Topic: Law and Criminality

Problem: Capital punishment

Question:“Is Capital Punishment an effective practice in modern legal

systems?”

Introduction: According to the Cambridge Dictionary, capital punishment is “punishment by

death, as ordered by a legal system”1. Capital punishment has come under increasing scrutiny
in modern legal systems. Amnesty International recorded at least 1,153 executions in 16
countries – a 31% increase from the 883 executions in 20 countries in 2022- marking the
highest total since 2015 but the lowest number of executing countries on record with the
organisation.2 China remained the world’s leading executioner – but the true extent of its use of
the death penalty is unknown as this data is classified as a state secret; the global figure of at
least 1,153 excludes the thousands of executions believed to have been carried out there.
Excluding China, 89% of all reported executions took place in just two countries – Iran, Saudi
Arabia.3

One reason this issue remains relevant is its inconsistency with contemporary human rights
standards.There are a number of disagreements that may arise between countries that impose
the death penalty and those that do not. Capital punishment is a violation to human rights.The
irreversible nature of the death penalty also raises concerns about executing innocent
individuals, with the potential for wrongful convictions being a global problem. The United
Nations argue that capital punishment contradicts Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, which states that "everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person". 4
Moreover it is cruel and inhuman.

Perspectives:

National: In recent years, there has been a growing international discourse on the
intersection of capital punishment and human rights, particularly concerning individuals with
severe mental health conditions. According to the Pakistan’s Supreme Court, “capital
punishment cannot be carried out to people with serious mental health issues.”5 While the
Supreme Court’s decision does not automatically remove all mentally ill prisoners from death
row, it grants them the right to have their cases reviewed by a medical board. This review

1 Dictionary
2 DPIC-Death Penalty
3 Amnesty International.
4 United Nations-Universal Declaration of Human Rights
5 WCADP, Pakistan's Supreme Court
process could lead to the commutation of their death sentences, marking a significant initial step
in limiting the application of the death penalty and moving toward its eventual abolition in law.

However, The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence applies capital punishment only for offences that
cause death—murder; murder and terrorism; and murder, kidnapping and terrorism.6 When
sentencing individuals convicted of lethal offences such as murder, the Supreme Court carefully
considers the relative severity of the crime committed and increasingly reserves death
sentences only for the worst and most exceptional aggravated cases.

Pakistan’s stance on capital punishment reflects a tension between its legal framework, which
retains the death penalty, and an increasingly cautious judicial approach. While the country
continues to issue and carry out death sentences, particularly for serious crimes like murder and
terrorism, the Supreme Court has played a crucial role in limiting its application. The court has
shown concern over systemic flaws in the justice system, such as wrongful convictions,
unreliable evidence, and poor legal representation, which has led to the overturning or
commutation of the majority of death penalty cases it reviews. This indicates a judicial
preference for life imprisonment over capital punishment in many instances. Despite this
progressive shift in the judiciary, lower courts frequently impose death sentences for non-lethal
offences, highlighting inconsistencies in the legal process. Pakistan’s overall approach thus
remains conflicted—maintaining the death penalty in law with a growing recognition of its
potential for injustice, and a judiciary pushing for reform.

The Director of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, I.A. Rahman, said: “Even in
countries where the system of justice is unexceptionally sound, the death penalty is
considered a miscarriage of justice. Considering the state our system of justice has
fallen into and the known penchant of police for prosecuting the innocent even when the
guilty ones can be apprehended, in Pakistan, the death penalty can only be described as
unmitigated bestiality.” He's basically suggesting that with such a flawed system, executing
people is an extreme and unjust punishment.

Global: The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights is a
department of the United Nations Secretariat that works to promote and protect human rights
that are guaranteed under international law. According to them,“The use of the death penalty is
not consistent with the right to life and the right to live free from torture or cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment.”7Around 170 States have abolished or introduced a
moratorium on the death penalty either in law or in practice. Despite this abolitionist trend, the
death penalty is still employed in a small number of countries, largely because of the myth that
it deters crime. A few states also still permit use of the death penalty for crimes other than
those of extreme gravity involving intentional killing, including for drug-related crimes or
terrorism charges.8

6 The Pakistan Capital Punishment Study

7 OHCHR-Death Penalty
8 OHCHR-Death Penalty
On August 9th 2024, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed alarm over the
high number of executions in Iran. Within two days, Iranian authorities executed at least 29
people, contributing to a total of 345 executions reported that year. Many of the individuals
executed were convicted of drug-related offences, which do not meet international standards
for the death penalty. The UN also raised concerns about unfair trials and the disproportionate
impact on ethnic minorities, urging Iran to impose a moratorium on executions. 9

A quote said by Ban Ki-Moon, United Nations Secretary-General:

“The right to life is the foundation of all human rights. The taking of life is irreversible, and goes
against our fundamental belief in the dignity and worth of every human being. I call on all world
leaders, legislators and justice officials to stop executions now. There is no place for the death
penalty in the 21st century.”10

This illustrates his expectation that the death penalty would be entirely abolished by the 21st
century. However, even today, capital punishment is still widely practised, with some regions
carrying it out in highly unjust ways.

