“imprisonment liberty.” or A deprivation similar (referring formulation to deprivation sanctions liberty, not follow that the Conventions are capable of pecuniary confiscation) does of an interpretation permitting, today, the fresh imposition imprisonment, of and of appears the death penalty for narcotics offences. in Article 3(4) of the related 1988 United Nations Convention Traffic in against lllicit In any Drugs and under customary international law to Narcotic event, move Psychotropic Substances. towards obligation This leads inference death to an that the penalty is appropriate of the excluded as or available is an obligation abolition, is and inconsistent that with re-imposition by abolitionist States is overwhelming imposition there of death penality. an International punishment law to abolition of move the Philippines, which the death penalty. Where a State, such 1961 or 1988 as Conventions. the eventual States for narcotics crimes for States, such as are parties the towards requires Philippines, abolished the has death already penalty by travaux ratifying the Second Optional Protocol, préparatoires to the two Conventions, any attempt to reintroduce the death which penalty This is not affected make it clear by the that it was the intention of the parties that narcotics obligation trafficking be move penalties which the subject would of serious is contained towards The HRC well of whether the case that with in the ICCPR the to abolition. adequately deter narcotics trafficking. While it may be inconsistent some parties to the Conventions of the has considered the question independent retain the death penalty for narcotics offences, it there of the Protocol, to move 35 exists an obligation, Second towards Optional abolition of