles 1, 2 and 16 of the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), which Saudi Arabia acceded to on 23 September 1997. 469. The Special Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication and that Saudi Arabia, by having carried out Mr. Badawi’s corporal punishment, in part, and by failing further to protect Mr. Badawi from enforcement of the Supreme Court ruling upholding his sentence, has violated Mr. Badawi’s right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided for in articles 1, 2 and 16 of the CAT, and has failed to provide Mr. Badawi redress for these violations according to article 14 of the CAT. The Special Rapporteur strongly urges the Government to refrain from and abolish the practice of the corporal punishment. (c) JUA 25/08/2015 Case No: SAU 4/2015 State Reply: None to date Allegation concerning the risk of imminent execution of seven Pakistani Nationals, Messrs. Mohammad Afzal, Mohammad Irfan, Mohammad Fiaz, Liaquat Ali, Mohammad Imran, Ghulam Shabbir, and Safeer Ahmad in Saudi Arabia. 470. The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Saudi Arabia has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Right Council in its resolution 25/13. In particular the letter expressed grave concerns regarding the use of the death penalty that may be carried out against several prisoners who have been convicted on drug-related charges, which does not meet the threshold of “most serious crimes” that would warrant the death penalty under international law. 471. As observed by the Special Rapporteur in his 2012 report to the General Assembly (A/67/279), there is evidence of an evolving standard within international bodies and a robust State practice to frame the debate about the legality of the death penalty within the context of the fundamental concepts of human dignity and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. This evolving standard, along with the resulting illegality of the death penalty under such prohibition, is developing into a norm of customary law, if it has not already done so (para. 74). 472. In the absence of information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, available via the link above, and is therefore of the view that the Government of Saudi Arabia, by seeking to execute the death penalty for offenses that do not reach the threshold of “the most serious crimes” imposing the death penalty of Messrs. Mohammad Afzal, Mohammad Irfan, Mohammad Fiaz, Liaquat Ali, Mohammad Imran, Ghulam Shabbir, and Safeer Ahmad, has violated their right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided for, inter alia, Articles 2 and 16 of the Convention Against Torture (CAT). 473. The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to reconsider whether the use of the death penalty per se respects the inherent dignity of the human person, causes severe mental and physical pain or suffering and constitutes a violation of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (para. 79 A/67/279). He calls upon the government of Saudi Arabia to observe rigorously the restrictions and conditions 80