6. While it follows from article 6 (2) to pornography (6) that State parties are not obliged do to crime.” abolish the death penalty totally not and narcotics constitute “a offences most serious they are obliged to limit its use and, in particular, than to the abolish “most Accordingly, they it for the serious ought other crimes”. to consider in restrict any the event, are application obliged of the in Kennedy Trinidad “most crime” & Tobago, is one a which serious carries fatal or a to In death its Concluding Observations for Kuwait (UN Doc CCPR/C/KWT/CO/2 (18 penalty to the “most serious crimes” ... November 2011)), 7. The Committee is of the opinion that expressed the the drug-related offences were not “most expression “most serious crimes” must be read restrictively to mean the death penalty should be the a quite 6. firm Similarly, in Observations stated for that Sri of the ICCPR, as interpreted by the HRC, meaning of Article 6. only imposed be with penalty respect not “serious Concluding Lanka, to the also establishes the the HRC concluded been death crimes against the person falling short financial within Further, in Luboto v. Zambia, petitioner doubt that property offences, murder, HRC offences” crimes” that there had violation of Article 6(2) beyond the may most serious crimes. The work of the HRC that of Article “drug-related were that the death view its It is clearly beyond doubt that Article 6 requires Committee serious” within the meaning that exceptional measure. of v. similarly grave consequence. reviewing their criminal laws in this light, and In the view of the HRC crimes, 29 had under been a a because the sentenced to imposing a law mandatory sentence of death for aggravated robbery in which firearms