A/HRC/34/54/Add.3 44. 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 if imposed or executed under circumstances that violate such prohibition, is developing into a norm of customary law, if it has not already done so (para. 74). 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). Even if this customary norm is still under way, the Special Rapporteur considers that most conditions under which capital punishment is actually applied renders the punishment tantamount to torture and that under many other, less severe conditions, it still amounts to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (para. 75). 45. Furthermore, in his interim report to the General Assembly of 5 August 2011 (A/66/268), the Special Rapporteur defined solitary confinement, in accordance with the Istanbul Statement on the Use and Effects of Solitary Confinement, as the physical and social isolation of individuals who are confined in their cells for 22 to 24 hours a day. He observed that while solitary confinement for short periods of time may be justified under certain circumstances, with adequate and effective safeguards in place, the use of prolonged (in excess of 15 days) or indefinite solitary confinement may never constitute a legitimate instrument of the State, as it causes severe mental and physical pain or suffering. Prolonged or indefinite solitary confinement runs afoul of the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Furthermore, due to the prisoner’s lack of communication, as well as the lack of witnesses inside the prison, solitary confinement may also give rise to other acts of torture or ill-treatment. 46. In the absence of information to the contrary, the Special 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 Bahrain, by failing to provide any additional information or details about the investigation into Mr. Ramadan’s allegations, particularly as regards the extraction of a confession under torture, and by sentencing him to death on the basis of a flawed process, has violated his right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided by art. 1, 2, 12, 15 and 16 of the CAT. Bangladesh 47. JUA 29/07/2016 Case No. BGD 5/2016 State Reply: None to date Allegations concerning the risk of execution of Mr. Mir Quasem Ali, following a trial by the Bangladesh International Crimes Tribunal that did not meet international standards on fair trial and due process. 48. The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Bangladesh has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13. 49. In the absence of information to the contrary, the Special 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 Bangladesh, by 13