Overview OSCE participating States have made a number of commitments relating to the issue of the death penalty. In 1989 in Vienna, participating States pledged to limit the use of capital punishment only to the most serious crimes and in a manner not contrary to their international commitments.1 Moreover, at the 1990 Copenhagen Meeting, participating States agreed to make available to the public information regarding the use of the death penalty and keep the question of eliminating capital punishment under consideration.2 These commitments were reaffirmed at the Moscow Meeting in 1991 and at the Budapest Summit in 1994.3 Based on these commitments and pursuant to its mandate, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) monitors developments relevant to the use of the death penalty in the OSCE region and reports on the issue through its annual publication — Background Paper on the Status of the Death Penalty in the OSCE Area. The Background Paper is based on information provided by participating States that have a de facto abolitionist or retentionist status in response to ODIHR’s questionnaire. This information is supplemented with inputs from OSCE field operations, intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations and media reports. Country entries on abolitionist States are compiled based on ODIHR’s research only. The 2013 Background Paper covers the period from 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2013. It highlights changes in the status of the death penalty in OSCE participating States and provides relevant statistical data. This background paper focuses on the two participating States — Belarus and the United States of America — that continue to impose the death penalty, and on four participating States — Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Russia and Tajikistan — that are de facto abolitionist, but retain the death penalty 1  Concluding Document of the Vienna 1989 Follow-up Meeting, paragraph 24, <http://www.osce.org/mc/16262>. 2  Document of the 1990 Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE, paragraphs 17.7 and 17.8, <http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/14304>. 3  Document of the 1991 Moscow Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE, paragraph 36, <http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/14310>; and OSCE Budapest Document 1994, “Enhancing Compliance with CSCE Commitments and Promoting Co-operation and Dialogue in the Human Dimension”, paragraph 19, <http:// www.osce.org/mc/39554?download=true>. 5