Note In 2004, Bhutan, Samoa and Senegal (de facto abolitionist on 31 December 2003) and Greece and Turkey (abolitionist for ordinary crimes on 31 December 2003) became completely abolitionist.

Of these 25 countries, 19 had been formerly retentionist (5 of them de facto abolitionist) and 6 had moved from abolitionist for ordinary crimes to abolitionist for all crimes.

(a) Retentionist countries that became abolitionist

b Became fully abolitionist in 2004.

The response rate was, as usual, higher from those countries which were abolitionist by the end of the survey period (31 December 2003) 33 of the 80 that were completely abolitionist replied, as did 7 of the 12 that were abolitionist for ordinary offences, in total less than half of all abolitionist countries.

Three formerly de facto abolitionist countries resumed executions.

Three of these 11 countries, formerly abolitionist for ordinary crime became abolitionist for all crimes in the period 1999 2003 Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cyprus and Malta.

In 2004, a fourth country, Greece, became completely abolitionist.

In summary, by the end of 2004, over half the countries formerly abolitionist for ordinary crimes had either become completely abolitionist or had plans to become so.

In contrast, several of the new members of the de facto abolitionist camp have indicated that they have an ambition to join the ranks of abolitionist States.

Countries that became abolitionist for all crimes between 1999 and 2003

(b) Countries that became or consider themselves as de facto abolitionist

Retentionist countries that were de facto abolitionist at the beginning of 1999

Status of capital punishment in December 2003 completely abolitionist countries and territoriesa

Status of capital punishment in December 2003 de facto abolitionist countries and territoriesa

Thus, 25 countries remained de facto abolitionist from the beginning of 1999 until the end of 2003 (6 of the 34 on 1 January 1999 having become abolitionist and 3 having reverted to being retentionist).

Four other countries became abolitionist for all ordinary crimes Albania, Chile, Latvia and Turkey.

The remaining countries that are abolitionist for ordinary crimes can all be regarded as de facto abolitionist as far as crimes against the State or under the Military Code for which they retain the death penalty are concerned.

(a) Countries that were abolitionist for all crimes, whether in time of peace or war

Status of capital punishment in December 2003 abolitionist countries and territories for ordinary crimes onlya

For the first time in these five yearly surveys, questions were framed separately for abolitionist countries, for countries that did not impose the death penalty for ordinary offences and for retentionist countries, including those that were de facto abolitionist.

Two other countries might be expected to become abolitionist in the near future Kenya and the Russian Federation.

None of them had abolished the death penalty or become de facto abolitionist by the end of 2003.

Tajikistan became de facto abolitionist on legally establishing a moratorium on executions without limit of time in 2004.

Furthermore, only one of the 41 countries that were de facto abolitionist by the end of 2003 replied.

In its reply for the sixth survey, Myanmar stated categorically that it was a de facto abolitionist country.

In summary, three countries that were retentionist in 1999 became abolitionist for all crimes by the end of 2003.

As already noted, Chad had briefly become de facto abolitionist, but resumed executions within the period of the survey.

An up to date list of abolitionist and retentionist countries is contained in annex I to the present report.

Of the 34 countries that were de facto abolitionist at the beginning of 1999, 9 changed their status during the quinquennium.

This is a lower figure than the seven formerly de facto abolitionist countries that resumed executions during the quinquennium 1994 1998.

Two of the 34 countries became abolitionist for all crimes between 1999 and 2003 Côte d'Ivoire in 2000 and Armenia in 2003.

b Tajikistan instituted an official moratorium on executions in 2004 without any time limit, thus making it a de facto abolitionist country.

In addition, replies were received from five countries that were abolitionist only for ordinary crimes on 1 January 1999 Argentina, El Salvador, Greece, Malta and Mexico.

Thus, with the addition of these two countries, 17 States that were formerly retentionist became de facto abolitionist within the five year period 1999 to 2003.

Several of these countries appeared to be moving towards an abolitionist stance, among them Nigeria, Republic of Korea, Sierra Leone and Zambia (except in its Northern provinces).

As regards the imposition of death sentences by de facto abolitionist countries, they continued to be imposed in the Gambia, Mali and Togo during the period 1999 2003.

In addition, two other countries, Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan can be classified as de facto abolitionist by establishing official moratoriums on executions and both seem to be heading towards full abolition.

The issue was whether exposing a person to the risk of facing capital punishment in another country was per se in violation of article 6 when done by an abolitionist country.

Moreover, although 3 countries that had been regarded as de facto abolitionist did resume executions, that is a much smaller number than the 9 that did so between 1994 and 1998.

Although three countries that were formerly de facto abolitionist resumed executions, none of them have done so on a substantial scale and no countries that had abolished the death penalty reintroduced it.

However, no abolitionist countries reintroduced the death penalty during the period 1999 2003, compared with four countries and two states of the United States of America that did so in the previous quinquennium.

Countries that were abolitionist for ordinary criminal offences were asked to specify which offences remained subject to the death penalty and whether any persons had been sentenced to death or executed during the survey period.

A majority (22) of these completely abolitionist countries reported that they had taken or were involved in initiatives to promote the abolition of capital punishment or to reduce its scope or the incidence of its application.

Thus, there is evidence to suggest that where the abolitionist movement has not persuaded retentionist countries to abandon capital punishment, it has had the effect of modifying the frequency with which they have recourse to execution.