The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area In his report, the United Nations Secretary General noted that governments that still use the death penalty do not have unfettered discretion in deciding the manner in which it is carried out. They should comply with requirements emanating from the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.26 The United Nations Human Rights Council, in its resolution 30/5, from October 2015, recalled my call to consider whether the use of the death penalty violated the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment. Likewise, the upcoming biennial high-level panel discussion to be held at the 34th session of the Human Rights Council will address the human rights violations related to the use of the death penalty, in particular with respect to the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment.27 In its 17 December 2015 resolution on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the United Nations General Assembly recognized that states must protect the rights of those facing the death penalty.28 The growing trend toward the abolition of the death penalty and the regulation of the particular methods of implementation reflect the irreconcilable conflict between the lawful imposition of the sanction and the prohibition of torture or other ill-treatment under international law. Other documents that provide evidence of this trend and, at the same time, constitute a reflection of the international movement toward abolition are, among others, the United Nations General Assembly Resolutions calling for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty with a view to achieving its abolition,29 and the report of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) showing a positive picture of progress in South-East Asia towards abolition of the death penalty in that region, consistent with the worldwide trend.30 Regional instruments, such as the EU Guidelines or the resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Community of Portuguese-speaking countries, are further indicators of the global trend, at times explicitly linking the application of the death penalty with the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment. 31 26  Secretary General, Op. Cit., note 22, para. 30. 27  Resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council on 1 October 2015, on the question of the death penalty, A/HRC/RES/30/5 (12 October 2015), page 2 and para. 6, <http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/alldocs.aspx?doc_ id=25720>. 28  United Nations General Assembly Resolution on Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, A/RES/70/146 (12 February 2016), <http://www.un.org/en/ga/70/resolutions.shtml>. 29  United Nations General Assembly Resolutions on the Moratorium on the Use of the Death Penalty, A/ RES/62/149 (2007), <http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/62/149; A/RES/63/168> (2008), <http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/63/168>; A/RES/65/206 (2010), <http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/65/206; A/RES/67/176> (2012), <http:// www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/67/176>; and A/RES/69/186 (2014), <http://www. un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/69/186>. 30  EU Guidelines, Op. Cit., note 8. 31  Ibid.; see also “EU Policy on Death Penalty”, <http://eeas.europa.eu/human_rights/adp/index_en.htm>; see also Council of Ministers of the Community of Portuguese-speaking countries, “Resolution on Human rights and the Abolition of the death Penalty”, (18 July 2003), <http://www.cplp.org/id-4447.aspx?Action=1&NewsId=3002 &M=NewsV2&PID=10872>, and “Resolution on the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights in the CPLP” (18 July 2013), <http://www.cplp.org/id-4447.aspx?Action=1&NewsId=3012&M=NewsV2&PID=10872>. 12