E/CN.4/2005/62/Add.2 page 52 legal acts of the Republic of Uzbekistan” reducing the number of articles in the Criminal Code punishable by death from four to the following two: “premeditated aggravated murder”(arti. 97, part 2 of the Criminal Code) and “terrorism” (art. 155, part 3). It is widely believed that most death sentences in Uzbekistan have been handed down for “premeditated, aggravated murder”. The authorities refuse to publish comprehensive statistics, which makes it impossible to verify whether the reduction in the number of capital offences has had an impact on the actual number of death sentences. The Government’s Plan has provisions for conducting public opinion polls on repealing the death penalty, assessing the practice of replacing capital punishment with imprisonment and preparing regulations on informing relatives of individuals sentenced to death (actions 19.1, 19.2 and 19.3) in 2004 and 2005. It is unclear why treatment of relatives of individuals sentenced to death in accordance of international norms requires the preparation of special regulations that must wait until 2005 even to be submitted for review. 247. The Government drew attention to information previously provided concerning the application of the death penalty (E/CN.4/2004/56/Add.3, para. 311). Concerning the obligation to inform relatives, it is not foreseen by the current legislation of Uzbekistan that relatives should be informed about the date, time and place of the execution and the location of the grave. It is for ethical reasons that the body of the executed person is not handed over to the relatives since, due to the method of the execution (i.e. firing squad), the body is often transformed. The institution executing the punishment informs the court once it has been carried out, which in turn informs the relatives. It has to be taken into account that the death penalty in Uzbekistan is applied only in exceptional situations for very severe crimes. In this regard it is important to pay attention to the feelings of the relatives of the victim. Also, public opinion is in favour of the death penalty (a survey conducted in April/May 2004 polling 1,200 persons found that 78.2 per cent are in favour of the death penalty, with only 21.8 per cent against); 56.2 per cent are strictly against a moratorium on the death penalty, whereas 43.8 per cent are in favour. The main reasons put forward by the proponents of the death penalty are revenge and prevention. 248. Recommendation (t) stated: The Government should give urgent consideration to closing Jaslyk colony which by its very location creates conditions of detention amounting to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment for both its inmates and their relatives. 249. According to the information received from non-governmental sources, the Government has made no movement to consider closing Jaslyk and actions to implement this recommendation are not included in the Plan. 250. The Government reported that in 2003 the Jaslyk colony was visited twice by representatives of EU embassies and repeatedly by several journalists from the international media. The conditions in the colony fully conform to the requirements of the Criminal Execution Code of Uzbekistan. Whereas the maximum capacity of the colony is 700 prisoners, currently only 439 persons are serving their sentences there. About 35 per cent of them have been convicted for religious extremism. All prisoners have their own beds, clothes and bed linen. The temperature of the premises is constantly regulated. No complaints from prisoners concerning the quality of food and medical treatment have been received. Up to 30 per cent of the prisoners are from the surrounding Khoresm region or the Republic of Karalpakstan. A new road has reduced the distance to the nearest large towns. Closing the colony would lead to a deterioration