The death penalty is a term used to describe the act of putting a person to death, after judgment by a legal system,

either as an act of retribution, or to ensure they cannot commit future crimes. The death penalty is often described as capital punishment, as well, a term that comes from the Latin capitalis, meaning head, describing the fact that historically capital punishment involved losing ones head. While historically, most countries have at some point used the death penalty; in the modern world a minority of nations practice it. The death penalty is often a major topic of debate in countries that still practice it, such as the United States. Many religious ideologies are opposed to putting people to death, and many modern philosophical theories of ethics disagree with the practice as well. Article 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union disallows the use of the death penalty in any of its member states, so no European country practices the death penalty. The early use of the death penalty was often for penal purposes, and as a result the methods used to put people to death were horrific. Drawing and quartering people, for example, or flaying them alive or burning them, were not uncommon in Medieval Europe or in much of the world. A movement began in the late-18th century, however, towards humane punishments. For this reason, the guillotine was developed in France, hanging in many countries was changed from a way of strangling people to death to a way of breaking their neck, and the United States invented both the electric chair and the lethal injection. There has consistently been a movement towards abolishing the death penalty, as well, although different cultures have arrived there in different times. China, for example, banned the death penalty in the mid-8th century, only to restore it after 12 years. A public statement in England in the 14th century argued against the death penalty, although England would not actually ban the practice until 1973. In the mid18th century, an Italian author, Cesare Beccaria, wrote a treatise On Crimes and Punishment, which argued against the death penalty both for moral and practical reasons. This treatise would impact many rulers, including Grand Duke Leopold II of Hapsburg, who would eventually outlaw the death penalty in his lands. Near the end of the 19th century, a number of nations began abolishing the death penalty. The Roman Republic, San Marino, Venezuela, and Portugal all outlawed the death penalty between 1849 and 1867. The 1970s and 1980s saw a general abolishment in many Western countries, with Canada abolishing it in 1976, France in

1981, and Australia in 1985. The United Nations, in 1977, issued a resolution stating it would be good to abolish the death penalty as widely as possible. http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-death-penalty.htm

Early Death Penalty Laws The first established death penalty laws date as far back as the Eighteenth Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammaurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty for 25 different crimes. The death penalty was also part of the Fourteenth Century B.C.'s Hittite Code; in the Seventh Century B.C.'s Draconian Code of Athens, which made death the only punishment for all crimes; and in the Fifth Century B.C.'s Roman Law of the Twelve Tablets. Death sentences were carried out by such means as crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and impalement. In the Tenth Century A.D., hanging became the usual method of execution in Britain. In the following century, William the Conqueror would not allow persons to be hanged or otherwise executed for any crime, except in times of war. This trend would not last, for in the Sixteenth Century, under the reign of Henry VIII, as many as 72,000 people are estimated to have been executed. Some common methods of execution at that time were boiling, burning at the stake, hanging, beheading, and drawing and quartering. Executions were carried out for such capital offenses as marrying a Jew, not confessing to a crime, and treason. The number of capital crimes in Britain continued to rise throughout the next two centuries. By the 1700s, 222 crimes were punishable by death in Britain, including stealing, cutting down a tree, and robbing a rabbit warren. Because of the severity of the death penalty, many juries would not convict defendants if the offense was not serious. This lead to reforms of Britain's death penalty. From 1823 to 1837, the death penalty was eliminated for over 100 of the 222 crimes punishable by death. (Randa, 1997) The Death Penalty in America

Britain influenced America's use of the death penalty more than any other country. When European settlers came to the new world, they brought the practice of capital punishment. The first recorded execution in the new colonies was that of Captain George Kendall in the Jamestown colony of Virginia in 1608. Kendall was executed for being a spy for Spain. In 1612, Virginia Governor Sir Thomas Dale enacted the Divine, Moral and Martial Laws, which provided the death penalty for even minor offenses such as stealing grapes, killing chickens, and trading with Indians. Laws regarding the death penalty varied from colony to colony. The Massachusetts Bay Colony held its first execution in 1630, even though the Capital Laws of New England did not go into effect until years later. The New York Colony instituted the Duke's Laws of 1665. Under these laws, offenses such as striking one's mother or father, or denying the "true God," were punishable by death. (Randa, 1997) The Abolitionist Movement Colonial Times The abolitionist movement finds its roots in the writings of European theorists Montesquieu, Voltaire and Bentham, and English Quakers John Bellers and John Howard. However, it was Cesare Beccaria's 1767 essay, On Crimes and Punishment, that had an especially strong impact throughout the world. In the essay, Beccaria theorized that there was no justification for the state's taking of a life. The essay gave abolitionists an authoritative voice and renewed energy, one result of which was the abolition of the death penalty in Austria and Tuscany. ( Schabas 1997) American intellectuals as well were influenced by Beccaria. The first attempted reforms of the death penalty in the U.S. occurred when Thomas Jefferson introduced a bill to revise Virginia's death penalty laws. The bill proposed that capital punishment be used only for the crimes of murder and treason. It was defeated by only one vote. Also influenced was Dr. Benjamin Rush, a signer of the Declaration of Independence and founder of the Pennsylvania Prison Society. Rush challenged the belief that the death penalty serves as a deterrent. In fact, Rush was an early believer in the "brutalization effect." He held that having a death penalty actually increased criminal conduct. Rush gained the support of Benjamin Franklin and Philadelphia Attorney General William Bradford. Bradford, who would later become the U.S. Attorney

General, led Pennsylvania to become the first state to consider degrees of murder based on culpability. In 1794, Pennsylvania repealed the death penalty for all offenses except first degree murder. (Bohm, 1999; Randa, 1997; and Schabas, 1997) Nineteenth Century In the early to mid-Nineteenth Century, the abolitionist movement gained momentum in the northeast. In the early part of the century, many states reduced the number of their capital crimes and built state penitentiaries.In 1834, Pennsylvania became the first state to move executions away from the public eye and carrying them out in correctional facilities. In 1846, Michigan became the first state to abolish the death penalty for all crimes except treason. Later, Rhode Island and Wisconsin abolished the death penalty for all crimes. By the end of the century, the world would see the countries of Venezuela, Portugal, Netherlands, Costa Rica, Brazil and Ecuador follow suit. (Bohm, 1999 and Schabas, 1997). Although some U.S. states began abolishing the death penalty, most states held onto capital punishment. Some states made more crimes capital offenses, especially for offenses committed by slaves. In 1838, in an effort to make the death penalty more palatable to the public, some states began passing laws against mandatory death sentencing instead enacting discretionary death penalty statutes. The 1838 enactment of discretionary death penalty statutes in Tennessee, and later in Alabama, were seen as a great reform. This introduction of sentencing discretion in the capital process was perceived as a victory for abolitionists because prior to the enactment of these statutes, all states mandated the death penalty for anyone convicted of a capital crime, regardless of circumstances. With the exception of a small number of rarely committed crimes in a few jurisdictions, all mandatory capital punishment laws had been abolished by 1963. (Bohm, 1999) During the Civil War, opposition to the death penalty waned, as more attention was given to the anti-slavery movement. After the war, new developments in the means of executions emerged. The electric chair was introduced at the end of the century. New York built the first electric chair in 1888, and in 1890 executed William Kemmler. Soon, other states adopted this execution method. (Randa, 1997)

Early and Mid-Twentieth Century Although some states abolished the death penalty in the mid-Nineteenth Century, it was actually the first half of the Twentieth Century that marked the beginning of the "Progressive Period" of reform in the United States. From 1907 to 1917, six states completely outlawed the death penalty and three limited it to the rarely committed crimes of treason and first degree murder of a law enforcement official. However, this reform was short-lived. There was a frenzied atmosphere in the U.S., as citizens began to panic about the threat of revolution in the wake of the Russian Revolution. In addition, the U.S. had just entered World War I and there were intense class conflicts as socialists mounted the first serious challenge to capitalism. As a result, five of the six abolitionist states reinstated their death penalty by 1920.(Bedau, 1997 and Bohm, 1999) In 1924, the use of cyanide gas was introduced, as Nevada sought a more humane way of executing its inmates. Gee Jon was the first person executed by lethal gas. The state tried to pump cyanide gas into Jon's cell while he slept, but this proved impossible, and the gas chamber was constructed. (Bohm, 1999) From the 1920s to the 1940s, there was a resurgence in the use of the death penalty. This was due, in part, to the writings of criminologists, who argued that the death penalty was a necessary social measure. In the United States, Americans were suffering through Prohibition and the Great Depression. There were more executions in the 1930s than in any other decade in American history, an average of 167 per year. (Bohm, 1999 and Schabas, 1997) In the 1950s, public sentiment began to turn away from capital punishment. Many allied nations either abolished or limited the death penalty, and in the U.S., the number of executions dropped dramatically. Whereas there were 1,289 executions in the 1940s, there were 715 in the 1950s, and the number fell even further, to only 191, from 1960 to 1976. In 1966, support for capital punishment reached an all-time low. A Gallup poll showed support for the death penalty at only 42%. (Bohm, 1999 and BJS, 1997) Constitutionality of the Death Penalty in America Challenging the Death Penalty

