Pakistan: The love of hanging

<div style="text-align: justify;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbc_zsbdDalAnCERM7nttum4zrUSuCMpXhKNDF-AIa38ww8RPBYAeJEj9D5ThUCZJnVBTP263BoXqtIpmkryZzmbrIg8v3yGIlQtIw68ISLx-Zk72-GcufW8e8aqo4mZI-UZ1PLBvRyqE/s1600/Gallows.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Gallows" border="0" height="280" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbc_zsbdDalAnCERM7nttum4zrUSuCMpXhKNDF-AIa38ww8RPBYAeJEj9D5ThUCZJnVBTP263BoXqtIpmkryZzmbrIg8v3yGIlQtIw68ISLx-Zk72-GcufW8e8aqo4mZI-UZ1PLBvRyqE/s400/Gallows.jpg" title="Gallows" width="400" /></a></div>Pakistan chose to vote against the recent resolution in the United Nations General Assembly that had called for a global moratorium on the death penalty and was adopted by a majority of member-states.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The gist of this resolution has been adopted by the UN General Assembly every 2 years since 2007. The resolution adopted on Dec 19, 2016 was backed by 117 states, while 40 voted against it and 31 abstained. As against the voting pattern in 2014, the new supporters of the moratorium call were Guinea, Malawi, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka and Swaziland.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">South Asia maintained its fondness for the death penalty as Pakistan joined Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India and Maldives in rejecting a universal moratorium, while Bhutan, Nepal and Sri Lanka voted in favour.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Those who defend the death penalty as a principle enjoined by Islam may look at the division among the Muslim states (the category includes all members of the OIC).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Those voting in favour of a moratorium included: Albania, Algeria, Azerbaijan, Benin, Bosnia Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Chad, Cote d'Ivoire, Eritrea, Gabon, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mali, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Suriname, Togo, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Those who abstained included: Bahrain, Cameroon, Comoros, Djibouti, Indonesia, Jordan, Lebanon, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, Uganda and the UAE.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The Muslim states that voted against were: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei, Egypt, Guyana, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">We find that 24 of the OIC's 57 member states voted in favour of the moratorium, while 13 abstained and only 18 voted against. In other words, Pakistan is in the minority group of 18 OIC member-countries that opposes the moratorium.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">It is for Pakistan's government and its Islamic scholars to ponder as to why a majority of the OIC members do not find any faith-based bar to the acceptance of a moratorium on capital punishment. They may also consider the possibility that, as in the case of some international treaties, reservations expressed in the name of religion are in fact dictated by the culture or custom of the countries concerned.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">What is more distressing for human rights activists, abolitionist groups and promoters of humanitarian laws in Pakistan is the authorities' aversion to any scrutiny of the rationale for their love of the death penalty regime.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">What one hears of references to the death penalty during the Universal Periodic Review or at talks with the European Union on the GSP+ status is not the result of any serious deliberation. Indeed, one doubts if any discussion on the subject has ever taken place in Pakistan. That there is an urgent need for such a discussion can easily be established.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The recent cases in which the Supreme Court acquitted two individuals who had already been executed, or ordered the release of persons who had spent long years on death row, have strengthened the call for abolition of the death penalty on the ground of high risk of miscarriage of justice. A number of other issues that have surfaced over the past many years also need to be addressed. These are:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">-- The view that the death sentence is not a deterrent to crime has not been challenged nor has the view that hangings brutalise society.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">-- The Qisas law has prevented the president from pardoning death convicts or commuting their sentence although his power to do so under Article 45 of the Constitution remains intact. How does one explain the fact that the army chief can pardon a person awarded the death sentence by a military court while the president cannot do so?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">-- The scholars agree that Islam prescribes the death penalty in only 2 instances. How does the state defend the fact that capital punishment is prescribed for 27 offences in the name of religion?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">-- The judiciary has pointed out the problems it faces in cases in which capital punishment is mandatory if the evidence on record warrants a lesser penalty.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">-- The possibility of a minor or a mentally challenged person being executed keeps cropping up every now and then.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">One ventures to suggest a look at the Indian response to the issue of the death penalty in view of the shared legal tradition.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The Law Commission of India recommended in August 2015, vide its Report No. 262, that "the death penalty be abolished for all crimes other than terrorism-related offences and waging war". The commission agreed to retain capital punishment for certain offences in view of the parliamentarians' plea that "abolition of death penalty for terrorism-related offences and waging war will affect national security", although in the commission's view "there is no valid penological justification for treating terrorism differently from other crimes."