III. INVESTIGATION BY TORTURE The widespread reliance on confessions obtained by torture violates the right to a fair trial. International law prohibits the use of torture and requires the exclusion of evidence obtained through torture.99 First, as a State Party to the Convention Against Torture (CAT) and to the ICCPR, Pakistan is required to “take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.”100 International law separately provides that legal assistance must be made available during pre-trial procedures including police questioning.102 For instance, the Human Rights Committee has stated that “[i]n cases involving capital punishment, it is axiomatic that the accused must be effectively assisted by a lawyer at all stages of the proceedings.” Second, and moreover, the use of torture undermines the fairness and legitimacy of the justice system. Article 14(g) of the ICCPR guarantees the right of defendants “[n]ot to be compelled to testify against himself or to confess guilt.”103 The Human Rights Committee elaborates that “[d]omestic law must ensure that statements or confessions obtained in violation of article 7 of the Covenant are excluded from the evidence.”104 Similarly, in Othman v. United Kingdom, the European Court of Human Rights stressed the importance of excluding evidence obtained through torture, stating: “Torture evidence is excluded to protect the integrity of the trial process and, ultimately, the rule of law itself.”105 In Pakistan, torture at the hands of the police as an instrument for collecting evidence is widespread and rarely punished.106 In a 2007 report on the death penalty in Pakistan, the International Federation of Human Rights concluded that “[t]orture in order to obtain confession, to intimidate and terrorise is widespread, common and systematic.”107 JPP and the Lowenstein Clinic confirmed those findings in a 2014 report. Researchers examined 1,867 medical-legal certificates of independent physical examinations of criminal defendants from Faisalabad. The figures were striking; physicians found conclusive evidence of abuse in 1,424 of the 1,867 cases.108 Police were documented as having “beaten victims, suspended, stretched and crushed them, forced them to witness other people's torture, put them in solitary confinement, subjected them to sleep and sensory deprivation, confined them to small spaces, exposed them to extreme temperatures, humiliated them by imposing culturally inappropriate or unpleasant circumstances, and sexually abused them.”109 The routine reliance on torture has been documented repeatedly over the last thirty-five years,110 but genuine reforms have yet to take hold.111 Formal prohibitions against torture exist under Article 14(2) of Pakistan's Constitution, yet there is still no law expressly criminalizing torture in Pakistan, despite its ratification of the Convention Against Torture in 2010.112 The Pakistan Penal Code fails to define and specifically prohibit torture, further contributing to a “culture of impunity.”113 The fact that Pakistan's police “have traditionally been used by the state to suppress dissent and tame opposition” has contributed to an institutional culture in which torture and abuse of power are pervasive and tolerated.114 Further, while the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that a confession obtained under police custody is inadmissible,115 courts routinely admit and rely on confessions made under duress.116 A “MOST SERIOUS CRIME”: PAKISTAN'S UNLAWFUL USE OF THE DEATH PENALTY 11