Upon commission of a criminal offense, “[e]very child deprived of his or her liberty shall have the right to prompt access to legal and other appropriate assistance,”214 as well as a right “[t]o have the matter determined without delay by a competent, independent and impartial authority or judicial body in a fair hearing according to law, in the presence of legal or other appropriate assistance and, unless it is considered not to be in the best interest of the child, in particular, taking into account his or her age or situation. . . .”215 These safeguards “overwhelmingly” reflect the accepted international norm.216 Because of the weight and breadth of these obligations to protect children, international law dictates that when written or official proof of age is unavailable, the ambiguity should be resolved in favor of the defendant. The CRC emphasized this favorable presumption in its commentary on children's rights in juvenile justice, stating that: “If there is no proof of age, the child is entitled to a reliable medical or social investigation that may establish his/her age and, in the case of conflict or inconclusive evidence, the child shall have the right to the rule of the benefit of the doubt.”217 In response to Pakistan's continued failure to grant that presumption, UN experts issued a statement218 reiterating that the prohibition on executing juveniles should apply in all cases: “International law, accepted as binding by Pakistan, is clear: it is unlawful to execute someone who was under 18 years old when they allegedly committed a crime.”219 A “MOST SERIOUS CRIME”: PAKISTAN'S UNLAWFUL USE OF THE DEATH PENALTY 26