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The commission noted the significant steps taken during India's decades-long efforts to restrict the use of the death penalty: removal of the requirement of giving special reasons for awarding life imprisonment instead of death (1955); introduction of the requirement of imposing the death penalty (1973); and the Supreme Court's decision that the death penalty should be restricted to the rarest of rare cases (1980). The conclusion reached by the commission was:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">"Informed also by the expanded and deepened contents and horizons of the right to life and strengthened due process requirements in the interactions between the state and the individual, prevailing standards of constitutional morality and human dignity, the commission feels that time has come for India to move towards abolition of the death penalty."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">During the latest debate in the UN General Assembly, however, India again voted against the resolution calling for a moratorium although it could have shown some respect for the Law Commission's recommendation by abstaining. Which only goes to show that, in developing countries, state policies are often determined by authorities that are too timid to disturb the status quo or too proud of their conservatism to heed the counsel of experts who are conscious of the call of the age.</div><br />Source: dawn.com, January 6, 2017<br /><br /><br /><h2>Pakistan: Reviewing the death penalty</h2><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCMrehjtnKWFCuyKdj8RCaoNR8xtTkR8f5XYwT9Vri3mpFfiaSO3xNRb0uLpRpxDhE3qOg7eG3b_207J_3H2hz2zyf5Y1lA5r8zAoj5rhmAAufnOv7X9Q4JaEcmcvvo-Wc-JDAkabngPM/s1600/Peshawar+Central+Prison.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Peshawar Central Prison" border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCMrehjtnKWFCuyKdj8RCaoNR8xtTkR8f5XYwT9Vri3mpFfiaSO3xNRb0uLpRpxDhE3qOg7eG3b_207J_3H2hz2zyf5Y1lA5r8zAoj5rhmAAufnOv7X9Q4JaEcmcvvo-Wc-JDAkabngPM/s400/Peshawar+Central+Prison.jpg" title="Peshawar Central Prison" width="400" /></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>The first thing you notice about the death penalty is how much preparation is involved. In two years, Pakistan has carried out 419 executions. 419 death row prisoners wore a hood as six warders accompanied them to the scaffold each time. 419 bodies remained suspended for 30 minutes after being hanged. Some of these bodies likely ended up in prison graveyards, unable to break free from jails even in death.</b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">On December 17, 2014, Pakistan lifted the moratorium on the death penalty in the wake of the tragic terrorist attack on the Army Public School in Peshawar. Originally lifted for terrorism related offences in March 2015, the moratorium was lifted for all capital offences. In the face of international opposition, the government has consistently maintained that the death penalty is the only effective means of fighting terrorism.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">However, an analysis of the 419 executions that have occurred in less than 2 years by Justice Project Pakistan (JPP), a rights group, reveals significant flaws in this narrative. In Pakistan, criminal culpability is at best, widely misunderstood and at worst, casually measured with irreversible consequences. The numbers that confirm this are frightening.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">27 offences are liable for a black warrant in this country, explaining the macabre achievement of having one of the world’s most populated death rows.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The 100th prisoner to be hanged after executions resumed was mentally ill, unaware until his death as to why he was being punished. Undiagnosed until 2014, Muneer Hussain was mentally unwell since childhood and later, killed two family members.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">There have been at least six juveniles executed since the moratorium was lifted in December 2014. Between then and March 2016, at least 444 mercy petitions were sent to the President of Pakistan, including one for schizophrenic prisoner, Imdad Ali and Abdul Basit who is a paraplegic prisoner. So far, the known number of presidential pardons granted stands at zero.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In Pakistan, the judicial system that enables the carrying out of death sentences warrants close examination. The legal infrastructure is faulty, mired in red tape, beholden to power, creating a permissive environment for the routine miscarriage of justice.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In November this year, the Supreme Court exercised its suo moto right to reassess a case of kidnapping in Bahawalpur in Punjab, for which two brothers had been sentenced to death. Unsurprisingly, the prosecution’s case was riddled with contradictions, with insufficient evidence and incongruous eyewitness testimonies, and the SC acquitted the condemned prisoners. Only Ghulam Qadir and Ghulam Sarwar were no longer prisoners, having been executed last year.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Given the Bahawalpur case, it is critical to overhaul a system that hangs the living, and exonerates the dead. The dearth of resources for law-enforcement incentivises corruption and other abuses of authority. Police lack forensic capabilities and other reliable means of investigation. As a result, there is over-reliance on confessions, easily obtained through torture.