Abolish the death penalty

“What says the law? You will not kill. How does it say it? By killing!” –Victor Hugo

“For centuries the death penalty, often accompanied by barbarous refinements, has been trying to hold crime in check; yet crime persists.” –Albert Camus

“Had it not been for slavery, the death penalty would have likely been abolished in America. Slavery became a haven for the death penalty.” –Angela Davis

“The death penalty is the ultimate, irreversible denial of human rights. It is the premeditated and cold-blooded killing of a human being by the state. This cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment is done in the name of justice. It violates the right to life as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

We oppose the death penalty in all cases without exception regardless of the nature of the crime, the characteristics of the offender, or the method used by the state to kill the prisoner.” –Amnesty International

Amnesty International says, “There can never be any justification for torture or for cruel treatment. Like torture, an execution constitutes an extreme physical and mental assault on an individual. The physical pain caused by the action of killing a human being cannot be quantified, nor can the psychological suffering caused by foreknowledge of death at the hands of the state.

The death penalty is discriminatory and is often used disproportionately against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic and religious communities. It is imposed and carried out arbitrarily. In some countries, it is used as a tool of repression to silence the political opposition. In other countries, flaws in the judicial process are exacerbated by discrimination, prosecutorial misconduct and inadequate legal representation. As long as human justice remains fallible, the risk of executing the innocent can never be eliminated.

The death penalty: 1.denies the possibility of rehabilitation and reconciliation. 2.promotes simplistic responses to complex human problems, rather than pursuing explanations that could inform positive strategies. 3.prolongs the suffering of the murder victim’s family, and extends that suffering to the loved ones of the condemned prisoner. 4.diverts resources and energy that could be better used to work against violent crime and assist those affected by it. 5.is a symptom of a culture of violence, not a solution to it. It is an affront to human dignity. 6.should be abolished. Now.”

More than two-thirds of the countries in the world have now abolished the death penalty in law or practice. The numbers are as follows:Abolitionist for all crimes: 97, Abolitionist for ordinary crimes only: 8, Abolitionist in practice: 36, Total abolitionist in law or practice: 141, Retentionist: 57


These are the countries whose laws do not provide for the death penalty for any crime.
Albania, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bhutan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cambodia, Canada, Cape Verde, Colombia, Cook Islands, Costa Rica, Cote D’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Holy See, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niue, Norway, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome And Principe, Senegal, Serbia (including Kosovo), Seychelles, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Timor-Leste, Togo, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela

People are still sentenced to death. Total sentenced to death, from 2007 to 2011:
China-Thousands. China refused to divulge figures on its use of the death penalty.
Pakistan-1497 (executed 171)
Iraq-1420 (executed 256)
Algeria-752 (executed 0)
Egypt-704 (executed 12)
USA-504 (executed 220)
India-435 (executed 0)
Bangladesh-423 (executed 28)
Afghanistan-364 (executed 34)
Nigeria-341 (executed 0)
Malaysia-324 (executed 2)
Vietnam-258 (executed 58)
Sudan-166 (executed 30)
Iran-156 (executed 1663)
Uganda-134 (executed 0)
SriLanka-120 (executed 0)
Yemen-109 (executed 152)
Japan-108 (executed 33)

There’s still a hope. We are getting closer to a death penalty-free world.

Is Noam Chomsky Right or Wrong?

Noam Chomsky was asked, ‘What do you think of the U.S. increased reliance—President Obama increasingly using drones to attack people in Pakistan, in Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, and beyond?’

He answered: ‘Good comment about that made by Yochi Dreazen. He’s the military correspondent—was the military correspondent for the Wall Street Journal, is now for some other outfit, a military analyst. He pointed out accurately—this after the killing of Osama bin Laden, which he approved of, but he said that there’s an interesting difference between Bush and Obama. I mean, I’m now paraphrasing in my own terms, not his terms, so the way I would have said it is: Bush—if Bush, the Bush administration, didn’t like somebody, they’d kidnap them and send them to torture chambers; if the Obama administration decides they don’t like somebody, they murder them, so you don’t have to have torture chambers all over.

Actually, that tells us something else. Just take a look at the first Guantánamo detainee to go to trial under Obama. Trial means military commission, whatever that is. The first one was a very interesting case and tells us a lot. The first one was Omar Khadr. And what was his crime? His crime was that when he was 15 years old, he tried to defend his village against an attack by U.S. forces in Afghanistan. So that’s the crime, therefore he’s a terrorist. So he was sent to Bagram, then to Guantánamo, eight years in these torture chambers. And then he came up for trial under Obama. And he was given a choice: you can plead not guilty and stay in Guantánamo for the rest of your life, or you can plead guilty and get another eight years. So his lawyers advised him to plead guilty. Well, that’s justice under our constitutional law president, for a 15-year-old kid defending his village against an attacking army. And there was nothing said—the worst part is, there’s nothing said about it.

Actually, the same is true of the Awlaki killing, you know, this American cleric in Yemen who was killed by drones. He was killed. The guy next to him was killed. Shortly after, his son was killed. Now, there was a little talk about the fact that he was an American citizen: you shouldn’t just murder American citizens. But, you know, the New York Times headline, for example, when he was killed, said something like “West celebrates death of radical cleric.” First of all, it wasn’t death, it was murder. And the West celebrates the murder of a suspect. He’s a suspect, after all. There was something done almost 800 years ago called the Magna Carta, which is the foundation of Anglo-American law, that says that no one shall be subjected to a violation of rights without due process of law and a fair and speedy trial. It doesn’t say, if you think somebody’s a suspect, you should kill them.’