164. While it is accepted that there is no rule of international law which prescribes the circumstances under which the death penalty may be imposed, the African Commission has cautioned that the death penalty should only be imposed after a full consideration of not only the circumstances of the individual offence, but also the circumstances of the individual offender.46 165. The Complainants have made reference to the fact that the adoption of AC HP R hanging as a method of executing the death penalty, and the failure of the Courts in the Respondent State to have regard to the medical condition of Kobedi violates Article 5 of the African Charter. 166. By invoking Article 60 of the African Charter, the African Commission will rely on the jurisprudence of the UN Human Rights Committee 47 to hold that where a death sentence has been imposed, it must be carried out in such a way as to cause the least possible physical and mental suffering. This approach was applied in Ng v. Canada 48 wherein the UN Committee found that the particular method of gas asphyxiation amounted to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. 167. The African Commission, therefore, believes that, the carrying out of a death sentence using a particular method of execution may amount to cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment if the suffering caused in execution of the sentence is excessive and goes beyond that is strictly necessary. 168. The African Commission holds that under the African Charter, a parallel obligation to prevent torture or ill-treatment derives from the undertaking given 46 47 Communication 240/01, Para. 31 Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 20, Para. 6. Communication No 469/1991, Human Rights Committee, 7 January 1994, UN doc. CCPR/C/49/D/469/1991, Para. 16.2 and 16.4. 48 45