constitutional guarantees, internal political instability or any other public disaster or emergency.”508 The Court has repeatedly referred to the jus cogens character of the absolute prohibition of all forms of torture,509 and it is now clear that it also considers the prohibition on other forms of ill-treatment to be customary international law.510 3.3.2 Lawful sanctions “The concept of torture shall not include physical or mental pain or suffering that is inherent in or solely the consequence of lawful measures, provided that they do not include the performance of the acts or use of the methods referred to in this article.” On its face, this exception is narrower than that in the UNCAT, as it explicitly states that acts and methods falling within the definition of torture will still qualify as such if inflicted in the context of an otherwise lawful measure. 3.3.2.1 The death penalty While the imposition of the death penalty is not prohibited by Article 4 of the ACHR, which concerns the right to life, strict limits are placed on its use. The Court has indicated that the conditions in which the sentence may be imposed will be interpreted restrictively.511 Nonetheless, imposition of the death penalty, or circumstances surrounding its use, may under certain circumstances violate the rights guaranteed under Article 5 of the ACHR. The Inter-american Regional System The IACPPT provides an explicit exception to the prohibition on all ill-treatment by providing in Article 2 that: 3 The Commission has not as yet ruled on whether any particular method of execution amounts to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment as compared with other methods, although it has reserved its competence to rule on this point in the future.512 Nonetheless, the Commission has found that Berenson-Mejía v Peru (2004), op. cit., §100; De la Cruz Flores v Peru (2004), op. cit., §125; Las Palmeras v Colombia, IACHR (Series C) No. 90, judgement of 6 September 2001, §58. 509 Goiburú and Others v Paraguay (2006), op. cit., §128; Tibi v Ecuador (2004), op. cit., §143; Gómez-Paquiyauri Brothers v Peru (2004), op. cit., §112; Urrutia v Guatemala (2003), op. cit., §92. 510 Ximenes-Lopes v Brazil (2006), op. cit., §127. 511 See Restrictions to the Death Penalty (Articles 4(2) and 4(4) American Convention on Human Rights), Advisory Opinion OC-3/83 of 8 September 1983; Hilaire and Others v Trinidad and Tobago, IACHR (Series C) No. 94, judgement of 21 June 2002, §99. 512 Sewell v Jamaica, Case 12347, Report No. 76/02, 27 December 2002, §118. 508 113