E/CN.4/1997/7 page 7 corporal punishment, the Special Rapporteur must consider that those States applying religious law are bound to do so in such a way as to avoid the application of pain-inducing acts of corporal punishment in practice. In this connection, he draws attention to the axiomatic doctrine that a State may not invoke the provisions of its national law to justify non-compliance with international law. 11. The Special Rapporteur notes support for his view in the position of the Human Rights Committee, which has affirmed on at least two occasions that the prohibition on torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment contained in article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political 2 Rights extends to corporal punishment. Furthermore, the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, in resolution 1984/22, recommended to the Commission on Human Rights to urge Governments of States which maintain the penalty of amputation “to take appropriate measures to provide for other punishment consonant with article 5 [of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights]”. The United Nations General Assembly has also addressed the issue with respect to the administration of Trust Territories, recommending in resolutions 440 (V) of 2 December 1950 and 562 (VI) of 18 January 1952 that immediate measures be taken to abolish corporal punishment in the Trust Territories. Corporal punishment is plainly prohibited in the context of international armed conflict by the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I and, in non-international armed conflict, by Additional Protocol II. Finally, various organs of the Commission on Human Rights have contested resort to corporal punishment, including the previous Special Rapporteur on torture (see E/CN.4/1993/26, para. 593), the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan (see A/51/481, annex, para. 81), the Special Representative on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran (see E/CN.4/1991/35, para. 494), the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iraq (E/CN.4/1995/56, para. 32; E/CN.4/1996/61, para. 29; A/51/496, annex, para. 108), and the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Sudan (E/CN.4/1994/48, paras. 59-61). B. Methods of work 12. The Special Rapporteur has continued to follow the methods of work described in the first report of his tenure (E/CN.4/1994/31, chap. I) and approved by the Commission in its resolutions 1994/37, paragraph 13, 1995/37 B, paragraph 6 and 1996/33 B, paragraph 6. In the light of frequent requests from governmental and non-governmental sources for information concerning the methods of work of the Special Rapporteur, a recapitulation of the methods is contained in Annex 1 to this report. 13. The Special Rapporteur has continued the recent practice of cooperating with the holders of other Commission mandates to avoid duplication of activity in respect of country-specific initiatives. Thus, he has sent urgent appeals to Governments in conjunction with the following mechanisms: Working Group on Arbitrary Detention; Special Rapporteurs on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; on the independence of judges and lawyers and on freedom of opinion and expression; Special Representative of the Secretary-General on internally displaced persons; Special Rapporteurs on the situation of human rights in Burundi, Cuba, Myanmar, the Sudan, the former Yugoslavia and Zaire;