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">1,424 cases of torture have been uncovered in just one district of Faisalabad from 2006 to 2012, according to Justice Project Pakistan</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">444 mercy petitions have been sent to the president between Dec 2014 and March 2016; none have been granted so far</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">JPP uncovered 1,424 cases of torture in just one district of Faisalabad from 2006 to 2012. At 17, Abd-ur-Rehman was subject to such brutal torture following his detention that he admitted to every accusation levied at him, including being told that his name was Azam. Today, no one in Karachi Central Jail, where he remains imprisoned, knows him by the name he was born with. His involvement in an attempted burglary has kept him on death row for the last 18 years — well over half his life.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Every defendant is entitled to effective legal counsel at all stages of proceedings under the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Pakistan is a signatory. Though Pakistan provides needy capital defendants with counsel at state expense, the quality of representation is poor. In fact, it is generally not perceived as acceptable for lawyers to be seen in a jail.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Such scant contact between lawyers and their clients in criminal cases actively enables the miscarriage of justice, given the former essentially forgoes the chances of uncovering potentially exculpatory evidence. But with a fee below the minimum wage (a minimum of Rs2,000, with a daily fee of Rs200), there is little motivation for a state-appointed attorney to pursue a case.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">International law dictates that capital punishment be reserved only for the most serious crimes, subject to fair and legitimate processes that protect a defendant’s basic rights and provide avenues for post-conviction relief. Pakistan has not lived up to its obligations. At each stage of a defendant’s encounter with this system, severe violations emerge.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Calling for anything short of a complete moratorium on executions means the continued killing of individuals whose rights have repeatedly been violated from the time of their arrest to their conviction and beyond. Sending even one innocent person – and the government sent two in the Bahawalpur case – to the gallows should prompt this step.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Given these systemic failings, legal reforms, while an important first step, are inadequately implemented at the local level. An executive mechanism to examine mercy petitions must be assembled which refers credible mercy petitions to the presidency.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Because of the lack of transparency, it is recommended that independent actors such as the National Human Rights Commission, a statutory body constituted under the National Human Rights Commission Act 2012, conduct investigations into cases.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Wrongful and unjust death sentences must be commuted. Because the death sentence warrants a high standard of proof, the state should also commute cases for individuals whose convictions were based primarily on confessions, in recognition of the high prevalence of custodial torture and inadequate safeguards in place.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Passing the Anti-Torture Bill, which has been pending since 2012, would be a good place to start. In short, Pakistan’s criminal justice system needs to undertake a detailed review of the death penalty.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Source: <a href="http://www.dawn.com/news/1303817" target="_blank">Dawn</a>, Rimmel Mohydin, Zainab Malik, December 22, 2016. Rimmel Mohydin and Zainab Malik work on public and policy advocacy at Justice Project Pakistan.</div><br /><div style="text-align: center;">⚑ | Report an error, an omission; suggest a story or a new angle to an existing story; submit a piece; recommend a resource; contact the webmaster, contact us: <a href="mailto:deathpenaltynews@gmail.com">deathpenaltynews@gmail.com</a>.</div><br /><table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="4" style="background-color: white; border-collapse: collapse; border: 0px solid rgb(255, 204, 0); color: black; text-align: center; width: 100%;"><tbody><tr> <td><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><a href="https://www.facebook.com/WebDPN/" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhL4sspwgGptzvuHVklum5TwxKppRN-lIC5TN8RLZFq_B4ZOtBrX1ssXPNKQ6XpSyQFRJRtVQN45HMkpt3VX0JtOW0TovwxZAurG-AV6gh98IAXo7Ip6QlpkZr9WrM3_m943Mwy-gGxBAY/s1600/Find+us+Facebook.jpg" /></a></div></td> <td><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><a href="https://twitter.com/WebDPN" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiULIPEaT_P6oIauxAZd17XRRxljesDLS7iIjdQXT7Xct99uHeohx4IYmiAB6S044gTjMDGSy50sL2vDzOyPZ-3vJj9zwcYQ2rgzJh9v1-QDiunKAQtLLLqJ83s38qN3HABxGIC8GsIOD0/s1600/Find+us+twitter.jpg" /></a><span id="goog_1427852018"></span><span id="goog_1427852019"></span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/"></a></div></td> </tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: center;"></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /><b>Opposed to Capital Punishment? Help us keep this blog up and running! <a href="https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=JBVXEBZLP3WKW" target="_blank">DONATE!</a></b></div><form action="https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr" method="post" target="_blank"><div style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" border="0" height="1" src="https://www.paypalobjects.com/fr_FR/i/scr/pixel.gif" width="1" /></div></form><div style="text-align: center;"></div><div style="text-align: center;"></div><div style="text-align: center;"></div>

Pakistan: The love of hanging

Pakistan chose to vote against the recent resolution in the United Nations General Assembly that had called for a global moratorium on the d...

