27 67. The Commission and the representatives argued that the death penalty applied in Guatemala as a punishment for the crime of simple kidnapping “is disproportionate and excessive.” 68. In this regard, the Court has stated that the American Convention reduces the scope of application of the death penalty to the most serious common crimes;44 in other words, “it was designed to be applied in truly exceptional circumstances only.”45 Indeed, Article 4(2) of the American Convention stipulates that “[i]n countries that have not abolished the death penalty, it may be imposed only for the most serious crimes.” 69. The United Nations Human Rights Committee46 has stated that “crimes that do not result in loss of life” may not be punished by the death penalty. 70. A distinction must be made between the different degrees of seriousness of the facts that permits distinguishing serious crimes from the “most serious crimes”; namely, those that affect most severely the most important individual and social rights and therefore merit the most vigorous censure and the most severe punishment. 71. The crime of kidnapping or abduction may include different nuances of seriousness, ranging from simple kidnapping, which does not fall within the category of the “most serious crimes,” to kidnapping following by the death of the victim. Even in the latter case, which would constitute an extremely serious act, it would be necessary to consider the conditions or circumstances of the case sub judice. All of this must be examined by the court and, to this end, the law must grant it a margin of subjective appraisal. 72. In the case that concerns us, Article 201 of the Penal Code, applied to Mr. Raxcacó Reyes, punished both simple kidnapping and any other form of kidnapping or abduction with the death penalty, thus disregarding the restriction imposed by Article 4(2) of the American Convention regarding the application of the death penalty only for the “most serious crimes.” iii) Mandatory death penalty 73. The representatives and the Inter-American Commission state that the Guatemalan Penal Code punishes the crime of kidnapping or abduction by the “mandatory” death penalty, and that Mr. Raxcacó Reyes was a victim of this violation of Article 4(1) of the American Convention. The State disputes this affirmation indicating that the court does not impose the death penalty mandatorily, but makes the respective assessment of all the evidence presented by the parties and determines which punishment to impose on each guilty party. The State adduced in 44 Cf. Case of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al., supra note 39, para. 106. 45 Cf. Restrictions to the Death Penalty (Arts. 4(2) and 4(4) American Convention on Human Rights), supra note 40, para. 54. 46 Cf. UN, Human Rights Committee. Concluding observations on Iran (Islamic Republic of) issued on August 3, 1993. CCPR/C/79/Add.25, para. 8; and UN, Human Rights Committee. Concluding observations on Iraq issued on November 19, 1997. CCPR/C/79/Add.84, paras. 10 and 11.