A/HRC/31/57/Add.1 of systematic and widespread use of torture in the Faisalabad district. As a result, he finds that Pakistan has violated the right of these and other citizens to be free from torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as provided by articles 1 and 16 of the CAT. (b) JUA 19/12/2014 Case No. PAK 16/2014 State Reply: 02/01/2015 Allegation concerning the removal of the moratorium on the death penalty for terrorism related cases. 388. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Pakistan for its reply, dated 2 January 2015, to the present communication. 389. The Rapporteur acknowledges the Government’s concern over the 16 December 2014 terrorist attack in Peshawar that took the lives of 132 defenseless school children. Nevertheless, the Rapporteur reiterates his concerns with the Government’s overuse of its anti-terrorist laws, where the definition of acts of terrorism remains vague and where more than 800 people charged with terrorism under these vague laws remain at risk of being executed. 390. As observed in his 2012-report to the General Assembly (A/67/279), there is evidence of an evolving standard within international bodies and a robust State practice to frame the debate about the legality of the death penalty within the context of the fundamental concepts of human dignity and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. This evolving standard, along with the resulting illegality of the death penalty under such prohibition, is developing into a norm of customary law, if it has not already done so (para. 74). Even if this customary norm is still under way, the Special Rapporteur considers that most conditions under which capital punishment is actually applied renders the punishment tantamount to torture and that under many other, less severe conditions, it still amounts to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (para. 75). 391. The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to reconsider whether the use of the death penalty per se respects the inherent dignity of the human person, causes severe mental and physical pain or suffering and constitutes a violation of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (para. 79). 392. Furthermore, as stated in his 2012-report (A/67/279), the Special Rapporteur calls upon Pakistan to observe rigorously the restrictions and conditions imposed by article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and articles 1 and16 of the Convention against Torture. He calls upon retentionist States inter alia to ensure that the method of execution employed causes the least possible physical and mental suffering and that it does not violate the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (para. 80(b)); to refrain from carrying out executions in public or in any other degrading manner; to end the practice of secret executions; and to end the practice of executions with little or no prior warning given to condemned prisoners and their families (para. 80 (c)). (c) JUA19/03/2015 Case No. PAK 2/2015 State Reply: None to date Allegations concerning situation of Mr. Shafqat Hussain, a juvenile offender, who faced a risk of imminent execution and was subsequently executed. 393. The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Pakistan has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13. In particular the letter expressed grave concerns regarding the death penalty to be carried out against Mr. Shafqat Hussain, a juvenile offender. 394. As observed by the Special Rapporteur in his 2012-report to the General Assembly (A/67/279), there is evidence of an evolving standard within international bodies and a 68