Causes:

Every day, people are executed and sentenced to death by the state as punishment for a variety
of crimes – sometimes for acts that should not be criminalised. In some countries, it can be for
drug-related offences, in others this cruel punishment is reserved for terrorism-related acts and
murder.11

1. Drug Offences: According to Harm Reduction International, “At the end of 2023, 34
countries retained the death for drug offences. In July 2023 Pakistan took the
landmark decision to remove the death penalty from the list of punishments that can be
imposed for certain violations of its Control of Narcotics Substances Act.12 There was
also visible progress seen in Malaysia, which abolished the mandatory death penalty for
all offences, including drug-related ones. This reform may impact the lives of over 700
people on death row for drug offences and bring the country one step closer to total
abolition of capital punishment.13

2. Terrorism Acts: In many countries, a significant percentage of death sentences are

imposed for terrorism-related offences. At the same time, new and revised antiterrorism
legislation in many states has broadened the activities considered ‘acts of terrorism’.14In
2016, 65 countries retained the death penalty in law for terrorism-related offences. Of

9OHCHR-Death Penalty
10 OHCHR-Death Penalty
11 Amnesty International
12HRI- The Death Penalty for Drug Offences: Global Overview 2023
13HRI- The Death Penalty for Drug Offences: Global Overview 2023
14 Penal Reform International
 these, 15 carried out executions for terrorism and 12 others sentenced terrorist suspects
to death at least once over the past ten years. In the last ten years, countries like
Bangladesh, India, Nigeria, Tunisia and others have modified their legal framework to
expand the scope of capital punishment to include terrorism-related offences. More
recently, Pakistan and Chad resumed executions in the name of the fight against
terrorism, putting an end to moratoriums that had lasted for years15.

Consequences:

Execution is the ultimate, irrevocable punishment: the risk of executing an innocent person can
never be eliminated. Since 1973, for example, more than 197 people sent to death row in the
USA have later been exonerated or released from death row on grounds of innocence. Others
have been executed despite serious doubts about their guilt.16 Over 70% of the countries in the
world have abolished the death penalty,17 but it’s still used in places like China, Japan, Saudi
Arabia, and the United States. Public opinion is divided, but over the years, support for the
death penalty has waned. Supporters say it’s a valuable crime deterrent while opponents argue
it fails in this purpose.18

The main consequences of capital punishment are:

1. It’s Inhumane: Methods of execution have included firing squads, hanging, the electric
chair, and lethal injections. Are these punishments cruel? Death penalty critics refer to
The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment, an international agreement meant to stop actions seen as inhumane. While
the Convention doesn't take a clear position on the death penalty, many people believe
executions should be considered cruel and inhumane. Even for those who think
executions can be done "humanely," there's the issue of botched executions. Studies
show that 3% of executions in the US between 1890 and 2010 were botched. Lethal
injection, although the most common method, has the highest error rate. When it goes
wrong, it can take a long time for the person to die.

In 2014, in Oklahoma, Clayton Lockett went through a botched execution. It started

badly when the execution team struggled to find a proper vein and realised they had the
wrong needles. After 16 attempts, they finally got an IV in. Lockett was clearly suffering
as the drugs entered his body, and the execution was stopped. He died of a heart attack
43 minutes after the first drug – midazolam – was given. Though it's unclear if the drug
was the main cause, midazolam has been involved in other failed executions.
Considering these points, the death penalty can easily be viewed as inhumane.19

15 Parliamentarians for Global Action

16 Amnesty International
17 DPIC-Death Penalty
18Human Rights Careers-Why Death Penalty is Wrong?.
19Human Rights Careers-Why Death Penalty is Wrong?. .
 2. It’s Irreversible: What makes the death penalty distinct from life in prison is that the
judgement can’t be reversed if new evidence is discovered. It’s a disturbingly frequent
occurrence. In 2000, Professor James Liebman from Columbia Law School released a
study examining every capital conviction and appeal between 1973-1995. More than
90% of the states that gave death sentences had overall error rates of 52% or higher.
85% of states had error rates of 60% or higher. 20