The 1960s brought challenges to the fundamental legality of the death penalty. Before then, the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments were interpreted as permitting the death penalty. However, in the early 1960s, it was suggested that the death penalty was a "cruel and unusual" punishment, and therefore unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment. In 1958, the Supreme Court had decided in Trop v. Dulles (356 U.S. 86), that the Eighth Amendment contained an "evolving standard of decency that marked the progress of a maturing society." Although Trop was not a death penalty case, abolitionists applied the Court's logic to executions and maintained that the United States had, in fact, progressed to a point that its "standard of decency" should no longer tolerate the death penalty. (Bohm, 1999) In the late 1960s, the Supreme Court began "fine tuning" the way the death penalty was administered. To this effect, the Court heard two cases in 1968 dealing with the discretion given to the prosecutor and the jury in capital cases. The first case was U.S. v. Jackson (390 U.S. 570), where the Supreme Court heard arguments regarding a provision of the federal kidnapping statute requiring that the death penalty be imposed only upon recommendation of a jury. The Court held that this practice was unconstitutional because it encouraged defendants to waive their right to a jury trial to ensure they would not receive a death sentence. The other 1968 case was Witherspoon v. Illinois (391 U.S. 510). In this case, the Supreme Court held that a potential juror's mere reservations about the death penalty were insufficient grounds to prevent that person from serving on the jury in a death penalty case. Jurors could be disqualified only if prosecutors could show that the juror's attitude toward capital punishment would prevent him or her from making an impartial decision about the punishment. In 1971, the Supreme Court again addressed the problems associated with the role of jurors and their discretion in capital cases. The Court decided Crampton v. Ohio and McGautha v. California (consolidated under 402 U.S. 183). The defendants argued it was a violation of their Fourteenth Amendment right to due process for jurors to have unrestricted discretion in deciding whether the defendants should live or die, and such discretion resulted in arbitrary and capricious sentencing. Crampton also argued that it was unconstitutional to have his guilt and sentence determined in one set of deliberations, as the jurors in his case were instructed that a first-degree murder conviction would result in a death sentence. The Court, however, rejected these claims, thereby approving of unfettered jury discretion and a single proceeding to

determine guilt and sentence. The Court stated that guiding capital sentencing discretion was "beyond present human ability." Suspending the Death Penalty The issue of arbitrariness of the death penalty was again be brought before the Supreme Court in 1972 in Furman v. Georgia, Jackson v. Georgia, and Branch v. Texas (known collectively as the landmark case Furman v. Georgia (408 U.S. 238)). Furman, like McGautha, argued that capital cases resulted in arbitrary and capricious sentencing. Furman, however, was a challenge brought under the Eighth Amendment, unlike McGautha, which was a Fourteenth Amendment due process claim. With the Furman decision the Supreme Court set the standard that a punishment would be "cruel and unusual" if it was too severe for the crime, if it was arbitrary, if it offended society's sense of justice, or it if was not more effective than a less severe penalty. In 9 separate opinions, and by a vote of 5 to 4, the Court held that Georgia's death penalty statute, which gave the jury complete sentencing discretion, could result in arbitrary sentencing. The Court held that the scheme of punishment under the statute was therefore "cruel and unusual" and violated the Eighth Amendment. Thus, on June 29, 1972, the Supreme Court effectively voided 40 death penalty statutes, thereby commuting the sentences of 629 death row inmates around the country and suspending the death penalty because existing statutes were no longer valid. Reinstating the Death Penalty Although the separate opinions by Justices Brennan and Marshall stated that the death penalty itself was unconstitutional, the overall holding in Furman was that the specific death penalty statutes were unconstitutional. With that holding, the Court essentially opened the door to states to rewrite their death penalty statutes to eliminate the problems cited in Furman. Advocates of capital punishment began proposing new statutes that they believed would end arbitrariness in capital sentencing. The states were led by Florida, which rewrote its death penalty statute only five months after Furman. Shortly after, 34 other states proceeded to enact new death penalty statutes. To address the unconstitutionality of unguided jury discretion, some states removed all of that discretion by mandating capital punishment for those convicted of capital crimes. However, this practice was held

unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Woodson v. North Carolina (428 U.S. 280 (1976)). Other states sought to limit that discretion by providing sentencing guidelines for the judge and jury when deciding whether to impose death. The guidelines allowed for the introduction of aggravating and mitigating factors in determining sentencing. These guided discretion statutes were approved in 1976 by the Supreme Court in Gregg v. Georgia (428 U.S. 153), Jurek v. Texas (428 U.S. 262), and Proffitt v. Florida (428 U.S. 242), collectively referred to as the Gregg decision. This landmark decision held that the new death penalty statutes in Florida, Georgia, and Texas were constitutional, thus reinstating the death penalty in those states. The Court also held that the death penalty itself was constitutional under the Eighth Amendment. In addition to sentencing guidelines, three other procedural reforms were approved by the Court in Gregg. The first was bifurcated trials, in which there are separate deliberations for the guilt and penalty phases of the trial. Only after the jury has determined that the defendant is guilty of capital murder does it decide in a second trial whether the defendant should be sentenced to death or given a lesser sentence of prison time. Another reform was the practice of automatic appellate review of convictions and sentence. The final procedural reform from Gregg was proportionality review, a practice that helps the state to identify and eliminate sentencing disparities. Through this process, the state appellate court can compare the sentence in the case being reviewed with other cases within the state, to see if it is disproportionate. Because these reforms were accepted by the Supreme Court, some states wishing to reinstate the death penalty included them in their new death penalty statutes. The Court, however, did not require that each of the reforms be present in the new statutes. Therefore, some of the resulting new statutes include variations on the procedural reforms found in Gregg. The ten-year moratorium on executions that had begun with the Jackson and Witherspoon decisions ended on January 17, 1977, with the execution of Gary Gilmore by firing squad in Utah. Gilmore did not challenge his death sentence. That same year, Oklahoma became the first state to adopt lethal injection as a means of execution, though it would be five more years until Charles Brooks became the first person executed by lethal injection in Texas on December 7, 1982.

Timeline Eighteenth Century B.C. - First established death penalty laws. Eleventh Century A.D. - William the Conqueror will not allow persons to be hanged except in cases of murder. 1608 - Captain George Kendall becomes the first recorded execution in the new colonies. 1632 - Jane Champion becomes the first woman executed in the new colonies. 1767 - Cesare Beccaria's essay, On Crimes and Punishment, theorizes that there is no justification for the state to take a life. Late 1700s - United States abolitionist movement begins. Early 1800s - Many states reduce their number of capital crimes and build state penitentiaries. 1823-1837 - Over 100 of the 222 crimes punishable by death in Britain are eliminated. 1834 - Pennsylvania becomes the first state to move executions into correctional facilities. 1838 - Discretionary death penalty statutes enacted in Tennessee. 1846 - Michigan becomes the first state to abolish the death penalty for all crimes except treason. 1890- William Kemmler becomes first person executed by electrocution. Early 1900s - Beginning of the "Progressive Period" of reform in the United States. 1907-1917 - Nine states abolish the death penalty for all crimes or strictly limit it. 1920s - 1940s - American abolition movement loses support.

1924 - The use of cyanide gas introduced as an execution method 1930s - Executions reach the highest levels in American history - average 167 per year. 1948 - The United Nations General Assembly adopts the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaiming a "right to life." 1950-1980 - De facto abolition becomes the norm in Western Europe. 1958 - Trop v. Dulles. Eighth Amendment's meaning contained an "evolving standard of decency that marked the progress of a maturing society." 1966 - Support of capital punishment reaches all-time low. A Gallup poll shows support of the death penalty at only 42%. 1968 - Witherspoon v. Illinois. Dismissing potential jurors solely because they express opposition to the death penalty held unconstitutional. 1970 - Crampton v. Ohio and McGautha v. California. The Supreme Court approves of unfettered jury discretion and non-bifurcated trials. June 1972 - Furman v. Georgia. Supreme Court effectively voids 40 death penalty statutes and suspends the death penalty. 1976 - Gregg v. Georgia. Guided discretion statutes are approved and the death penalty is reinstated. January 17, 1977 - Ten-year moratorium on executions ends with the execution of Gary Gilmore by firing squad in Utah. 1977 - Oklahoma becomes the first state to adopt lethal injection as a means of execution. 1977 - Coker v. Georgia. The death penalty is an unconstitutional punishment for the rape of an adult woman when the victim is not killed. December 7, 1982 - Charles Brooks becomes the first person executed by lethal injection.

