Worldwide View on the Death Penalty - Research Paper Example

Worldwide View on the Death Penalty Introduction Death penalty or capital punishment refers to a legal process wherean individual is sentenced to death by the country as a reprimand for engaging in a criminal activity. The judicial verdict that an individual be penalized in this way is a death sentence, while the definite procedure of killing the individual is an execution. Moreover, criminal activities that may result in a death penalty are referred to capital offences or capital crimes. The phrase capital stems from a Latin word meaning execution that is undertaken through beheading (Hood 8). In previous times, capital punishment has been put into practice by a large number of societies. Presently, 58 countries aggressively put it into practice, and 97 nations have abolished it. The remaining nations have not employed death penalty for almost 10 years or only practice it in isolated occasions, for example, during war time. In addition, the death penalty is a subject of dynamic controversy in a number of states and countries, and opinions may differ within a sole cultural religion or political ideology. Article 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union proscribes the employment of capital punishment. Presently, Amnesty International deems a large number of countries as abolitionist. In 2007, 2008, and 2010, the United Nations General Assembly adopted non-binding declarations requiring a global moratorium on executions, with an aim to ultimate abolition. Even though numerous countries have abolished the death penalty, more than 60% of the population of the world resides in nations where executions occur, for example, the United States of America, China, and Iran. Also, the United States of America and China voted against the resolutions of the General Assembly (Hood 54). This paper will analyze the worldwide view on the death penalty while looking at the trends that have affected obliteration of the death sentence in states that have abolished it, the movement towards global abolition of the death penalty, some of the major countries who practice the death penalty, trends between pro death penalty countries. It will also analyze the potential of abolition in these countries, the role of international organizations in the search for a worldwide abolition, and the differences that might exist in public opinion regarding the death penalty around the world. The global death penalty trends are obviously in the direction of abolition. The practice of the death penalty globally has continued to reduce in size, and use of the death penalty has also been gradually more restrained in international law. Since 1990, approximately 3 nations have abolished the death penalty, and currently, 141 countries and almost two-thirds of the globe have abolished the death penalty or have terminated capital punishment in practice or law (Mandery 36). The Hungarian Constitutional Court asserted that the death penalty abuses human dignity and the inherent right to life as highlighted in article 54 of the constitution, on October 24th, 1990. This had the impact of abolishing the death penalty for all criminal activities in the country. The South African Constitutional Court affirmed the death penalty for murder as illustrated by the laws to be contrary with the exclusion of punishment, cruel, degrading or inhuman treatment, or punishment under the nation’s acting constitution, on 6th June 1995. On 9th December 1998 the Republic of Lithuania’s Constitutional Court judged the death penalty for murder in the Criminal Code conflicts with the Constitution on protecting the right to life. The Ukrainian Constitutional Court asserted that the death penalty was not constitutional and the laws permitting it invalid on 29th December 1999. The constitution prohibits torture and inhuman behavior that abuses human dignity. On 11th November 1999 the Republic of Albania’s Constitutional Court declared the death penalty in peace time as conflicting with the constitution, which gives the right to life. The United Nations committee against Torture perceives the death penalty as inhuman and cruel, breaching article 16 of the United Nations convention. There has been a movement towards universal abolition of the death penalty. The trend towards abolition of the death penalty is positive and has not extended in use largely. The Americans and Europeans have almost entirely stopped employing the death penalty with the exclusion of a small number of states, the most significant being the United States of America, and Africa has also moved towards abolition. The most significant pointer of a global movement towards the abolition of the death penalty is the numerous numbers of nations that have abolished it either de jure or de facto, 141, in comparison to the countries which continue to preserve it, 60. In addition, in 2007, only 24 countries carried out executions. Fascinatingly, with the omission of the United States and Japan, the other 22 nations that executed offenders are recognized as being predominantly Muslim and have a low respect for human rights. As the assessment of present international law in view of the death penalty demonstrates, international law