Read more »

The Growing Gap Between the U.S. and the International Anti-Death-Penalty Consensus

<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzYtit8NJDCRLIRlPKKePilrpPrgqvvSJJBLPmvCxqlhBl0iw0IaNUoc55CgHp6LLD3M9qJnPQVLaPhx25qJuvQiXgEPWYkagbnUz2SSF1ZOG8HSqdNmNxfTJNShoQ3hQP-meHLGxu_FI/s1600/Gallows%252C+Department+of+Corrections%252C+Smyrna%252C+Delaware%252C+1991.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="Disused gallows in Smyrna prison, Delaware, 1991" border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzYtit8NJDCRLIRlPKKePilrpPrgqvvSJJBLPmvCxqlhBl0iw0IaNUoc55CgHp6LLD3M9qJnPQVLaPhx25qJuvQiXgEPWYkagbnUz2SSF1ZOG8HSqdNmNxfTJNShoQ3hQP-meHLGxu_FI/s400/Gallows%252C+Department+of+Corrections%252C+Smyrna%252C+Delaware%252C+1991.jpg" title="Disused gallows in Smyrna prison, Delaware, 1991" width="373" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Disused gallows in Smyrna prison, Delaware, 1991</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;"><i>In employing the death penalty, the U.S. insists it abides by international law. But it declines to make the most important international commitment - to reject the penalty as a violation of human rights. </i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Last week, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted a resolution calling for a worldwide "moratorium on the use of the death penalty" - the 6th that the U.N. has approved in the past decade. Each one has gained the support of more of the organization's members. The latest vote was 117 countries in favor to 409 against. (31 abstained, and 5 did not vote.) In addition to a call for a halt to executions worldwide, the resolution urges countries that maintain the death penalty to increasingly restrict its imposition and to apply international laws that protect the rights of those facing the penalty. The rights include that a death sentence may be imposed only for the "most serious crimes," defined as intentional crimes that have "lethal or other extremely grave consequences," and that execution be carried out only after "a final judgment rendered by a competent court," following a legal process that insures a fair trial and that provides access to appeal to a higher court and the opportunity to seek a pardon or a commutation of the sentence.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">At the General Assembly, the United States cast one of the nay votes. Stefanie Amadeo, the deputy representative to the U.N. Economic and Social Council, explained the country's position, which is basically unchanged since the U.S. opposed the 1st resolution against the death penalty, in 2007: "The ultimate decision regarding these issues must be addressed through the domestic democratic processes of individual Member States and be consistent with their obligations under international law," which does not prohibit capital punishment. The position reflects the American reality of supporting the death penalty in principle, but increasingly outlawing it in practice. As Jeffrey Toobin reported recently, the U.S. maintains the death penalty under federal and military law and under the laws of 31 states - even though only 5 states conducted executions in 2016 and executed only 20 people in total, the lowest number in 25 years.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><h3>Global norms</h3><br />The U.S. stresses the importance of observing global norms. "Just as the United States is committed to complying with its international obligations," Amadeo said, "we strongly urge other countries that employ the death penalty to do so only in full compliance with their international obligations." Meanwhile, in the past 40 years, the U.S. Supreme Court has increasingly sought to restrict the application of the death penalty to the worst of the worst offenders - 1st, to people who commit the most heinous murders and, then, only to adults who commit them, excluding youth under the age of 18. In addition, it generally takes a decade or more for a state to carry out an execution because of challenges to a death sentence allowed under due process of law.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Among the states with the death penalty, 12 have not carried out an execution for a decade or more, and another five have not executed anyone for at least 5 years. In California, where the last execution was in 2006, there were 750 people on death row as of December 2nd. Rather than being executed (the state has executed only 13 people since 1978) it is much more likely that a death-row inmate will die as a result of natural causes or suicide.