2.3.2 Lawful sanctions Despite the absolute prohibition on torture, inhuman and degrading treatment, the European Court and Commission have drawn a distinction between acts which are inherent in lawful sanctions and those which are not.355 The European Court and Commission have considered lawful sanctions in the context of corporal punishment and, to a lesser extent, the imposition of the death penalty, and have developed considerable jurisprudence on this issue.356 2 The European Regional System This proviso can be seen as an attempt to draw a distinction between treatment and punishment that is a “reasonable” or unavoidable part of a penal system, and acts that unreasonably violate a person’s physical or mental integrity. Clearly, tolerance of some lawful sanctions does not give the State “carte blanche” simply to create legislation permitting actions that amount to acts of torture or other forms of ill-treatment. Lawful sanctions must not be inconsistent with the spirit of the absolute prohibition of torture, inhuman and degrading treatment. Yet the qualification of “lawful sanctions” can be seen as somewhat subjective and this perception may encompass many elements of a State’s society, i.e. the dominant cultural, political and religious thinking. 2.3.2.1 The death penalty The tension between on the one hand prohibiting torture in absolute terms and on the other allowing certain forms of lawful sanctions has also arisen in relation to the death penalty. While the European human rights system long restricted the imposition of the death penalty without absolutely prohibiting it,357 progress towards total abolition was made with the adoption by the Council of Europe of Protocol No. 13 to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. This Protocol, which entered into force on 1 July 2003, closed the loophole left by Protocol No. 6, which did not exclude the death penalty being imposed in respect of acts committed in time of war or imminent threat of war. Protocol No. 13 excludes the death penalty in all circumstances, but, as with all treaties, is binding only on States which have ratified it. See Campbell and Cosans v UK (1982), op. cit., §30, Y v UK, Commission Report No. 8, 1991; Costello-Roberts v UK, no. 13134/87, ECHR (Series A) No. 247-C, judgement of 25 March 1993. 356 See Tyrer v UK (1978), op. cit.; Campbell and Cosans v UK (1982), op. cit. 357 See Protocol No. 6 to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. 355 75