standards have also moved towards abolition as a large number of countries have followed the pattern in practice and have stopped utilizing the death penalty. In addition, the movement towards universal abolition of the death penalty has had an impact on the United State’s diplomatic endeavors, leaving the United States in disagreement with a number of countries most closely aligned with no goals or values. The countries that continue to use the death penalty remain extremely isolated in asserting that the death penalty does not abuse international standards (Garland 84). The universal movement towards universal abolition of the death penalty is likely to go on. Among developed countries, those that have abolished it have not given an indication of reversing this rule, and international accords now encourage abolition of the death penalty. Among the countries that have maintained the death penalty, pressure to eliminate or retain it seems to be augmenting. According to Amnesty International 2009 facts, there are several nations that preserve the death penalty for regular criminal activities, for example, rape or murder. The United States, China, and Iran are among developed countries that still utilize the death penalty, and that the US is the only state in the Western region that still practices this form of penalty. 34 out of 50 states in America preserve the death penalty, and even though absolute abolition is not probable within ten years, there have been a number of recent positive steps (Amnesty International 1). For example, New Mexico abolished the death penalty in 2009 and Illinois in March 2011. Arguments have been based on the risk of executing innocent individuals and cost of execution. Moreover, China is the most frequent employer of the death penalty, although its employment is extremely unclear. Statistics remain in the China’s furtive so the correct details on executions cannot be determined. Nonetheless, there have been significant advances, for example, the return of the power of final review to the Supreme Court. Iran is only second to China in the total figure of individuals it executes. Iran is among the few nations which continue to execute juvenile offenders. This is conflicting to its obligation under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It also employs stoning in executions. There are trends between pro death penalty countries, and the potential of abolition in these countries which is extremely minimal. The notion of human rights by itself as applicable in these nations is not often discussed. The concept of human rights is almost entirely concentrated on different or other nations. Pro death penalty nations often show apprehension about human rights abuses in other countries but not their own nations. The idea that the death penalty should be stopped because it is an abuse of human rights would not go well with pro death penalty nations. Instead, their uneasiness will be illustrated in terms of the morality, danger of fatal error, or fairness of the death penalty (Fijalkowski 72). In these nations, contemplations of the death penalty start with the presumption that the death penalty is not an unusual or cruel punishment and that it is legal. That is largely because the death penalty concisely exists as a lawful penalty, for example, in America, in 1791 when the Eighth Amendment was embraced, thus signifying the constitutional approval by the founding fathers. The potential of abolition in these countries is extremely minimal. This is because these countries view the death penalty program as playing a significant part in safeguarding members of the public from ferocious offenders by punishing and deterring their behavior. In addition, apart from the just punishment of the guilty and the protection of the public, the death penalty program justifies the privileges of fatalities and their kin to get justice. These countries assert that the death penalty is disputed by a noisy minority of interest groups attempting to enhance their anti-death penalty ideas by utilizing generalizations and undependable studies on the basis of isolated cases. International organizations play a significant part in the search for global abolition of the death penalty. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, approved in December 1948 by the United Nations General Assembly acknowledges every individual’s right to life. It specifically asserts that no individual should be exposed to torture, degrading or inhuman, or cruel punishment or treatment, this is in article 5. From the view of Amnesty International, the death penalty abuses these rights. International organizations, for example, the United Nations have talked about and approved actions to promote the call for the universal abolition of the death penalty. For instance, in December 2007 and 2008 the United Nations General Assembly agreed to resolutions 62/149 and 63/168, necessitating a suspension on the utilization of the death penalty. Since that time, different civil society coalitions and regional agencies embraced declarations and resolutions encouraging a cessation on execution as an action in the direction of universal abolition of the death penalty. International organizations call for the death penalty to be gradually limited in areas that is still being utilized. In addition, these organizations emphasize that the death penalty be undertaken in line with the international minimum values. Also, international organizations arbitrate both at a general policy level and on individual cases when a nation’s law on the death penalty is in fluctuation. International organizations fund non-governmental agencies to push for the abolition of the death penalty (Death Penalty Information Center 1). Projects may entail awareness-raising and advocacy campaigns, scrutinizing the use of the death penalty to help prisoners, training, and backing for constitutional reform. There are differences that might exist in public opinion regarding the death penalty around the world. In most European and African countries the death penalty is opposed in all situations as a subject of code. The code is unconditional. This recognizes the fact that there is no justice system which is perfect. A large number of countries in Europe and Africa call upon the different countries which still use the death sentence to abolish it for all criminal activities and forever. These countries hold the opinion that capital punishment or the death sentence tends to promote a careless attitude towards an individual’s right to life. Individuals from countries which do not use the death penalty presume that it enhances the degree of cruelty in society and may, accidentally, legalize killing. They also argue that a country that gives support to the death penalty communicates the idea that killing is a suitable technique of dealing with social issues. In contrast, countries that support the death penalty, for example, the United States and China hold a different opinion regarding the death penalty. They presume it to be the most appropriate form of punishment. Also, they argue that the cost of maintaining offenders in correctional facilities is high (Pennington 91). In America, the cost of capital trial is approximately $2 million. This is averagely 4 to 5 times extra costly than non-capital murder case. They also argue there are extra appeal and review layers in cases involving the death sentence. Nonetheless, a large percentage of the United States population currently prefers substitute punishments over the death penalty as the finest penalty for grave crimes, for example, murder (Zimring 113). Yearly death sentences in America have decreased significantly since 2000. Also, execution levels diminished from 98 in the year 1999 to only 37 in the year 2008. In 2010, there were 46 executions and 43 in 2011 (Death Penalty Information Center 1). Conclusion The transition to democracy and democracy are significant in dealing with the death sentence issue. This means that in well-developed democracies and in newly developed democracies, particularly, there is an escalating acceptance regarding the death penalty as an abuse of human rights, which makes abolition more probable. Moreover, to democratization and democracy, political demands on retentionist nations have an unquestionable effect on the possibility of abolition. Nonetheless, it may be asserted that if an individual deems that the death penalty should be eliminated if there is any danger that a guiltless individual may be condemned to death, then that individual is vindicated in campaigning for the abolition of the death sentence. Nevertheless, there is no criminal justice system that can guarantee the form of infallible faultlessness (Whitman 69). On the other hand, the intrinsic danger of condemning a guiltless person to death and the still not understood likelihood that a guiltless individual may in fact be executed cannot be contemplated in seclusion. The global death penalty trends are obviously in the direction of abolition. The practice of the death penalty globally has continued to reduce in size, and use of the death penalty has also been gradually more restrained in international law. People can expect the universal trend regarding abolition of the death sentence to persist. Generally, if or not the trend regarding worldwide abolition of the death penalty will persist is largely due to factors that may be affected. Work Cited Amnesty International. The Death Penalty. 2011.Web. 24 Apr 2013 < http://web.amnesty.org> Death Penalty Information Center. 2006. Web. 24 Apr 2013 Fijalkowski, A. A. “The Abolition of the Death Penalty in Central and Eastern Europe.” Tilburg Foreign Law Review 9 (2001): 62-83. Print. Garland, D. The Culture of Control. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2001. Print. Hood, R. “Capital Punishment: A Global Perspective.” Punishment & Society 3.3 (2001): 54-331. Print. Hood, R. The Death Penalty: A World-wide Perspective (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Print. Mandery, E. J. Capital Punishment: A Balanced Examination. Massachusetts: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2005. Print. Pennington, J. C. American Exceptionalism and the Death Penalty. California: University of California, 2000. Print. Whitman, J. Harsh Justice. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. Print. Zimring, F. E. The Contradictions of American Capital Punishment. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. Print. Read More