Latest news with #InternationalCommissionAgainsttheDeathPenalty
Yahoo
15-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - Outside the US, the death penalty is a vestige from another time
On Mar. 31, the United Arab Emirates informed the world that it had sentenced to death three people who had taken the life of an Israeli Moldovan rabbi last November, with what the prosecution called 'terrorist intention.' After the sentence, the Emirates's attorney general stressed that the sentences signified how his country will respond to any attempt to 'undermine national security and stability.' The UAE has shown no hesitancy about turning death sentences into executions. In February, it executed Shahzadi Khan, a domestic worker convicted of killing her employers' baby. Just days after Khan was put to death, the UAE carried out two more executions. Khan's case was marked by a litany of problems familiar to any observer of America's death penalty. She claimed that her taped confession had been coerced and she had been left without 'adequate representation' during the trial. Her lawyer described her death as an 'extrajudicial killing under the guise of legal proceedings.' But arguments about problems in the administration of capital punishment have much less purchase in the global effort to end state killing than they do in this country. There is no one-size-fits-all approach in the battle to end capital punishment. The most common strategy in the international arena has focused more on human rights appeals than worries about executing the innocent, discrimination or botched executions — the things that have moved the needle on the death penalty in this country. Typical is the position of the European Union, that 'Capital punishment violates the inalienable right to life and is incompatible with human dignity.' The UAE, along with some other pro-death-penalty nations, continues to ignore such arguments. Still, efforts to end the death penalty globally are gaining traction. Eighty years ago, 'only eight states had abolished the death penalty for all crimes.' Today, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, 144 countries have abolished it, and four others made progress toward abolition last year. Abolitionists will run into a trap if they insist that there is only one right way for death penalty countries to end the practice. We don't want the effort to end state killing worldwide to be just another 'West knows best' campaign. The danger of that is clear if we look at how the global death penalty scene breaks down. From what we know, China executes more people every year than any other nation. In 2024, Iran, which carried out the second most executions, put about 800 people to death. This was followed by Saudi Arabia (303 people), Iraq (94), North Korea (32) and the U.S. (25). And, like the UAE, other nations continue to impose death sentences for a broader array of offenses than just intentional killings. They use it for such things as 'sexual violence, homosexuality, blasphemy, fraud, security-related offenses, and drug-related offenses.' The International Commission Against the Death Penalty identifies nine different paths that countries have taken to end the death penalty. Some have done so because they needed to in order to be part of organizations like the EU, others because a court ordered them to do so. Some made a one-time and dramatic break from their pasts; others have ended the death penalty gradually. Despite these differences, the commission concludes that 'Leadership is key in the abolition of capital punishment as it increases respect and protection of the fundamental right to life.' Whatever arguments are used, the journey toward worldwide rejection of capital punishment will not be concluded quickly. But it will come. Meanwhile, we will have to endure more death sentences like those handed down in the UAE and the death of Khan and others like her. Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
15-04-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Outside the US, the death penalty is a vestige from another time
On Mar. 31, the United Arab Emirates informed the world that it had sentenced to death three people who had taken the life of an Israeli Moldovan rabbi last November, with what the prosecution called 'terrorist intention.' After the sentence, the Emirates's attorney general stressed that the sentences signified how his country will respond to any attempt to 'undermine national security and stability.' The UAE has shown no hesitancy about turning death sentences into executions. In February, it executed Shahzadi Khan, a domestic worker convicted of killing her employers' baby. Just days after Khan was put to death, the UAE carried out two more executions. Khan's case was marked by a litany of problems familiar to any observer of America's death penalty. She claimed that her taped confession had been coerced and she had been left without 'adequate representation' during the trial. Her lawyer described her death as an 'extrajudicial killing under the guise of legal proceedings.' But arguments about problems in the administration of capital punishment have much less purchase in the global effort to end state killing than they do in this country. There is no one-size-fits-all approach in the battle to end capital punishment. The most common strategy in the international arena has focused more on human rights appeals than worries about executing the innocent, discrimination or botched executions — the things that have moved the needle on the death penalty in this country. Typical is the position of the European Union, that 'Capital punishment violates the inalienable right to life and is incompatible with human dignity.' The UAE, along with some other pro-death-penalty nations, continues to ignore such arguments. Still, efforts to end the death penalty globally are gaining traction. Eighty years ago, 'only eight states had abolished the death penalty for all crimes.' Today, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, 144 countries have abolished it, and four others made progress toward abolition last year. Abolitionists will run into a trap if they insist that there is only one right way for death penalty countries to end the practice. We don't want the effort to end state killing worldwide to be just another 'West knows best' campaign. The danger of that is clear if we look at how the global death penalty scene breaks down. From what we know, China executes more people every year than any other nation. In 2024, Iran, which carried out the second most executions, put about 800 people to death. This was followed by Saudi Arabia (303 people), Iraq (94), North Korea (32) and the U.S. (25). And, like the UAE, other nations continue to impose death sentences for a broader array of offenses than just intentional killings. They use it for such things as 'sexual violence, homosexuality, blasphemy, fraud, security-related offenses, and drug-related offenses.' The International Commission Against the Death Penalty identifies nine different paths that countries have taken to end the death penalty. Some have done so because they needed to in order to be part of organizations like the EU, others because a court ordered them to do so. Some made a one-time and dramatic break from their pasts; others have ended the death penalty gradually. Despite these differences, the commission concludes that 'Leadership is key in the abolition of capital punishment as it increases respect and protection of the fundamental right to life.' Whatever arguments are used, the journey toward worldwide rejection of capital punishment will not be concluded quickly. But it will come. Meanwhile, we will have to endure more death sentences like those handed down in the UAE and the death of Khan and others like her.
Yahoo
03-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Former Connecticut governor: NC must confront racism in the death penalty
A billboard that welcomed people to Smithfield, a town in Johnston County, stood until the 1970s, "but the efforts to keep Black Johnstonians off juries continued," said Henderson Hill, one of the attorneys for Hasson Bacote, a Black man sentenced to death in Johnston County in 2009. (Photo: Exhibit filed by Bacote's attorneys) As a former prosecutor, mayor, governor of Connecticut, and a member of the International Commission Against the Death Penalty, I have spent much of my career in and around the criminal legal system learning firsthand that our system is far from perfect. Human beings are fallible – and when the stakes of a trial are life or death – it is essential that we examine the process thoroughly for fairness and accuracy. The more I learned, the more I realized that the only way to ensure the death penalty is not unfairly applied and does not cause additional harm to victims was to end it. I went from prosecuting homicide cases in New York to becoming a lead advocate in my state for abolishing capital punishment. Three weeks ago, a North Carolina judge issued a decision in a case brought under the state's Racial Justice Act that examined the impact of race in capital cases. After years of legal wrangling over the scope of the law, Hasson Bacote's case was the first in which Racial Justice Act petitioners were actually afforded the opportunity to present witnesses. Persuaded by extensive evidence of the systemic exclusion of Black jurors and racially disproportionate sentencing outcomes, the court's opinion confirms what many have long known: racial bias infects the administration of the death penalty, including in North Carolina. Nowhere is this disturbing truth clearer than in Johnston County, where Mr. Bacote, the lead petitioner in the Racial Justice Act litigation, was tried and sentenced to death. Since 1990, Johnston County juries returned death verdicts in every case in which Johnston County prosecutors sought death against a Black defendant. Meanwhile, White defendants in the county had a better than 50-50 chance of receiving life sentences. This disparity is not a coincidence. Mr. Bacote's legal team conducted an exhaustive review of approximately 680,000 pages of prosecutors' notes from every capital trial in North Carolina between 1980 and 2010 and found undeniable proof that race plays a central role in determining who gets to sit on juries and who is sentenced to death in death penalty cases. Across Johnston County, prosecutors struck prospective jurors of color at nearly twice the rate of white prospective jurors in all capital cases. One prosecutor's notes disparaged a Black prospective juror with a criminal record as a 'thug' while another prosecutor commented derisively on a juror questionnaire that a Black woman was 'too dumb.' The court appropriately vacated the death sentence imposed in Mr. Bacote's case. But as I said in 2012 when I signed legislation ending the death penalty in Connecticut, pivotal moments like this demand sober reflection, not celebration. The court's recognition of the pattern of racism in sentencing adds to a growing body of evidence showing that racial discrimination is not an anomaly in North Carolina's death penalty system, it is a defining feature. Between 2007 and 2009, three Black men sentenced to death in North Carolina were exonerated after spending more than a decade each on death row, narrowly escaping execution for crimes they did not commit. In 2012, a court resentenced three other people to life in prison because racial discrimination played a key role in securing their sentences. The judge in that case hoped that decision would be the 'first step in creating a system of justice free from the pernicious influence of race' and one that 'truly lives up to our ideal of equal justice under the law.' The continued evidence of racial discrimination in sentencing and jury selection shows that North Carolina has yet to realize this vision. Just last December, then Governor Roy Cooper cited continued concerns about the role of race in sentencing decisions when he announced he was commuting the sentences of 15 people on death row. When the Racial Justice Act was passed in 2009, it intended to address the racial bias baked into capital sentencing. Fifteen years later, North Carolina has yet to ensure that every person facing a capital trial has a fair, unbiased chance at justice. With more than 30 years of proof that racial discrimination infects capital sentencing in North Carolina and more than 120 people still on death row, it is clear more work needs to be done. I urge North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson and Governor Josh Stein to undertake a comprehensive investigation into the use of capital punishment in their state. Failing to act in the face of this undeniable evidence would be a tacit endorsement of a system that has disproportionately condemned Black defendants to death and excluded people in their state from the most important function of jury service. True leaders do not ignore injustice, they confront it head on. So yes, we need sober reflection. But what we need more urgently is action: an investigation, accountability, and a commitment to ensuring that racial bias no longer dictates who lives and who dies in North Carolina.