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Roger Hood, an emeritus professor at Oxford, and Carolyn Hoyle, who directs Oxford's Centre for Criminology, last year published the 5th edition of "The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective." Their book documents the many ways that people are sentenced to death in violation of international law - for drug-trafficking, for example, rather than for "the most serious crimes," in unfair proceedings and with no opportunity to ask for clemency, and while imprisoned in terrible conditions. These and other realities, they write, are moving "the debate about capital punishment beyond the view that each nation has, if it wishes, the sovereign right to retain the death penalty" to persuading "countries that retain the death penalty that it inevitably, and however administered, violates universally accepted human rights." Countries that employ the death penalty and insist that they are abiding by international law, including the U.S., decline to join in making the most important international commitment about the penalty, which is to reject it as a violation of human rights.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">There has long been a gap between the idealism that the U.S. expresses when boasting of its dedication to the rule of law, especially the protection of individual rights, and the reality of its persistent refusal to abide by major international human-rights commitments. The U.S. was a leader in the development of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the U.N. adopted in 1948, but stopped supporting the international system to carry it out because, among other reasons, Jim Crow laws directly violated the declaration. There is a sizable list of human-rights treaties - on the Rights of the Child, for example, and on the International Criminal Court - that the U.S. has signed but not ratified. Even when the U.S. ratifies treaties, the government often adds a caveat that excludes protection of some basic rights.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As a result, the U.S. has ended up in some rough company, particularly when it comes to the death penalty. In the past generation, the number of countries that have stopping using the death penalty has doubled, from about 50 to about 100. Of the 57 member states of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, and of the 35 member states of the Organization of American States, only the U.S. carried out executions last year. The countries that executed the most offenders were, in order, China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United States. China executed thousands of people, though its secrecy about its use of capital punishment makes it impossible to know exactly how many. Excluding China, Iran (with close to 1000 or more), Pakistan (326), and Saudi Arabia (158) executed almost 9 out of 10 people put to death worldwide - "often after grossly unfair trials," according to Amnesty International, and "for crimes - including drug trafficking, corruption, 'adultery,' and 'blasphemy' - that do not meet the international legal standards for the use of the death penalty." In 2015, according to Amnesty International, at least 1634 people were executed, an increase of more than 50 % from the year before and the highest number in a quarter of a century. (The organization expects to release figures for 2016 in the spring.)<br /><br /><h3>The influence of the U.S. on the death penalty worldwide</h3></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The United States, in other words, ranks with countries that conspicuously are not in full compliance with their international obligations. And its responsibility is sometimes worse than guilt by association. As Maya Foa, the director of the death-penalty team at Reprieve, an international human-rights organization, told me, "The U.S. clearly leads and influences global death-penalty practice. Our partners, who are lawyers and human-rights defenders in jurisdictions that retain the penalty, tell us that the use of the death penalty by the U.S., a 'developed' nation, is used to justify the death-penalty practice in the jurisdictions they work in." Reprieve is providing legal and investigative assistance to people facing execution in 11 countries, in Africa, the Middle East, and South and Southeast Asia, and in the U.S.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In August at a rally in Istanbul, after the failed coup attempt in Turkey, the BBC reported, the country's President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, said, "They say there is no death penalty in the E.U. ... Well, the U.S. has it; Japan has it; China has it; most of the world has it. So they are allowed to have it. We used to have it until 1984. Sovereignty belongs to the people, so if the people make this decision I am sure the political parties will comply." He said that the Turkish people might want to restore the death penalty to punish those responsible for killing hundreds of citizens during the attempted coup. That has not happened yet, but, if it does, its purpose, Erdogan suggested, will be a display of cold-blooded power.