L 30/4 EN Official Journal of the European Union 31.1.2019 (26) It is appropriate to provide for specific exemptions from the export controls in order not to impede the functioning of the police forces of the Member States and the execution of peacekeeping or crisis management operations. (27) Taking into account the fact that some Member States have already prohibited exports and imports of such goods, it is appropriate to grant Member States the right to prohibit exports and imports of leg-irons, gangchains and portable electric shock devices other than electric shock belts. Member States should also be empowered to apply export controls on handcuffs having an overall dimension, including chain, exceeding 240 mm when locked, if they so wish. (28) In order to limit the administrative burden for exporters, competent authorities should be allowed to grant an exporter a global authorisation in respect of goods listed in Annex III to this Regulation to prevent the relevant goods from being used for torture or for other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. (29) In some cases, medicinal products exported to third countries have been diverted and used for capital punishment, notably by administering a lethal overdose by means of injection. The Union disapproves of capital punishment in all circumstances and works towards its universal abolition. The exporters objected to their involuntary association with such use of the products they developed for medical use. (30) It is therefore necessary to impose controls on exports of certain goods which could be used for capital punishment in order to prevent the use of certain medicinal products for that purpose and to ensure that all Union exporters of medicinal products are subject to uniform conditions in this regard. The relevant medicinal products were developed for, inter alia, anaesthesia and sedation. (31) The export authorisation system should not go beyond what is proportionate. It should, therefore, not prevent the export of medicinal products to be used for legitimate therapeutic purposes. (32) The list of goods for whose export an authorisation is required with a view to preventing these goods from being used for capital punishment should only include goods that have been used for capital punishment in a third country that has not abolished capital punishment and goods whose use for capital punishment any such third country has approved, without having used them for that purpose yet. It should not include non-lethal goods which are not essential for executing a convicted person, such as standard furniture that may also be found in the execution chamber. (33) Given the differences between capital punishment, on the one hand, and torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment on the other, it is appropriate to lay down a specific export authorisation system with a view to preventing the use of certain goods for capital punishment. Such a system should take into account the fact that a number of countries have abolished capital punishment for all crimes and have made an international commitment on this issue. As there is a risk of re-export to countries that have not done so, certain conditions and requirements should be imposed when authorising exports to countries that have abolished capital punishment. It is therefore appropriate to grant a general export authorisation for exports to those countries that have abolished capital punishment for all crimes and confirmed that abolition through an internat­ ional commitment. (34) If a country has not abolished capital punishment for all crimes and confirmed that abolition through an inter­ national commitment, the competent authorities should, when examining a request for an export authorisation, check whether there is a risk that the end-user in the country of destination would use the exported goods for such punishment. Appropriate conditions and requirements should be imposed to control sales or transfers to third parties by the end-user. If multiple shipments between the same exporter and end-user take place, the competent authorities should be allowed to review the status of the end-user on a periodic basis, for example every six months, rather than every time an export authorisation for a shipment is granted, without prejudice to the right of the competent authorities to annul, suspend, modify or revoke an export authorisation where warranted. (35) In order to limit the administrative burden for exporters, the competent authorities should be allowed to grant an exporter a global authorisation for all shipments of medicinal products from the exporter to a specific end-user for a fixed period of time, specifying, where necessary, a quantity corresponding to the end-user's normal use of such products. Such authorisation should be valid for between one and three years with a possible extension of up to two years.