1984 - Velma Barfield becomes the first woman executed since the reinstatement of the death penalty. 1986 - Ford v. Wainwright. Execution of insane persons banned. 1986 - Batson v. Kentucky. Prosecutor who strikes a disproportionate number of citizens of the same race in selecting a jury is required to rebut the inference of discrimination by showing neutral reasons for his or her strikes. 1987 - McCleskey v. Kemp. Racial disparities not recognized as a constitutional violation of "equal protection of the law" unless intentional racial discrimination against the defendant can be shown. 1988 - Thompson v. Oklahoma. Executions of offenders age fifteen and younger at the time of their crimes is unconstitutional. 1989 - Stanford v. Kentucky, and Wilkins v. Missouri. Eighth Amendment does not prohibit the death penalty for crimes committed at age sixteen or seventeen. 1989 - Penry v. Lynaugh. Executing persons with "mental retardation" is not a violation of the Eighth Amendment. 1993 - Herrera v. Collins. With the absence of other constitutional grounds, new evidence of innocence is no reason for a federal court to order a new trial. 1994 - President Clinton signs the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act expanding the federal death penalty. 1996 - President Clinton signs the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act restricting review in federal courts. 1998 - Karla Faye Tucker and Judi Buenoano executed. November 1998 - Northwestern University holds the first-ever National Conference on Wrongful Convictions and the Death Penalty. The Conference brings together 30 inmates who were freed from death row because of innocence. January 1999 - Pope John Paul II visits St. Louis, Missouri and calls for the end of the death penalty.

April 1999 - U.N. Human Rights Commission Resolution Supporting Worldwide Moratorium On Executions. June 1999 - Russian President, Boris Yeltsin, signs a decree commuting the death sentences of all convicts on Russia's death row. January 2000 - Illinois Governor George Ryan declares a moratorium on executions and appoints a blue-ribbon commission on capital punishment to study the issue. 2002 - Ring v. Arizona. A death sentence where the necessary aggravating factors are determined by a judge violates a defendant's constitutional right to a trial by jury. 2002 - Atkins v. Virginia. The execution of "mentally retarded" defendants violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. January 2003 - Gov. George Ryan grants clemency to all of the remaining 167 death row inmates in Illinois because of the flawed process that led to these sentences. June 2004 - New York's death penalty law declared unconstitutional by the state's high court.

March 2005 - Roper V. Simmons. The death penalty for those who commit crimes under 18 years of age is cruel and unusual punishment. December 2007 - The New Jersey General Assembly votes to become the first state to legislatively abolish capital punishment since it was re-instated in 1976. February 2008 - The Nebraska Supreme Court rules electrocution, the sole execution method in the state, to be cruel and unusual punishment, effectively freezing all executions in the state. June 2008 - Kennedy v. Louisiana. Capital punishment cannot apply to those convicted of child rape where no death occurs. March 2009 - Governor Bill Richardson signs legislation to repeal the death penalty in New Mexico, replacing it with life without parole. Limiting the Death Penalty

Creation of International Human Rights Doctrines In the aftermath of World War II, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This 1948 doctrine proclaimed a "right to life" in an absolute fashion, any limitations being only implicit. Knowing that international abolition of the death penalty was not yet a realistic goal in the years following the Universal Declaration, the United Nations shifted its focus to limiting the scope of the death penalty to protect juveniles, pregnant women, and the elderly. During the 1950s and 1960s subsequent international human rights treaties were drafted, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the American Convention on Human Rights. These documents also provided for the right to life, but included the death penalty as an exception that must be accompanied by strict procedural safeguards. Despite this exception, many nations throughout Western Europe stopped using capital punishment, even if they did not, technically, abolish it. As a result, this de facto abolition became the norm in Western Europe by the 1980s. (Schabas, 1997)

Limitations within the United States Despite growing European abolition, the U.S. retained the death penalty, but established limitations on capital punishment. In 1977, the United States Supreme Court held in Coker v. Georgia (433 U.S. 584) that the death penalty is an unconstitutional punishment for the rape of an adult

woman when the victim was not killed. Other limits to the death penalty followed in the next decade. Mental Illness and Intellectual Disability

In 1986, the Supreme Court banned the execution of insane persons and required an adversarial process for determining mental competency in Ford v. Wainwright (477 U.S. 399). In Penry v. Lynaugh (492 U.S. 584 (1989)), the Court held that executing persons with "mental retardation" was not a violation of the Eighth Amendment. However, in 2002 in Atkins v. Virginia, (536 U.S. 304), the Court held that a national consensus had evolved against the execution of the "mentally retarded" and concluded that such a punishment violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on crual and unusual punishment.

Race Race became the focus of the criminal justice debate when the Supreme Court held in Batson v. Kentucky (476 U.S. 79 (1986)) that a prosecutor who strikes a disproportionate number of citizens of the same race in selecting a jury is required to rebut the inference of discrimination by showing neutral reasons for the strikes. Race was again in the forefront when the Supreme Court decided the 1987 case, McCleskey v. Kemp (481 U.S. 279). McCleskey argued that there was racial discrimination in the application of Georgia's death penalty, by presenting a statistical analysis showing a pattern of racial disparities in death sentences, based on the race of the victim. The Supreme Court held, however, that racial disparities would not be recognized as a constitutional violation of "equal protection of the law" unless intentional racial discrimination against the defendant could be shown.

Juveniles In the late 1980s, the Supreme Court decided three cases regarding the constitutionality of executing juvenile offenders. In 1988, in Thompson v. Oklahoma (487 U.S. 815), four Justices held that the execution of offenders aged fifteen and younger at the time of their crimes was unconstitutional. The fifth vote was Justice O'Connor's concurrence, which restricted Thompson only

to states without a specific minimum age limit in their death penalty statute. The combined effect of the opinions by the four Justices and Justice O'Connor in Thompson is that no state without a minimum age in its death penalty statute can execute someone who was under sixteen at the time of the crime. The following year, the Supreme Court held that the Eighth Amendment does not prohibit the death penalty for crimes committed at age sixteen or seventeen. (Stanford v. Kentucky, and Wilkins v. Missouri (collectively, 492 U.S. 361)). At present, 19 states with the death penalty bar the execution of anyone under 18 at the time of his or her crime. In 1992, the United States ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Article 6(5) of this international human rights doctrine requires that the death penalty not be used on those who committed their crimes when they were below the age of 18. However, in doing so but the U.S. reserved the right to execute juvenile offenders. The United States is the only country with an outstanding reservation to this Article. International reaction has been highly critical of this reservation, and ten countries have filed formal objections to the U.S. reservation. In March 2005, Roper v. Simmons, the United States Supreme Court declared the practice of executing defendants whose crimes were committed as juveniles unconstitutional in Roper v. Simmons.

Additional Death Penalty Issues Innocence The Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of executing someone who claimed actual innocence in Herrera v. Collins (506 U.S. 390 (1993)). Although the Court left open the possibility that the Constitution bars the execution of someone who conclusively demonstrates that he or she is actually innocent, the Court noted that such cases would be very rare. The Court held that, in the absence of other constitutional violations, new evidence of innocence is no reason for federal courts to order a new trial. The Court also held that an innocent inmate could seek to prevent his execution through the clemency

process, which, historically, has been "the 'fail safe' in our justice system." Herrera was not granted clemency, and was executed in 1993. Since Herrera, concern regarding the possibility of executing the innocent has grown. Currently, over 115 people in 25 states have been released from death row because of innocence since 1973. In November, 1998 Northwestern University held the first-ever National Conference on Wrongful Convictions and the Death Penalty, in Chicago, Illinois. The Conference, which drew nationwide attention, brought together 30 of these wrongfully convicted inmates who were exonerated and released from death row. Many of these cases were discovered not as the result of the justice system, but instead as the result of new scientific techniques, investigations by journalism students, and the work of volunteer attorneys. These resources are not available to the typical death row inmate. In January 2000, after Illinois had released 13 innocent inmates from death row in the same time that it had executed 12 people, Illinois Governor George Ryan declared a moratorium on executions and appointed a blue-ribbon Commission on Capital Punishment to study the issue. Public Support Support for the death penalty has fluctuated throughout the century. According to Gallup surveys, in 1936 61% of Americans favored the death penalty for persons convicted of murder. Support reached an all-time low of 42% in 1966. Throughout the 70s and 80s, in the favor percentage of the of Americans death

penalty increased steadily, culminating in an 80% approval rating in 1994. A May 2004 Gallup Poll found that a growing number of Americans support a sentence of life without parole rather than the death penalty for those convicted of murder. Gallup found that 46% of respondents favor life imprisonment over the death penalty, up from 44% in May 2003. During that same time frame, support for capital punishment as an alternative fell from 53% to 50%. The poll also revealed a growing skepticism that the death

penalty deters crime, with 62% of those polled saying that it is not a deterrent. These percentages are a dramatic shift from the responses given to this same question in 1991, when 51% of Americans believed the death penalty deterred crime and only 41% believed it did not. Only 55% of those polled responded that they believed the death penalty is implemented fairly, down from 60% in 2003. When not offered an alternative sentence, 71% supported the death penalty and 26% opposed. The overall support is about the same as that reported in 2002, but down from the 80% support in 1994. (Gallup Poll News Service, June 2, 2004). (See also, DPIC's report, Sentencing for Life: American's Embrace Alternatives to the Death Penatly)

