[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide
October 22 UNITED KINGDOM: Baroness Hamwee: The UK should never be complicit with the death penalty being used anywhere in the world Liberal Democrat Lords Spokesperson on Immigration, Baroness Hamwee, writes about the Crime (Overseas Production Orders) Bill, which has its report stage in the House of Lords today and which Labour & the Liberal Democrats seek to amend. Justice "The UK has long opposed the use of the death penalty in other countries, and we have committed ourselves to the goal of abolishing it everywhere. We can do this by using our diplomatic influence, and also by refusing to help foreign governments with prosecutions that will result in someone being executed" - Baroness Hamwee The death penalty is one of the greatest affronts to fundamental human rights. It is cruel, inhumane and irreversible. The UK must oppose its use anywhere in the world - and we have an opportunity to enshrine that opposition in the snappily-titled but important 'Crime (Overseas Production Orders) Bill', currently making its way through the House of Lords. Widespread concerns about the morality of capital punishment - including the danger of wrongful executions - put an end to its use in the UK more than half a century ago. 141 other countries have also abolished the death penalty, in law or in practice. Yet, according to Amnesty International, almost a thousand people were executed around the world last year, and more than 20,000 are currently languishing on death row. The UK has long opposed the use of the death penalty in other countries, and we have committed ourselves to the goal of abolishing it everywhere. We can do this by using our diplomatic influence, and also by refusing to help foreign governments with prosecutions that will result in someone being executed. That has been longstanding government policy: the UK must get assurances that the death penalty will not be used before providing security and justice assistance to countries that still retain it. This clear policy is an important statement of Britain's values. It is vital not only for preventing the use of the death penalty in the individual cases where we provide assistance, but also for strengthening our efforts to persuade all countries to abolish it. Yet in July, we discovered that the Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, had offered to assist the United States government in prosecuting two British citizens accused of carrying out executions for ISIL in Syria and Iraq, without seeking assurances that the death penalty will not be used. Even worse, he made that decision in secret. We only found out because his letter to US Attorney General Jeff Sessions was leaked to the Telegraph. There is no doubt that terrorists should face justice, but that could be achieved in this case either by prosecuting them here, under British law, or by assisting the US authorities with their prosecutions - if they guarantee that they will not seek the death penalty. The Telegraph's revelations - and the Government's later admission of two other cases since 2001 where death penalty assurances were waived - have rightly provoked outcry among politicians and the public. But wringing our hands isn't enough. We must take concrete steps to prevent this happening in the future. And that brings us to the current Bill. The Government is seeking to give our courts new powers to require internet companies outside the UK to provide electronic data that law enforcement agencies need to investigate and prosecute serious crimes. This will only be possible with new international agreements between the UK and other governments. These new agreements are good opportunity to enshrine our commitment not to assist in death penalty cases. That's why my Liberal Democrat colleague Brian Paddick and I have been working with Labour peers to amend the Bill to require death penalty assurances as part of any future agreements on international data-sharing. It would remove the sort of ministerial discretion that was abused in the case we heard about in July. This is an issue where the UK has traditionally played an important leadership role in the international community. Our unambiguous opposition to the death penalty has helped British diplomats to advance the cause of abolition at the UN and around the world. But the Home Secretary's actions threaten that leadership role. If the UK is seen to no longer fully oppose the death penalty, it weakens our ability to persuade others to abolish it. When proposing the private member's bill that abolished the death penalty in Britain, the MP Sydney Silverman said: "It is impossible to argue that the execution or non-execution of 2 people in England every year can make a very great contribution to the improvement of a dark and menacing world. But in this darkness and gloom into which the twentieth century civilisation has so far led us, we can at least light this small
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----USA
October 22 USA: New Low of 49% in U.S. Say Death Penalty Applied Fairly The percentage of Americans who believe the death penalty is applied fairly continues to decrease, falling below 50% this year for the 1st time. 49 % now say the death penalty is applied fairly and 45% say it is applied unfairly. The 49% who say the death penalty is applied fairly is, by 1 % point, the lowest Gallup has measured since it first asked the question in 2000 and reflects a gradual decline of this view over the past decade. Meanwhile, the percentage who say capital punishment is applied unfairly has edged higher, with this year's 4-point gap marking the smallest difference between the 2 views in Gallup's polling. These latest data, from Gallup's annual Crime poll, were collected Oct. 1-10 -- just before the Washington state Supreme Court on Oct. 11 struck down that state's death penalty, saying it had been unequally applied across racial groups. In its decision, the court cited evidence that "black defendants were 4 1/2 times more likely to be sentenced to death than similarly situated white defendants." The decision makes Washington the 20th state to outlaw the death penalty. Percentage of Democrats Who Say Death Penalty Is Applied Fairly Remains Low The decline in Americans' belief that capital punishment is applied fairly is largely the result of a sharp drop in this view among Democrats. 31 % of Democrats this year say the death penalty is applied fairly, similar to the low of 30% in 2017 but down significantly from 2005 and 2006, when slim majorities held this view. Meanwhile, 73% of Republicans say the death penalty is applied fairly, and the percentage holding this view has been fairly stable over time -- typically in the low 70s. More Americans Say the Death Penalty Is Imposed "Too Often" Americans remain most likely to say the death penalty is not imposed enough (37%), while smaller percentages say it is imposed "too often" (29%) or "about the right amount" (28%). While belief that the death penalty is not imposed often enough is still the most common view, the latest 37% is down from a high of 53% in 2005 and is by one point the lowest reading since 2001. At the same time, U.S. adults have gradually become more likely to say capital punishment is imposed "too often," with the latest 29% slightly higher than in previous years. Small Majority of Americans Continue to Favor Death Penalty Historically, Americans have been generally supportive of the death penalty as the punishment for murder. In all but two polls (in 1965 and 1966), Americans have been more likely to say they are in favor of than opposed to use of the death penalty. However, support for capital punishment too has been trending downward since peaking at 80% in the mid-1990s during a high point in the violent crime rate. Currently, 56% of U.S. adults favor capital punishment -- similar to last year's 55%, which marked the lowest level of support for the practice since 1972, when the constitutionality of the death penalty was being challenged. Bottom Line Washington is the latest in a string of states that have outlawed the death penalty over the past decade. While courts sometimes drive abolishment, as was the case in Washington, most abolition of the death penalty in recent years has taken place via legislation by state lawmakers and governors, who are beholden to voters and public opinion. So, if public support for capital punishment continues to wane, it's not unfathomable that other states could follow suit. Some Americans' views on the subject may have been influenced by stories of people sentenced to death who were later found to be innocent. In a 2014 poll, Gallup found that about 1 in 6 people who were opposed to the death penalty said they were against it out of concern that the defendants might actually be innocent. Other news stories, such as a case in Alabama earlier this year involving a botched execution, may have influenced opinions on the issue. Future support for the death penalty may depend partly on whether crime continues to decrease, because support for capital punishment peaked along with U.S. violent crime statistics, and as crime statistics declined thereafter, so did support for capital punishment. Meanwhile, as executions in the U.S. have decreased along with the generally sinking crime rate, Americans have become more likely to say capital punishment is unfairly applied and that it is imposed too frequently. But this appears to have been driven mostly by shifts in Democrats' views on the subject -- with blue states far more likely to have abolished the death penalty. (source: gallup.com) ___ A service courtesy of Washburn University School of Law www.washburnlaw.edu DeathPenalty mailing list DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty Unsubscribe:
