CRC/C/GC/24 circumstances of the offender and to the gravity of the offence may be considered, including considerations of the need for public safety and sanctions. In the case of children, such considerations must weigh in favour of the child’s right to have his/her best interests considered as a primary consideration and to promote his/her reintegration. 86. Recognizing the harm caused by deprivation of liberty to children and adolescents, and its negative effects on their prospects for successful reintegration, the Committee recommends that States parties should set a maximum penalty for children accused of crimes, which should be considerably shorter than the duration of custodial sentences for adults for similar offences. Any exceptions to the maximum period should be kept to an absolute minimum, and must abide by the principle of proportionality. 87. As far as non-custodial measures are concerned, there is a wide range of experience with the use and implementation of such measures. States parties should benefit from this experience, and develop and implement such measures by adjusting them to their own culture and tradition. Measures amounting to forced labour or to torture or inhuman and degrading treatment must be explicitly prohibited, and those responsible for such illegal practices should be brought to justice. 88. The Committee reiterates that corporal punishment as a sanction is a violation of these principles as well as of article 37 of CRC which prohibits all forms of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment (see also the Committee’s general comment No. 8 (2006) on the right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment (arts. 19; 28, para. 2; and 37, inter alia)). 89. After these general remarks, the Committee wishes to draw attention to the measures prohibited under article 37 (a) of CRC, and to deprivation of liberty. Prohibition of the death penalty 90. Article 37 (a) of CRC reaffirms the internationally accepted standard (see for example article 6 (5) of ICCPR) that the death penalty cannot be imposed for a crime committed by a person who was under 18 years of age. Although the text is clear, some States parties assume that the rule only prohibits the execution of persons below the age of 18 years. However, under this rule the explicit and decisive criterion is the age at the time of the commission of the offence. It means that the death penalty may not be imposed for a crime committed by a person who was under 18 years at the time of the commission of the offence, regardless of his/her age at the time of the trial or sentencing or of the execution of the sanction. 91. The Committee recommends the few States parties that have not yet abolished the death penalty for all offences committed by persons below the age of 18 years to do so, and to suspend the execution of all death sentences for those persons until the necessary legislative measures abolishing the death penalty for children have been fully enacted, and measures taken for the commuting of sentences. The imposed death penalty should be changed to a sanction that is in full conformity with CRC. No life imprisonment without parole 92. No child who was under the age of 18 at the time he/she committed an offence should be sentenced to life without the possibility of release or parole. For all sentences imposed upon children the possibility of release should be realistic and regularly considered. In this regard, the Committee refers to article 25 of CRC providing the right to periodic review for all children placed for the purpose of care, protection or treatment. The Committee reminds the States parties which do sentence children to life imprisonment with the possibility of release or parole that this sanction must fully comply with and strive for the realization of the aims of juvenile justice enshrined in article 40 (1) of CRC. This means inter alia that the child sentenced to this imprisonment should receive education, treatment, and care aiming at his/her release, reintegration and ability to assume a constructive role in society. This also requires a regular review of the child’s development and progress in order to decide on his/her possible release. Given the likelihood that life imprisonment of a child will make it very difficult, if not impossible, to achieve the aims of juvenile justice despite the possibility of release, the Committee strongly recommends States parties to abolish all forms of life 17