Religion In the 1970s, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), representing more then 10 million conservative Christians and 47 denominations, and the Moral Majority, were among the Christian groups supporting the death penalty. NAE's successor, the Christian Coalition, also supports the death penalty. Today, Fundamentalist and Pentecostal churches support the death penalty, typically on biblical grounds, specifically citing the Old Testament. (Bedau, 1997). The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regards the question as a matter to be decided solely by the process of civil law, and thus neither promotes nor opposes capital punishment. Although traditionally also a supporter of capital punishment, the Roman Catholic Church now oppose the death penalty. In addition, most Protestant denominations, including Baptists, Episcopalians, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, and the United Church of Christ, oppose the death penalty. During the 1960s, religious activists worked to abolish the death penalty, and continue to do so today. In recent years, and in the wake of a recent appeal by Pope John Paul II to end the death penalty, religious organizations around the nation have issued statements opposing the death penalty. Complete texts of many of these statements can be found at www.deathpenaltyreligious.org.

Women

Women have, historically, not been subject to the death penalty at the same rates as men. From the first woman executed in the U.S., Jane Champion, who was hanged in James City, Virginia in 1632, to the present, women have constituted only about 3% of U.S. executions. In fact, only ten women have been executed in the post-Gregg era. (Shea, 2004, with updates by DPIC).

Recent Developments in Capital Punishment The Federal Death Penalty In addition to the death penalty laws in many states, the federal government has also employed capital punishment for certain federal offenses, such as murder of a government official, kidnapping resulting in death, running a large-scale drug enterprise, and treason. When the Supreme Court struck down state death penalty statutes in Furman, the federal death penalty statutes suffered from the same conitutional infirmities that the state statutes did. As a result, death sentences under the old federal death penalty statutes have not been upheld. In 1988, a new federal death penalty statute was enacted for murder in the course of a drug-kingpin conspiracy. The statute was modeled on the postGregg statutes that the Supreme Court has approved. Since its enactment, 6 people have been sentenced to death for violating this law, though none has been executed. In 1994, President Clinton signed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act that expanded the federal death penalty to some 60 crimes, 3 of which do not involve murder. The exceptions are espionage, treason, and drug trafficking in large amounts. Two years later, in response to the Oklahoma City Bombing, President Clinton signed the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. The Act, which affects both state and federal prisoners, restricts review in federal courts by establishing tighter filing deadlines, limiting the opportunity for

evidentiary hearings, and ordinarily allowing only a single habeas corpus filing in federal court. Proponents of the death penalty argue that this streamlining will speed up the death penalty process and significantly reduce its cost, although others fear that quicker, more limited federal review may increase the risk of executing innocent defendants. (Bohm, 1999 and Schabas, 1997) International Abolition In the 1980s the international abolition movement gained momentum and treaties proclaiming abolition were drafted and ratified. Protocol No. 6 to the European Convention on Human Rights and its successors, the Inter-American Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty, and the United Nation's Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Aiming at the Abolition of the Death Penalty, were created with the goal of making abolition of the death penalty an international norm. Today, the Council of Europe requires new members to undertake and ratify Protocol No. 6. This has, in effect, led to the abolition of the death penalty in Eastern Europe. For example, the Ukraine, formerly one of the world's leaders in executions, has now halted the death penalty and has been admitted to the Council. South Africa's parliament voted to formally abolish the death penalty, which had earlier been declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court. In addition, Russian President, Boris Yeltsin, signed a decree commuting the death sentence for all of the convicts on Russia's death row, in June 1999. (Amnesty International and Schabas, 1997). Between 2000 and 2004, seven additional countries abolished the death penalty for all crimes, and four more abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes.

The

Death

Penalty

Today

In April 1999, the United Nations Human Rights Commission passed the Resolution Supporting Worldwide Moratorium On Executions. The resolution calls on countries which have not abolished the death penalty to restrict its use of the death penalty, including not imposing it on juvenile offenders and limiting the number of offenses for which it can be imposed. Ten countries, including the United States, China, Pakistan, Rwanda and Sudan voted against the resolution. (New York Times, 4/29/99). Each year since 1997, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights has passed a resolution calling on countries that have not abolished the death penalty to establish a moratorium on executions. In April 2004, the resolution was co-sponsored by 76 UN member states. (Amnesty International, 2004).

In the United States numbers of death sentences are steadily declining from 300 in 1998 to 106 in 2009. Presently, more than half of the countries in the international community have abolished the death penalty completely, de facto, or for ordinary crimes.

However, 58 countries retain the death penalty, including China, Iran, the United States, and Vietnam all of which rank among the highest for international executions in 2003. (Amnesty International, 2010) http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/part-i-history-death-penalty

Capital punishment "Death penalty" and "Death sentence" redirect here. For other uses, see Death penalty (disambiguation) and Death sentence (disambiguation). "Execution" and "Execute" redirect here. For other uses, see Execution (disambiguation) and Execute (disambiguation). For other uses, see Capital punishment (disambiguation). Part of a series on Capital punishment Issues Debate Religion and capital punishment

Wrongful execution Current use Belarus People's Republic of China Ecuador Egypt India Iran Iraq Israel Japan Malaysia Mongolia North Korea Pakistan Russia Saudi Arabia Singapore South Korea Republic of China (Taiwan) Tonga United States Past use Australia Brazil Bulgaria Canada Denmark France Germany Italy Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Philippines Poland Portugal Romania San Marino South Africa Turkey United Kingdom Venezuela

Current methods Decapitation Electrocution Firing squad Gas chamber Hanging Lethal injection Shooting Stoning Nitrogen asphyxiation (proposed) Past methods Boiling Breaking wheel Burning Crucifixion Crushing Disembowelment Dismemberment Execution by elephant Flaying Impaling Necklacing Sawing Slow slicing Torture Other related topics Crime Death row Last meal Penology vde

Capital punishment, the death penalty, or execution is the killing of a person by judicial process as a punishment for an offense. Crimes that can result in a death penalty are known as capital crimes or capital offences. The term capital originates from Latin capitalis, literally "regarding the head" (Latin caput). Hence, a capital crime was originally one punished by the severing of the head. Capital punishment has in the past been practiced in virtually every society, although currently only 58 nations actively practice it, with 95 countries abolishing it (the remainder having not used it for 10 years or allowing it only in exceptional circumstances such as wartime).[1] It is a matter of active controversy in various countries and states, and positions can vary within a single political ideology or cultural region. In the European Union member states, Article 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union prohibits the use of capital punishment.[2] Today, most countries are considered by Amnesty International as abolitionist.[3] Amnesty International allowed a vote on a nonbinding resolution to the UN to promote the abolition of the death penalty.[4] However, over 60% of the world's population live in countries where executions take place, insofar as the four most populous countries in the world (the People's Republic of China, India, United States and Indonesia) apply the death penalty. All of them voted against the Resolution on a

Moratorium on the Use of the Death Penalty at the UN General Assembly in 2008. [5][6]
[7][8][9][10][11][12][13]

History Execution of criminals and political opponents has been used by nearly all societies both to punish crime and to suppress political dissent. In most places that practice capital punishment it is reserved for murder, espionage, treason, or as part of military justice. In some countries sexual crimes, such as rape, adultery, incest and sodomy, carry the death penalty, as do religious crimes such as apostasy in Islamic nations (the formal renunciation of the state religion). In many countries that use the death penalty, drug trafficking is also a capital offense. In China, human trafficking and serious cases of corruption are punished by the death penalty. In militaries around the world courts-martial have imposed death sentences for offenses such as cowardice, desertion, insubordination, and mutiny.[14]

Anarchist Auguste Vaillant guillotined in France in 1894 The use of formal execution extends to the beginning of recorded history. Most historical records and various primitive tribal practices indicate that the death penalty was a part of their justice system. Communal punishment for wrongdoing generally included compensation by the wrongdoer, corporal punishment, shunning, banishment and execution. Usually, compensation and shunning were enough as a form of justice.[15] The response to crime committed by neighbouring tribes or communities included formal apology, compensation or blood feuds. A blood feud or vendetta occurs when arbitration between families or tribes fails or an arbitration system is non-existent. This form of justice was common before the

emergence of an arbitration system based on state or organised religion. It may result from crime, land disputes or a code of honour. "Acts of retaliation underscore the ability of the social collective to defend itself and demonstrate to enemies (as well as potential allies) that injury to property, rights, or the person will not go unpunished."[16] However, in practice, it is often difficult to distinguish between a war of vendetta and one of conquest. Severe historical penalties include breaking wheel, boiling to death, flaying, slow slicing, disembowelment, crucifixion, impalement, crushing (including crushing by elephant), stoning, execution by burning, dismemberment, sawing, decapitation, scaphism, necklacing or blowing from a gun.[17]