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The influence of the U.S. on the death penalty worldwide has sometimes been constructive. In 1976, for example, when the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional for a state to make the death penalty mandatory for any crime, it marked the beginning of the decline of mandatory death sentences around the world. "The fundamental respect for humanity underlying the Eighth Amendment," the Court said, "requires consideration of the character and record of the individual offender and the circumstances of the particular offense."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The Indian Supreme Court employed this logic when it struck down the mandatory death sentence in the country's penal code, in 1983. The legislature, it held, could not compel judges "to shut their eyes to mitigating circumstances and inflict upon them the dubious and unconscionable duty of imposing a preordained sentence of death." More recently, the Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide reports, 18 other countries have followed suit and struck down the mandatory death penalty, including almost every Caribbean nation and Uganda, Malawi, and Kenya.<br /><br /><h3>Replacing Justice Scalia</h3></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In their latest edition of "The Death Penalty," Hood and Hoyle write optimistically about the U.S. example: "Those who campaign for abolition worldwide can hope that it will not be many years before the U.S. Supreme Court will be able to find that the majority of states, in line with a majority of countries worldwide, does not support the death penalty for anyone." Donald Trump has said that he will replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia - the Court's most vehement defender of the death penalty for almost 30 years - with someone in his mold. But, even when that happens, there will be a possibility that Justice Anthony Kennedy will join the Court's moderate liberals in striking down the death penalty, for reasons Justice Stephen Breyer articulated in 2015: "The Court in effect delegated significant responsibility to the States to develop procedures that would" insure the fairness of the capital-punishment system, he wrote. "Almost 40 years of studies, surveys, and experience strongly indicate, however, that this effort has failed." If the Court continues to uphold the death penalty, on the other hand, the gap between the U.S. and a large and growing majority of the rest of the world will continue to increase.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Source: The New Yorker, Lincoln Caplan, December 31, 2016. Mr. Caplan, a former New Yorker staff writer, is a senior research scholar at Yale Law School and the author of the new book "American Justice 2016: The Political Supreme Court."</div><br /><div style="text-align: center;">⚑ | Report an error, an omission; suggest a story or a new angle to an existing story; submit a piece; recommend a resource; contact the webmaster, contact us: <a href="mailto:deathpenaltynews@gmail.com">deathpenaltynews@gmail.com</a>.</div><br /><table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="4" style="background-color: white; border-collapse: collapse; border: 0px solid rgb(255, 204, 0); color: black; text-align: center; width: 100%;"><tbody><tr> <td><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><a href="https://www.facebook.com/WebDPN/" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhL4sspwgGptzvuHVklum5TwxKppRN-lIC5TN8RLZFq_B4ZOtBrX1ssXPNKQ6XpSyQFRJRtVQN45HMkpt3VX0JtOW0TovwxZAurG-AV6gh98IAXo7Ip6QlpkZr9WrM3_m943Mwy-gGxBAY/s1600/Find+us+Facebook.jpg" /></a></div></td> <td><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><a href="https://twitter.com/WebDPN" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiULIPEaT_P6oIauxAZd17XRRxljesDLS7iIjdQXT7Xct99uHeohx4IYmiAB6S044gTjMDGSy50sL2vDzOyPZ-3vJj9zwcYQ2rgzJh9v1-QDiunKAQtLLLqJ83s38qN3HABxGIC8GsIOD0/s1600/Find+us+twitter.jpg" /></a><span id="goog_1427852018"></span><span id="goog_1427852019"></span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/"></a></div></td> </tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: center;"></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /><b>Opposed to Capital Punishment? Help us keep this blog up and running! <a href="https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=JBVXEBZLP3WKW" target="_blank">DONATE!</a></b></div><form action="https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr" method="post" target="_blank"><div style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" border="0" height="1" src="https://www.paypalobjects.com/fr_FR/i/scr/pixel.gif" width="1" /></div></form><div style="text-align: center;"></div><div style="text-align: center;"></div><div style="text-align: center;"></div>

The Growing Gap Between the U.S. and the International Anti-Death-Penalty Consensus

Disused gallows in Smyrna prison, Delaware, 1991 In employing the death penalty, the U.S. insists it abides by international law. But it dec...

Read more »