Kobedi went through the proper judicial process of the Courts in Botswana and did not at anytime derogate from the procedures whatsoever. 138. The Respondent State avers that the jurisprudence of the African Commission did not regard the death penalty as inherently contrary to the African Charter, but rather that such penalty should only be imposed with necessary due process safeguards being in place. In referring the Commission to the Thirteenth Activity AC HP R Report of the Commission,40 the Respondent State argues that the African Commission did not declare the imposition of the death penalty a contravention of Charter Rights, but urged States that still had the death penalty to among other things limit its imposition only to crimes of the most serious nature as well as to consider establishing a moratorium on executions. 139. The Respondent State argues that because due process was followed and safeguarded by the judicial system of Botswana in the trial of Kobedi, his execution cannot amount to a contravention of Article 4 of the African Charter as alleged by the Complainants. On the Alleged Violation of Article 5 (Torture and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment) 140. In view of the alleged violation of Article 5 of the African Charter, the Respondent State, whilst referring the African Commission to Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, argues that, the death penalty is expressly recognized and not prohibited under international human rights law. It is averred by the Respondent State that since the African Charter41 provides that the African Commission shall draw inspiration from international 40 Thirteenth Annual Activity Report of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, OAU Doc AHG/Dec 153 (XXXVI) annex IV 41 See Article 60 of the African Charter 36