The Christian Martyrs' Last Prayer, by Jean-Lon Grme (1883). Roman Colosseum. Elaborations of tribal arbitration of feuds included peace settlements often done in a religious context and compensation system. Compensation was based on the principle of substitution which might include material (e.g. cattle, slave) compensation, exchange of brides or grooms, or payment of the blood debt. Settlement rules could allow for animal blood to replace human blood, or transfers of property or blood money or in some case an offer of a person for execution. The person offered for execution did not have to be an original perpetrator of the crime because the system was based on tribes, not individuals. Blood feuds could be regulated at meetings, such as the Viking things.[18] Systems deriving from blood feuds may survive alongside more advanced legal systems or be given recognition by courts (e.g. trial by combat). One of the more modern refinements of the blood feud is the duel.

Giovanni Battista Bugatti, executioner of the Papal States between 1796 and 1865, carried out 516 executions (Bugatti pictured offering snuff to a condemned prisoner). Vatican City abolished its capital punishment statute in 1969. In certain parts of the world, nations in the form of ancient republics, monarchies or tribal oligarchies emerged. These nations were often united by common linguistic, religious or family ties. Moreover, expansion of these nations often occurred by conquest of neighbouring tribes or nations. Consequently, various classes of royalty, nobility, various commoners and slave emerged. Accordingly, the systems of tribal arbitration were submerged into a more unified system of justice which formalised the relation between the different "classes" rather than "tribes". The earliest and most famous example is Code of Hammurabi which set the different punishment and compensation according to the different class/group of victims and perpetrators. The Torah (Jewish Law), also known as the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Christian Old Testament), lays down the death penalty for murder, kidnapping, magic, violation of the Sabbath, blasphemy, and a wide range of sexual crimes, although evidence suggests that actual executions were rare.[19] A further example comes from Ancient Greece, where the Athenian legal system was first written down by Draco in about 621 BC: the death penalty was applied for a particularly wide range of crimes, though Solon later repealed Draco's code and published new laws, retaining only Draco's homicide statutes.[20] The word draconian derives from Draco's laws. The Romans also used death penalty for a wide range of offenses.[21][22] Islam on the whole accepts capital punishment. [23] The Abbasid Caliphs in Baghdad, such as Al-Mu'tadid, were often cruel in their punishments.[24] In the One Thousand and One Nights, also known as the Arabian Nights, the fictional storyteller

Sheherazade is portrayed as being the "voice of sanity and mercy", with her philosophical position being generally opposed to punishment by death. She expresses this though several of her tales, including "The Merchant and the Jinni", "The Fisherman and the Jinni", "The Three Apples", and "The Hunchback".[25]

The breaking wheel was used during the Middle Ages and was still in use into the 19th century. Similarly, in medieval and early modern Europe, before the development of modern prison systems, the death penalty was also used as a generalised form of punishment. During the reign of Henry VIII, as many as 72,000 people are estimated to have been executed.[26] In 18th century Britain there were 222 crimes which were punishable by death, including crimes such as cutting down a tree or stealing an animal.[27] Thanks to the notorious Bloody Code, 18th century (and early 19th century) Britain was a hazardous place to live. For example, Michael Hammond and his sister, Ann, whose ages were given as 7 and 11, were reportedly hanged at King's Lynn on Wednesday, September 28, 1708 for theft. The local press did not, however, consider the executions of two children newsworthy.[28] Although many are executed in China each year in the present day, there was a time in Tang Dynasty China when the death penalty was abolished. [29] This was in the year 747, enacted by Emperor Xuanzong of Tang (r. 712756). When abolishing the death penalty Xuanzong ordered his officials to refer to the nearest regulation by analogy when sentencing those found guilty of crimes for which the prescribed punishment was execution. Thus depending on the severity of the crime a punishment of severe scourging with the thick rod or of exile to the remote Lingnan region might take the place of capital punishment. However the death penalty was restored only twelve years later in 759 in response to the An Lushan Rebellion.[30] At this time in China only the emperor had the authority to sentence criminals to execution. Under Xuanzong

capital punishment was relatively infrequent, with only 24 executions in the year 730 and 58 executions in the year 736.[29]

Ling Chi execution by slow slicing in Beijing around 1910. The two most common forms of execution in China in the Tang period were strangulation and decapitation, which were the prescribed methods of execution for 144 and 89 offenses respectively. Strangulation was the prescribed sentence for lodging an accusation against one's parents or grandparents with a magistrate, scheming to kidnap a person and sell them into slavery and opening a coffin while desecrating a tomb. Decapitation was the method of execution prescribed for more serious crimes such as treason and sedition. Interestingly, and despite the great discomfort involved, most Chinese during the Tang preferred strangulation to decaptitation, as a result of the traditional Chinese belief that the body is a gift from the parents and that it is therefore disrespectful to one's ancestors to die without returning one's body to the grave intact. Some further forms of capital punishment were practiced in Tang China, of which the first two that follow at least were extralegal. The first of these was scourging to death with the thick rod which was common throughout the Tang especially in cases of gross corruption. The second was truncation, in which the convicted person was cut in two at the waist with a fodder knife and then left to bleed to death. [31] A further form of execution called Ling Chi (slow slicing), or death by/of a thousand cuts, was used in China from the close of the Tang dynasty in roughly 900 CE to its abolition in 1905. When a minister of the fifth grade or above received a death sentence the emperor might grant him a special dispensation allowing him to commit suicide in lieu of execution. Even when this privilege was not granted, the law required that the

condemned minister be provided with food and ale by his keepers and transported to the execution ground in a cart rather than having to walk there. Nearly all executions under the Tang took place in public as a warning to the population. The heads of the executed were displayed on poles or spears. When local authorities decapitated a convicted criminal, the head was boxed and sent to the capital as proof of identity and that the execution had taken place. In Tang China, when a person was sentenced to decapitation for rebellion or sedition, punishment was also imposed on their relatives, whether or not the relatives were guilty of participation in the crime. In such cases fathers of the convicted under 79 years of age and sons aged over 15 were strangled. Sons under 15, daughters, mothers, wives, concubines, grandfathers, grandsons, brothers and sisters were enslaved and uncles and nephews were banished to the remotest reaches of the empire. Sometimes the tombs of the family's ancestors were levelled, the ancestors' coffins were destroyed and their bones scattered.[31]

Mexican execution by firing squad, 1916 Despite its wide use, calls for reform were not unknown. The 12th century Sephardic legal scholar, Moses Maimonides, wrote, "It is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent man to death." He argued that executing an accused criminal on anything less than absolute certainty would lead to a slippery slope of decreasing burdens of proof, until we would be convicting merely "according to the judge's caprice." His concern was maintaining popular respect for law, and he saw errors of commission as much more threatening than errors of omission. The last several centuries have seen the emergence of modern nation-states. Almost fundamental to the concept of nation state is the idea of citizenship. This caused justice to be increasingly associated with equality and universality, which in Europe saw an emergence of the concept of natural rights. Another important aspect is that

emergence of standing police forces and permanent penitential institutions. The death penalty became an increasingly unnecessary deterrent in prevention of minor crimes such as theft. The argument that deterrence, rather than retribution, is the main justification for punishment is a hallmark of the rational choice theory and can be traced to Cesare Beccaria whose well-known treatise On Crimes and Punishments (1764), condemned torture and the death penalty and Jeremy Bentham who twice critiqued the death penalty.[32] Additionally, in countries like Britain, law enforcement officials became alarmed when juries tended to acquit non-violent felons rather than risk a conviction that could result in execution.[citation
needed]

Moving executions there

inside prisons and away from public view was prompted by official recognition of the phenomenon reported first by Beccaria in Italy and later by Charles Dickens and Karl Marx of increased violent criminality at the times and places of executions.

Saint Nicholas of Myra seizes the executioner's sword in order to save at the last moment three wrongly condemned prisoners (oil painting by Ilya Repin, 1888, State Russian Museum). The 20th century was one of the bloodiest of the human history. Massive killing occurred as the resolution of war between nation-states. A large part of execution was summary execution of enemy combatants. Also, modern military organisations employed capital punishment as a means of maintaining military discipline. The Soviets, for example, executed 158,000 soldiers for desertion during World War II.[33] In the past, cowardice, absence without leave, desertion, insubordination, looting, shirking under enemy fire and disobeying orders were often crimes punishable by death (see decimation and running the gauntlet). One method of execution since firearms came into common use has almost invariably been firing squad. Moreover, various authoritarian statesfor example those with fascist or communist governmentsemployed the death penalty as a potent means of political oppression.

According to the declassified Soviet archives, 681,692 people were shot in 1937 and 1938 alone an average of 1,000 executions a day. [34] Partly as a response to such excessive punishment, civil organisations have started to place increasing emphasis on the concept of human rights and abolition of the death penalty. Among countries around the world, almost all European and many Pacific Area states (including Australia, New Zealand and Timor Leste), and Canada have abolished capital punishment. In Latin America, most states have completely abolished the use of capital punishment, while some countries, such as Brazil, allow for capital punishment only in exceptional situations, such as treason committed during wartime. The United States (the federal government and 35 of the states), Guatemala, most of the Caribbean and the majority of democracies in Asia (e.g. Japan and India) and Africa (e.g. Botswana and Zambia) retain it. South Africa, which is probably the most developed African nation, and which has been a democracy since 1994, does not have the death penalty. This fact is currently quite controversial in that country, due to the high levels of violent crime, including murder and rape.[35] Advocates of the death penalty argue that it deters crime, is a good tool for police and prosecutors (in plea bargaining for example),[36] improves the community by making sure that convicted criminals do not offend again, provides closure to surviving victims or loved ones, and is a just penalty for their crime. Opponents of capital punishment argue that it has led to the execution of wrongfully convicted, that it discriminates against minorities and the poor, that it does not deter criminals more than life imprisonment, that it encourages a "culture of violence", that it is more expensive than life imprisonment,[37] and that it violates human rights. Movements towards humane execution Further information: Cruel and unusual punishment

A gurney in the San Quentin State Prison in the United States on which prisoners are restrained during an execution by lethal injection. In early New England, public executions were a very solemn and sorrowful occasion, sometimes attended by large crowds, who also listened to a Gospel message [38] and remarks by local preachers and politicians. The Connecticut Courant records one such public execution on December 1, 1803, saying, "The assembly conducted through the whole in a very orderly and solemn manner, so much so, as to occasion an observing gentleman acquainted with other countries as well as this, to say that such an assembly, so decent and solemn, could not be collected anywhere but in New England."[39] Trends in most of the world have long been to move to less painful, or more humane, executions. France developed the guillotine for this reason in the final years of the 18th century while Britain banned drawing and quartering in the early 19th century. Hanging by turning the victim off a ladder or by kicking a stool or a bucket, which causes death by suffocation, was replaced by long drop "hanging" where the subject is dropped a longer distance to dislocate the neck and sever the spinal cord. Shah of Persia introduced throat-cutting and blowing from a gun as quick and painless alternatives to more tormentous methods of executions used at that time.[40] In the U.S., the electric chair and the gas chamber were introduced as more humane alternatives to hanging, but have been almost entirely superseded by lethal injection, which in turn has been criticised as being too painful. Nevertheless, some countries still employ slow hanging methods, beheading by sword and even stoning, although the latter is rarely employed. Abolitionism

The death penalty was banned in China between 747 and 759. In Japan, Emperor Saga abolished the death penalty in 818 under the influence of Shinto and it lasted until 1156. Therefore, capital punishment was not executed for 338 years in ancient Japan. In England, a public statement of opposition was included in The Twelve Conclusions of the Lollards, written in 1395. Sir Thomas More's Utopia, published in 1516, debated the benefits of the death penalty in dialogue form, coming to no firm conclusion. More recent opposition to the death penalty stemmed from the book of the Italian Cesare Beccaria Dei Delitti e Delle Pene ("On Crimes and Punishments"), published in 1764. In this book, Beccaria aimed to demonstrate not only the injustice, but even the futility from the point of view of social welfare, of torture and the death penalty. Influenced by the book, Grand Duke Leopold II of Habsburg, famous enlightened monarch and future Emperor of Austria, abolished the death penalty in the then-independent Grand Duchy of Tuscany, the first permanent abolition in modern times. On November 30, 1786, after having de facto blocked capital executions (the last was in 1769), Leopold promulgated the reform of the penal code that abolished the death penalty and ordered the destruction of all the instruments for capital execution in his land. In 2000 Tuscany's regional authorities instituted an annual holiday on November 30 to commemorate the event. The event is commemorated on this day by 300 cities around the world celebrating Cities for Life Day.

Peter Leopold II, Grand Duke of Tuscany, by Joseph Hickel, 1769 The Roman Republic banned capital punishment in 1849. Venezuela followed suit and abolished the death penalty in 1863 and San Marino did so in 1865. The last execution in San Marino had taken place in 1468. In Portugal, after legislative proposals in 1852 and 1863, the death penalty was abolished in 1867. In the United Kingdom, it was abolished for murder (leaving only treason, piracy with violence, Arson in royal dockyards and a number of wartime military offences as

capital crimes) for a five year experiment in 1965 and permanently in 1969, the last execution having taken place in 1964. It was abolished for all peacetime offences in 1998.[41] Abolition occurred in Canada in 1976, in France in 1981, and in Australia in 1973 (although the state of Western Australia retained the penalty until 1984). In 1977, the United Nations General Assembly affirmed in a formal resolution that throughout the world, it is desirable to "progressively restrict the number of offenses for which the death penalty might be imposed, with a view to the desirability of abolishing this punishment".[42] In the United States, Michigan was the first state to ban the death penalty, on May 18, 1846.[43] The death penalty was declared unconstitutional between 1972 and 1976 based on the Furman v. Georgia case, but the 1976 Gregg v. Georgia case once again permitted the death penalty under certain circumstances. Further limitations were placed on the death penalty in Atkins v. Virginia (death penalty unconstitutional for persons with IQ below 70, the baseline for mental retardation) and Roper v. Simmons (death penalty unconstitutional if defendant was under age 18 at the time the crime was committed). Currently, as of March 18, 2009, 15 states of the U.S. and the District of Columbia ban capital punishment. Of the states where the death penalty is permitted, California has the largest number of inmates on death row, while Texas has been the most active in carrying out executions (approximately one third of all executions since the practice was again legalized). The latest country to abolish the death penalty for all crimes was Togo, on June 23, 2009.[44] Human rights activists oppose the death penalty, calling it "cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment". Amnesty International considers it to be "the ultimate denial of Human Rights".[45] Contemporary use Global distribution Since World War II there has been a trend toward abolishing the death penalty. In 1977, 16 countries were abolitionist. According to information published by Amnesty International in 2010, 95 countries had abolished capital punishment altogether, 9 had done so for all offences except under special circumstances, and 35 had not

used it for at least 10 years or were under a moratorium. The other 58 retained the death penalty in active use.[46]

Criminal procedure Criminal trials and convictions Rights of the accused Fair Jury Presumption Exclusionary Self-incrimination Double jeopardy2 Verdict Conviction Not Directed verdict Sentencing Mandatory Custodial Dangerous Capital Execution Cruel and unusual Life Indefinite Post-sentencing offender4,
5

trial trial

Speedy of

trial Counsel

innocence rule1

Acquittal proven3

Suspended

punishment warrant punishment

Parole Tariff Miscarriage Exoneration

6

Probation Life of licence6 justice Pardon

Sexually violent predator legislation1 Related areas of law Criminal Criminal Civil procedure Portals Law Criminal justice law defenses Evidence

1 2 3 4 5 6

US courts. Not in English/Welsh courts. Scottish courts. English/Welsh courts. Canadian courts. UK courts.

vde

According to Amnesty International, at least 714 executions were known to have been carried out in 18 countries in 2009. In addition, there are countries which do not publish information on the use of capital punishment, most significantly China, which is estimated to execute hundreds of people each year. At least 17,000 people worldwide were under sentence of death at the beginning of 2010.[47] Country Number executed in 2009 People's Republic of Officially not released.[48][49] At least 1700 (estimated), may China Iran Iraq Saudi Arabia United States Yemen be as many as 10,000 per year.[50] At least 388 At least 120 At least 69 52 At least 30

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Sudan Vietnam Syria Japan Egypt Libya Bangladesh Thailand Singapore Botswana Malaysia North Korea

At least 9 At least 9 At least 8 7 At least 5 At least 4 3 2 At least 1 1 Unreleased Unreleased

