to Abolish the Death Penalty.99 The Court notes that thirteen States100 have signed the Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty, and have accepted its jurisdiction and abolished the death penalty. This Court urges those States that have not yet done so, to sign the Protocol and to proscribe this type of criminal sanction. 82. The Court notes that, when Guatemala ratified the American Convention, Decree No. 17/73 (Criminal Code) was in force and its article 201 sanctioned kidnapping followed by the death of the victim with the death penalty: The abduction or kidnapping of a person in order to obtain a ransom, an exchange for third persons or other unlawful purpose of the same or similar nature, shall be punished by eight to fifteen years’ imprisonment. The death penalty shall be imposed on the perpetrator when the person concerned dies during or owing to the abduction or kidnapping 83. The article was amended on several occasions and, finally, it was the provision established by Legislative Decree No. 81/96 of September 25, 1996, that was applied to the alleged victim. This established the imposition of the death penalty for the perpetrators and masterminds of the crime of abduction or kidnapping, thus eliminating the stipulation of the subsequent death of the victim: The death penalty shall be imposed on the perpetrators or masterminds of the crime of abduction or kidnapping of one or more persons in order to obtain a ransom, an exchange of persons, or the taking of any decision against the will of the person kidnapped or with any other similar or the same purpose and, when this cannot be imposed, twenty-five to fifty years’ imprisonment shall be imposed. In this case, no mitigating circumstance shall apply. Accomplices or accessories after the fact shall be punished with twenty to forty years’ imprisonment. Those sentenced to imprisonment for the crime of abduction or kidnapping may not be granted a reduction of the punishment for any reason.101 84. To establish whether the amendment introduced into the definition of the crime of abduction or kidnapping by Legislative Decree No. 81/96 entailed an “extension” of the application of the death penalty, prohibited by Article 4(2) of the American Convention, it should be recalled that the definition of the crime limits the scope of the criminal prosecution, delimiting the juridical conduct.102 85. The Court notes that the action described in the first paragraph of Article 201 of Legislative Decree No. 17/73 (Criminal Code) corresponded to the abduction or fraudulent detention of a person for a specific purpose (obtaining a ransom, an exchange for third persons, or other unlawful purpose). Thus, this crime basically protects individual freedom. The act mentioned in the second paragraph of the article included a further element: in addition to abduction or detention, the death, in any circumstances, of the victim; this protected the right to life. Consequently, a distinction is made 99 Cf. Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty. Signatories and ratifications. Available at: http://www.oas.org/juridico/english/sigs/a-53.html. 100 The thirteen States that have signed and ratified the Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty under the inter-American system are: Argentina, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela, together with another two that have ratified the Protocol with a reservation on the application of the death penalty in wartime and for extremely serious crimes of a military nature: Brazil and Chile. Cf. Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty. Signatories and ratifications. 101 The phrase “and, when this cannot be imposed,” refers to article 43 of the same Criminal Code, which establishes that: The death penalty may not be imposed: 1. For political crimes. 2. When the conviction is based on presumptions. 3. On women. 4. On men over seventy years of age. 102 Cf. Case of Raxcacó Reyes v. Guatemala, supra, para. 63. 21