A more recent analysis from 2014 collected data from all death sentences between
1973-2004. They estimated that around 1 in 25 of those given a death sentence had
likely been incorrectly convicted. While most of those who receive a death penalty
sentence are eventually removed from death row to serve life imprisonment, innocent
prisoners are never freed. 21
The Death Penalty Information Center maintains a database of exonerations, which
means the person was acquitted or the charges were dismissed completely. Reasons
include false confessions, insufficient evidence, perjury, official misconduct, and
inadequate legal defence. Data like this exposes how flawed the criminal justice system
is and how frequent errors are. It’s not a system we should trust with people’s lives.22

Course of Action:
Several international organisations, such as Amnesty International and the United Nations, have
taken significant steps to challenge the use of capital punishment, citing human rights violations
and the risk of wrongful convictions. Additionally, countries like Norway, Germany, and Brazil
have played a crucial role in the global push for abolition, offering their support through
diplomatic efforts and legislative reforms.

Amnesty International:
For over 45 years, Amnesty International has been campaigning to abolish the death penalty
around the world. Amnesty International monitors its use by all states to expose and hold to
account governments that continue to use the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading
punishment. They publish a report annually, reporting figures and analysing trends for each
country. Amnesty International’s latest report, Death Sentences and Executions 2023, was
released in May 2024.23

The organisation’s work to oppose the death penalty takes many forms, including targeted,
advocacy and campaign based projects in sub-Saharan Africa, Asia-Pacific, Americas and
Europe and Central Asia , and Middle East and North Africa regions; strengthening national and
international standards against its use, including by supporting the successful adoption of
resolutions by the UN General Assembly on a moratorium on the use of the death penalty; and

20Human Rights Careers-Why Death Penalty is Wrong?. .

21Human Rights Careers-Why Death Penalty is Wrong?. .
22Human Rights Careers-Why Death Penalty is Wrong?. .
23Amnesty International.
applying pressure on behalf of people facing imminent execution. They also support actions and
work by the abolitionist movement, at national, regional and global level.24

When Amnesty International started its work in 1977, only 16 countries had totally abolished the
death penalty. Today, that number has risen to 112 – more than half the world’s countries. More
than two-thirds are abolitionist in law or practice.25

United Nations (WCADP) :

The World Coalition Against the Death Penalty is actively campaigning against capital
punishment, particularly through engagement with international bodies like the United Nations
Human Rights Council (UNHRC). They attend sessions to highlight the human rights violations
associated with the death penalty and call on governments to abolish or limit its use. By
delivering oral statements and providing evidence, they aim to push for broader international
consensus.26

The United Nations Human Rights Council met for its 56th session from 18th to 12th October,
2024.During the Global Update by the High Commissioner on Human Rights, Volker Türk
called upon the government of Iran to establish for an “immediate moratorium on the death
penalty, given the reported spike in executions since the beginning of the year.” The European
Union made multiple statements, noting the alarming rise of executions in Iran, and condemning
executions in Saudi Arabia. It denounced the provision for the death penalty within the Anti-
Homosexuality Law in Uganda which is contrary to international human rights law and to
Uganda’s obligations under the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, regretted the
lifting of moratorium on death penalty in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and strongly
invited the Authorities to reintroduce it.27

Their approach involves collaborations with various human rights organisations, such as
Amnesty International, to amplify global pressure. These efforts include documenting cases of
wrongful executions and advocating for moratoriums in countries where the death penalty is still
used, such as Saudi Arabia and Nigeria. The coalition also supports countries undergoing
reform by spotlighting positive examples like Malaysia and Belize, which have taken steps
toward limiting or abolishing capital punishment.28

As a result of these sustained efforts, the World Coalition has contributed to significant changes,
including the reduction in the number of executions worldwide. Their advocacy has helped bring
international attention to the death penalty’s human rights impacts, leading to reforms in several
countries and strengthening the global movement toward abolition. This has gradually shifted
public perception and influenced governments to reconsider the death penalty.29

24Amnesty International.
25Amnesty International.
26World Coalition-Abolition of the death penalty
27World Coalition-Abolition of the death penalty
28World Coalition-Abolition of the death penalty
29World Coalition-Abolition of the death penalty
Both Amnesty International and the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty (WCADP) are
working towards the same goal of abolishing capital punishment, but their approaches and
areas of focus differ slightly. Amnesty International uses a data-driven, regional approach that
monitors specific countries and applies pressure based on evidence. Whereas, the World
Coalition Against the Death Penalty (WCADP) focuses more on international collaboration and
the diplomatic side of influencing global policies.
However, I agree with Amnesty International’s approach because it is evidence-driven and
focuses on concrete data and trend analysis, making their campaigns more impactful. Their
detailed reports hold governments accountable and provide a strong foundation for advocating
change, which has contributed to the significant rise in abolitionist countries. This method of
using targeted, country-specific pressure is practical and effective in shifting policies on the
death penalty worldwide.