CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

IS capital punishment contrary to international humans rights law

Is Capital Punishment Contrary To International Humans Rights Law

Introduction

Throughout history there have been many ways of dealing with members of society that have disobeyed the laws. In earlier times, methods such as exiling criminals out of their land or direct forms of punishment such as hanging, burning, and mutilations were performed. In United Kingdom prisons, these methods have supposedly passed and more humane ways of punishing criminals have risen. The most popular sentences for criminals is prison. The main purpose of prisons can be argued. One can determine that the purpose of the prison system is to keep those who are a danger to the rest of society from causing any more danger. In placing a criminal in prison there are many effects that will occur. This paper discusses if capital punishment is contrary to international humans rights law.

International provisions regarding death penality

Right now, no other issue is pushing the United States further apart from its allies and the growing consensus of international law than the death penalty. The costs to the U.S. in terms of international stature and vital cooperation from other countries are substantial. (McLaughlin & Muncie, 2008, 80-85) By defying international agreements and turning a deaf ear to the entreaties of its friends, the U.S. is increasingly positioning itself as a human rights violator on this issue. By executing juvenile offenders and the mentally ill; by executing citizens from other countries who were not afforded the simple protections U.S. citizens routinely expect abroad; and by ignoring international norms against expanding the death penalty, the U.S. is showing disrespect for international human rights law both at home and abroad. The potential costs to the U.S. will be measured in loss of leadership and prestige, endangerment of the rights of U.S. citizens abroad, disrespect for international law and the tribunals which protect it, and a lost opportunity to be part of a fundamental change in the status of human rights at the start of the 21st Century.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in December 1948, recognizes each person's right to life. It categorically states that;

“No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”(Article 5).

In Amnesty International's view, the death penalty violates these rights.

The community of states has adopted four international treaties specifically providing for the abolition of the death penalty. Through the years, several UN bodies discussed and adopted measures to support the call for the worldwide abolition of the death penalty.

In December 2007 and 2008 the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) adopted resolutions 62/149 and 63/168, calling for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty. Since then, other regional bodies or civil society coalitions adopted resolutions and declarations advocating for a moratorium on executions as a step towards global abolition of the death penalty.

These resolutions are not legally binding on governments, but represent important milestones for the abolitionist movement and constitute a ...