- Email: [email protected]
Achieving progress on ending the death penalty
Editorial
On Dec 19, 2016, the UN General Assembly adopted its sixth resolution on a moratorium on use of the death penalty. Recognising the poor evidence base for the effectiveness of capital punishment as a deterrent, the idea that a moratorium would contribute to “respect for human dignity and to the enhancement and progressive development of human rights” seems self-evident. Yet although the resolution attracted 117 votes in favour, 32 members abstained and 40 voted against it. Global consensus on the use of the death penalty is still, disappointingly, lacking, but it may not be out of reach. On April 11, 2017, Amnesty International released its 2016 report on global death sentences and executions. This report points towards an overall trend of decline in the use of the death penalty worldwide. In 2016, there were at least 1032 judicial executions, a 37% reduction on 2015 figures. Additionally, the number of countries that either handed down or implemented a death sentence has decreased since 2015. In 2016 two countries (Benin and Nauru) abolished the death penalty for all crimes. One country (Guinea) abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes. Despite these improvements, at the end of 2016 at least 18 848 people around the world were known to be living with a death sentence and, across the year, there were a total of 3117 new death sentences, surpassing the total number in 2015 and the previous record set in 2014. Importantly, these findings are incomplete. They do not, for instance, include data from China, where this information is classified as a state secret. Some progress has been made recently with the Chinese Government, which has committed to restrict the use of the death penalty. However, owing to difficulties in compiling robust and complete details on executions in China, Amnesty International has excluded these numbers from their annual reporting since 2009. Notwithstanding these limitations, the report states that China probably executes more people than the rest of the world combined. Similar challenges regarding transparency exist in several other countries, with Amnesty International being unable to confirm whether any judicial executions occurred in Libya, Yemen, or Syria. The realities of the practical application of the death penalty compound its barbarity. In the USA, for example, it has been known for many years that race and www.thelancet.com Vol 389 April 22, 2017
socioeconomic status weigh heavily on the likelihood of receiving a death sentence. The report outlines the many intersecting factors that exacerbate the basic injustice of capital punishment globally: its use against people who were younger than 18 years old when their alleged crimes were committed; its use against people with mental or intellectual disabilities; the imposition of death sentences following proceedings that do not meet international standards of a fair trial, including the use of military courts and confessions exacted through torture or other ill-treatment; and the use of mandatory death penalty sentencing. Also troubling is the use of the death penalty for crimes that do not meet internationally recognised standards of the “most serious”, such as for drug-related offences in much of southeast Asia and parts of the Middle East. With 20 recorded executions across five states, one of the standout findings in the report is that, for the first time since 2006, the USA did not feature in the top five countries that carried out judicial executions. The continued decline in the use capital punishment in the USA is largely attributable to the effects of litigation and industry controls on the supply of lethal injection drugs. In 2011, the European Commission introduced strict rules to prevent drugs exported from the European Union being used to perform executions in the USA, and to date over a dozen drug manufacturers have taken actions to prevent their products being used in the USA as part of lethal injections. Indeed, the notion that drugs designed to save and improve lives should not be supplied for the purpose of killing is fast becoming a norm in the pharmaceutical industry, as events have demonstrated in Arkansas this month: in a legal first, a supplier of a drug used to perform lethal injections (in this case, the neuromuscular blocking agent vecuronium bromide) has sued a US state for alleged violation of its agreements that prohibit the sale of such drugs to correctional facilities engaging in capital punishment. The growing body of evidence that demonstrates the injustice and futility of the death penalty makes the need for continued action ever more urgent. Although abolishing the practice worldwide might seem at times like an impossible task, recent developments—especially the successes won through legal and industry activism— show that progress is achievable. n The Lancet
Getty Images EITAN ABRAMOVICH / Stringer #: 79789140
Achieving progress on ending the death penalty
For the UN General Assembly resolution see https://www.un. org/en/ga/search/view_doc. asp?symbol=A/RES/71/187 For the Amnesty International report on the use of the death penalty in 2016 see https:// www.amnesty.org/en/ documents/act50/5740/2017/ en/ For more on the death penalty in China see https://www. amnesty.org/en/documents/ asa17/5849/2017/en/ For more on the death penalty in the USA see https:// deathpenaltyinfo.org/ documents/FactSheet.pdf For industry statements and action on execution drugs see http://www.reprieve.org.uk/ case-study/manufacturer-actionon-execution-drugs/
1581
On Dec 19, 2016, the UN General Assembly adopted its sixth resolution on a moratorium on use of the death penalty. Recognising the poor evidence base for the effectiveness of capital punishment as a deterrent, the idea that a moratorium would contribute to “respect for human dignity and to the enhancement and progressive development of human rights” seems self-evident. Yet although the resolution attracted 117 votes in favour, 32 members abstained and 40 voted against it. Global consensus on the use of the death penalty is still, disappointingly, lacking, but it may not be out of reach. On April 11, 2017, Amnesty International released its 2016 report on global death sentences and executions. This report points towards an overall trend of decline in the use of the death penalty worldwide. In 2016, there were at least 1032 judicial executions, a 37% reduction on 2015 figures. Additionally, the number of countries that either handed down or implemented a death sentence has decreased since 2015. In 2016 two countries (Benin and Nauru) abolished the death penalty for all crimes. One country (Guinea) abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes. Despite these improvements, at the end of 2016 at least 18 848 people around the world were known to be living with a death sentence and, across the year, there were a total of 3117 new death sentences, surpassing the total number in 2015 and the previous record set in 2014. Importantly, these findings are incomplete. They do not, for instance, include data from China, where this information is classified as a state secret. Some progress has been made recently with the Chinese Government, which has committed to restrict the use of the death penalty. However, owing to difficulties in compiling robust and complete details on executions in China, Amnesty International has excluded these numbers from their annual reporting since 2009. Notwithstanding these limitations, the report states that China probably executes more people than the rest of the world combined. Similar challenges regarding transparency exist in several other countries, with Amnesty International being unable to confirm whether any judicial executions occurred in Libya, Yemen, or Syria. The realities of the practical application of the death penalty compound its barbarity. In the USA, for example, it has been known for many years that race and www.thelancet.com Vol 389 April 22, 2017
socioeconomic status weigh heavily on the likelihood of receiving a death sentence. The report outlines the many intersecting factors that exacerbate the basic injustice of capital punishment globally: its use against people who were younger than 18 years old when their alleged crimes were committed; its use against people with mental or intellectual disabilities; the imposition of death sentences following proceedings that do not meet international standards of a fair trial, including the use of military courts and confessions exacted through torture or other ill-treatment; and the use of mandatory death penalty sentencing. Also troubling is the use of the death penalty for crimes that do not meet internationally recognised standards of the “most serious”, such as for drug-related offences in much of southeast Asia and parts of the Middle East. With 20 recorded executions across five states, one of the standout findings in the report is that, for the first time since 2006, the USA did not feature in the top five countries that carried out judicial executions. The continued decline in the use capital punishment in the USA is largely attributable to the effects of litigation and industry controls on the supply of lethal injection drugs. In 2011, the European Commission introduced strict rules to prevent drugs exported from the European Union being used to perform executions in the USA, and to date over a dozen drug manufacturers have taken actions to prevent their products being used in the USA as part of lethal injections. Indeed, the notion that drugs designed to save and improve lives should not be supplied for the purpose of killing is fast becoming a norm in the pharmaceutical industry, as events have demonstrated in Arkansas this month: in a legal first, a supplier of a drug used to perform lethal injections (in this case, the neuromuscular blocking agent vecuronium bromide) has sued a US state for alleged violation of its agreements that prohibit the sale of such drugs to correctional facilities engaging in capital punishment. The growing body of evidence that demonstrates the injustice and futility of the death penalty makes the need for continued action ever more urgent. Although abolishing the practice worldwide might seem at times like an impossible task, recent developments—especially the successes won through legal and industry activism— show that progress is achievable. n The Lancet
Getty Images EITAN ABRAMOVICH / Stringer #: 79789140
Achieving progress on ending the death penalty
For the UN General Assembly resolution see https://www.un. org/en/ga/search/view_doc. asp?symbol=A/RES/71/187 For the Amnesty International report on the use of the death penalty in 2016 see https:// www.amnesty.org/en/ documents/act50/5740/2017/ en/ For more on the death penalty in China see https://www. amnesty.org/en/documents/ asa17/5849/2017/en/ For more on the death penalty in the USA see https:// deathpenaltyinfo.org/ documents/FactSheet.pdf For industry statements and action on execution drugs see http://www.reprieve.org.uk/ case-study/manufacturer-actionon-execution-drugs/
1581