The use of the death penalty is becoming increasingly restrained in retentionist countries.[citation needed] Singapore, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and the U.S. are the only developed countries that have retained the death penalty. The death penalty was overwhelmingly practiced in poor and authoritarian states, which often employed the death penalty as a tool of political oppression. During the 1980s, the democratisation of Latin America swelled the rank of abolitionist countries. This was soon followed by the fall of communism in Central and Eastern Europe, which then aspired to enter the EU. In these countries, the public support for the death penalty varies but is generally supported.[51] The European Union and the Council of Europe both strictly require member states not to practice the death penalty (see Capital punishment in Europe). On the other hand, rapid industrialisation in Asia has been increasing the number of developed retentionist countries. In these countries, the death penalty enjoys strong public support, and the matter receives little attention from the government or the media. This trend has been followed by some African and Middle Eastern countries where support for the death penalty is high. Some countries have resumed practicing the death penalty after having suspended executions for long periods. The United States suspended executions in 1967 but resumed them in 1977, then again on 25 September 2007 to 16 April 2008; there

was no execution in India between 1995 and 2004; and Sri Lanka declared an end to its moratorium on the death penalty on 20 Nov. 2004,[52] although it has not yet performed any executions. The Philippines re-introduced the death penalty in 1993 after abolishing it in 1987, but abolished it again in 2006. Execution for drug-related offences Some countries that retain the death penalty for murder and other violent crimes do not execute offenders for drug-related crimes. The following is a list of countries that currently have statutory provisions for the death penalty for drug-related offences. Afghanistan Bangladesh Brunei People's Republic of China[53] Republic of China[54] Also available on Chinese Wikisource. Egypt Indonesia Iran Iraq Kuwait Laos Malaysia Oman Pakistan Saudi Arabia Singapore Thailand Vietnam Zimbabwe United Arab Emirates In specific countries See also: Use of capital punishment by nation

Use of the death penalty around the world (as of June 2009). Abolished for all offenses (94) Abolished for all offenses except under special circumstances (10) Retains, though not used for at least 10 years (35) Retains death penalty (58)* *Note that, while laws vary between U.S. states, it is considered retentionist because the federal death penalty is still in active use. For further information about capital punishment in these countries or regions, see: Australia Canada People's Republic of China (excluding Hong Kong and Macau) Europe India Iran Iraq Japan New Zealand Pakistan Philippines Russia Singapore Taiwan United Kingdom United States Juvenile offenders The death penalty for juvenile offenders (criminals aged under 18 years at the time of their crime) has become increasingly rare. Since 1990, nine countries have executed offenders who were juveniles at the time of their crimes: The People's Republic of China (PRC), Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, the United States and Yemen.[55] The PRC, Pakistan, the United States and Yemen have since raised the minimum age to 18. [56] Amnesty International has recorded 61 verified executions since then, in several countries, of both juveniles and adults who had been convicted of committing their offenses as juveniles.[57] The PRC does not allow for the execution of those under 18, but child executions have reportedly taken place.[58] Starting in 1642 within British America, an estimated 365[59] juvenile offenders were executed by the states and federal government of the United States. [60] The United

States Supreme Court abolished capital punishment for offenders under the age of 16 in Thompson v. Oklahoma (1988), and for all juveniles in Roper v. Simmons (2005). In addition, in 2002, the United States Supreme Court declared unconstitutional the execution of individuals with mental retardation, in Atkins v. Virginia.[61] Between 2005 and May 2008, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Yemen were reported to have executed child offenders, the most being from Iran.[62] The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which forbids capital punishment for juveniles under article 37(a), has been signed by all countries and ratified, except for Somalia and the United States (notwithstanding the latter's Supreme Court decisions abolishing the practice).[63] The UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights maintains that the death penalty for juveniles has become contrary to a jus cogens of customary international law. A majority of countries are also party to the U.N. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (whose Article 6.5 also states that "Sentence of death shall not be imposed for crimes committed by persons below eighteen years of age..."). In Japan, the minimum age for the death penalty is 18 as mandated by the internationals standards. But under Japanese law, anyone under 20 is considered a juvenile. There are three men currently on death row for crimes they committed at age 18 or 19. Iran Iran, despite its ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is currently the world's biggest executioner Campaign. Iran accounts for two-thirds of the global total of such executions, and currently has roughly 140 people on death row for crimes committed as juveniles (up from 71 in 2007).[64][65] The past executions of Mahmoud Asgari, Ayaz Marhoni and Makwan Moloudzadeh became international symbols of Iran's child capital punishment and the judicial system that hands down such sentences.[66][67] Somalia of juvenile offenders, for which it has received international condemnation; the country's record is the focus of the Stop Child Executions

There is evidence that child executions are taking place in the parts of Somalia controlled by the Islamic Courts Union (ICU). In October 2008, a girl, Aisho Ibrahim Dhuhulow was buried up to her neck at a football stadium, then stoned to death in front of more than 1,000 people. The stoning occurred after she had allegedly pleaded guilty to adultery in a shariah court in Kismayo, a city controlled by the ICU. According to a local leader associated with the ICU, she had stated that she wanted shariah law to apply.[68] However, other sources state that the victim had been crying, that she begged for mercy and had to be forced into the hole before being buried up to her neck in the ground. [69] Amnesty International later learned that the girl was in fact 13 years old and had been arrested by the al-Shabab militia after she had reported being gang-raped by three men.[70] However, Somalia's recently established Transitional Federal Government announced in November 2009 that it plans to ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child. This move was lauded by UNICEF as a welcome attempt to secure children's rights in the country.[71] Methods Main article: List of methods of capital punishment The following methods of execution are still being used in 2010:[72][73][74][75][76] Beheading (Saudi Arabia, Qatar) Electric chair (Alabama, Nebraska, Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, South Carolina, Florida, Illinois and Kentucky in the USA, Philippines) Falling (Iran, Chile) Gas chamber (Wyoming, California, Missouri and Arizona in the USA) Hanging (Washington, Delaware and New Hampshire in the USA, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Mongolia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen, Egypt, India, Mongolia, the Philippines, Burma, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Ecuador, Zimbabwe, Turkey, South Korea, Malawi, Liberia, Chad) Lethal injection (all states in the USA that are using the capital punishment, except from Nebraska, with electric chair as an alternative, Philippines, Guatemala, Thailand, the People's Republic of China, Taiwan, Vietnam) Shooting (Utah, Idaho and Oklahoma in the USA, the People's Republic of China, Vietnam, The Russian Federation, Belarus, Israel, Lebanon, Philippines,

Bangladesh, Egypt, Cuba, Chile, Grenada, North Korea, Turkmenistan, Haiti, Indonesia, Armenia, Madagascar, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Burkino Faso, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Chad) Stabbing (Somalia) Stoning (Iran)

Controversy and debate Main article: Capital punishment debate Capital punishment is often the subject of controversy. Opponents of the death penalty argue that it has led to the execution of innocent people, that its main motive is not justice but revenge and to save money, that life imprisonment is an effective and less expensive substitute,[37] that it discriminates against minorities and the poor, and that it violates the criminal's right to life. Supporters believe that the penalty is justified for murderers by the principle of retribution, that life imprisonment is not an equally effective deterrent, and that the death penalty affirms the right to life by punishing those who violate it in the strictest form.[citation needed] Wrongful executions Main article: Wrongful execution Wrongful execution is a miscarriage of justice occurring when an innocent person is put to death by capital punishment.[77] Many people have been proclaimed innocent victims of the death penalty.[78][79][80] Some have claimed that as many as 39 executions have been carried out in the U.S. in face of compelling evidence of innocence or serious doubt about guilt. Newly available DNA evidence has allowed the exoneration of more than 15 death row inmates since 1992 in the U.S., [81] but DNA evidence is only available in a fraction of capital cases. In the UK, reviews prompted by the Criminal Cases Review Commission have resulted in one pardon and three exonerations[citation
[citation needed] needed]

with compensation paid for people executed between

1950 and 1953, when the execution rate in England and Wales averaged 17 per year.

Public opinion This section needs additional citations for verification.

Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced

material may be challenged and removed. (January 2010) In Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Latin America, and Western Europe, the death penalty has become relatively unpopular, with the majority of the population opposing it.[82] However certain cases of mass murder, terrorism, and child murder occasionally cause waves of support for reinstitution, such as the Greyhound bus beheading, Port Arthur massacre and Bali bombings, though these are generally emotionally based and fade away.[citation needed] Between 2000 and 2010, support for the return of capital punishment in Canada dropped from 44% to 40%, and opposition to it returning rose from 43% to 46%.[83] Abolition was often adopted due to political change, as when countries shifted from authoritarianism to democracy, or when it became an entry condition for the European Union. The United States is a notable exception: some states have had bans on capital punishment for decades (the earliest is Michigan, where it was abolished in 1847), while others actively use it today. The death penalty there remains a contentious issue which is hotly debated. Elsewhere, however, it is rare for the death penalty to be abolished as a result of an active public discussion of its merits.[citation needed] In abolitionist countries, debate is sometimes revived by particularly brutal murders, though few countries have brought it back after abolishing it. However, a spike in serious, violent crimes, such as murders or terrorist attacks, has prompted some countries (such as Sri Lanka and Jamaica) to effectively end the moratorium on the death penalty. In retentionist countries, the debate is sometimes revived when a miscarriage of justice has occurred, though this tends to cause legislative efforts to improve the judicial process rather than to abolish the death penalty. A Gallup International poll from 2000 said that "Worldwide support was expressed in favor of the death penalty, with just more than half (52%) indicating that they were in favour of this form of punishment." A number of other polls and studies have been done in recent years with various results. In a poll completed by Gallup in October 2009, 65% of Americans supported the death penalty for persons convicted of murder, while 31% were against and 5% did not have an opinion.[84]

In the U.S., surveys have long shown a majority in favor of capital punishment. An ABC News survey in July 2006 found 65 percent in favour of capital punishment, consistent with other polling since 2000.[85] About half the American public says the death penalty is not imposed frequently enough and 60 percent believe it is applied fairly, according to a Gallup poll from May 2006.[86] Yet surveys also show the public is more divided when asked to choose between the death penalty and life without parole, or when dealing with juvenile offenders. [87] Roughly six in 10 tell Gallup they do not believe capital punishment deters murder and majorities believe at least one innocent person has been executed in the past five years.[88] Diminished capacity In the United States, there has been an evolving debate as to whether capital punishment should apply to persons with diminished mental capacity. In Ford v. Wainwright,[89] the Supreme Court held that the Eighth Amendment prohibits the state from carrying out the death penalty on an individual who is insane, and that properly raised issues of execution-time sanity must be determined in a proceeding satisfying the minimum requirements of due process. In Atkins v. Virginia,[90] the Supreme Court addressed whether the Eighth Amendment prohibits the execution of mentally retarded persons. The Court noted that a "national consensus" had developed against it.[91] While such executions are still permitted for people with marginal retardation, evidence of retardation is allowed as a mitigating circumstance. However, a recent case of Teresa Lewis who was the first woman executed in Virginia since 1912, proved to be very controversial because Governor Bob McDonnell refused to commute her sentence to life imprisonment, even though she had an IQ of 70.[92][93] International organisations The United Nations introduced a resolution during the General Assembly's 62nd sessions in 2007 calling for a universal ban.[94][95] The approval of a draft resolution by the Assembly's third committee, which deals with human rights issues, voted 99 to 52, with 33 abstentions, in favour of the resolution on November 15, 2007 and was put to a vote in the Assembly on December 18. [96][97][98] Again in 2008, a large majority of states from all regions adopted a second resolution calling for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty in the UN General Assembly (Third Committee) on November 20. 105 countries voted in favour of the draft resolution, 48 voted against and 31 abstained. A range of amendments proposed by a small minority of pro-death

penalty countries were overwhelmingly defeated. It had in 2007 passed a nonbinding resolution (by 104 to 54, with 29 abstentions) by asking its member states for "a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty".[99]

Article 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union affirms the prohibition on capital punishment in the EU A number of regional conventions prohibit the death penalty, most notably, the Sixth Protocol (abolition in time of peace) and the Thirteenth Protocol (abolition in all circumstances) to the European Convention on Human Rights. The same is also stated under the Second Protocol in the American Convention on Human Rights, which, however has not been ratified by all countries in the Americas, most notably Canada and the United States. Most relevant operative international treaties do not require its prohibition for cases of serious crime, most notably, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This instead has, in common with several other treaties, an optional protocol prohibiting capital punishment and promoting its wider abolition.[100] Several international organizations have made the abolition of the death penalty (during time of peace) a requirement of membership, most notably the European Union (EU) and the Council of Europe. The EU and the Council of Europe are willing to accept a moratorium as an interim measure. Thus, while Russia is a member of the Council of Europe, and practices the death penalty in law, it has not made public use of it since becoming a member of the Council. Other states, while having abolished de jure the death penalty in time of peace and de facto in all circumstances, have not ratified Protocol no.13 yet and therefore have no international obligation to refrain

from using the death penalty in time of war or imminent threat of war (Armenia, Latvia, Poland and Spain).[101] Italy is the most recent to ratify it, on March 3, 2009.[102] Turkey has recently, as a move towards EU membership, undergone a reform of its legal system. Previously there was a de facto moratorium on the death penalty in Turkey as the last execution took place in 1984. The death penalty was removed from peacetime law in August 2002, and in May 2004 Turkey amended its constitution in order to remove capital punishment in all circumstances. It ratified Protocol no. 13 to the European Convention on Human Rights in February 2006. As a result, Europe is a continent free of the death penalty in practice, all states but Russia, which has entered a moratorium, having ratified the Sixth Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights, with the sole exception of Belarus, which is not a member of the Council of Europe. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has been lobbying for Council of Europe observer states who practice the death penalty, the U.S. and Japan, to abolish it or lose their observer status. In addition to banning capital punishment for EU member states, the EU has also banned detainee transfers in cases where the receiving party may seek the death penalty.[citation needed] Among non-governmental organizations (NGOs), Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are noted for their opposition to capital punishment. A number of such NGOs, as well as trade unions, local councils and bar associations formed a World Coalition Against the Death Penalty in 2002. Religious views Buddhism There is disagreement among Buddhists as to whether or not Buddhism forbids the death penalty. The first of the Five Precepts (Panca-sila) is to abstain from destruction of life. Chapter 10 of the Dhammapada states: Everyone fears punishment; everyone fears death, just as you do. Therefore do not kill or cause to kill. Everyone fears punishment; everyone loves life, as you do. Therefore do not kill or cause to kill. Chapter 26, the final chapter of the Dhammapada, states, "Him I call a brahmin who has put aside weapons and renounced violence toward all creatures. He neither kills

nor helps others to kill." These sentences are interpreted by many Buddhists (especially in the West) as an injunction against supporting any legal measure which might lead to the death penalty. However, as is often the case with the interpretation of scripture, there is dispute on this matter. Historically, most states where the official religion is Buddhism have imposed capital punishment for some offenses. One notable exception is the abolition of the death penalty by the Emperor Saga of Japan in 818. This lasted until 1165, although in private manors executions continued to be conducted as a form of retaliation. Japan still imposes the death penalty, although some recent justice ministers have refused to sign death warrants, citing their Buddhist beliefs as their reason.[103] Other Buddhist-majority states vary in their policy. For example, Bhutan has abolished the death penalty, but Thailand still retains it, although Buddhism is the official religion in both. Judaism The official teachings of Judaism approve the death penalty in principle but the standard of proof required for application of death penalty is extremely stringent. In practice, it has been abolished by various Talmudic decisions, making the situations in which a death sentence could be passed effectively impossible and hypothetical. A capital case could not be tried by a normal Beit Din of three judges, it can only be adjudicated by a Sanhedrin of a minimum of twenty-three judges.[104] Forty years before the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE, i.e. in 30 CE, the Sanhedrin effectively abolished capital punishment, making it a hypothetical upper limit on the severity of punishment, fitting in finality for God alone to use, not fallible people.[105] The 12th century Jewish legal scholar, Maimonides said: "It is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death."[106] Maimonides argued that executing a defendant on anything less than absolute certainty would lead to a slippery slope of decreasing burdens of proof, until we would be convicting merely "according to the judge's caprice". Maimonides was concerned about the need for the law to guard itself in public perceptions, to preserve its majesty and retain the people's respect.[107] Islam

Scholars of Islam[who?] hold it to be permissible but the victim or the family of the victim has the right to pardon. In Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh), to forbid what is not forbidden is forbidden. Consequently, it is impossible to make a case for abolition of the death penalty, which is explicitly endorsed. Sharia Law or Islamic law may require capital punishment, there is great variation within Islamic nations as to actual capital punishment. Apostasy in Islam and stoning to death in Islam are controversial topics. Furthermore, as expressed in the Qur'an, capital punishment is condoned. Although the Qur'an prescribes the death penalty for several hadd (fixed) crimesincluding rapemurder is not among them. Instead, murder is treated as a civil crime and is covered by the law of qisas (retaliation), whereby the relatives of the victim decide whether the offender is punished with death by the authorities or made to pay diyah (wergild) as compensation.[108] "If anyone kills personunless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land it would be as if he killed all people. And if anyone saves a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all people" (Qur'an 5:32). "Spreading mischief in the land" can mean many different things, but is generally interpreted to mean those crimes that affect the community as a whole, and destabilise the society. Crimes that have fallen under this description have included: treason, apostasy, piracy (essentially armed robbery), murder, terrorism, rape including paedophilia, adultery, homosexual intercourse.[109] However, there is also a minority view within some Muslims that capital punishment is not justified in the light of Qur'an.[110] Christianity Although some[who?] interpret that Jesus's teachings condemn violence in The Gospel of Luke and The Gospel of Matthew regarding Turning the other cheek, and Pericope Adulterae in which Jesus intervenes in the stoning of an adulteress,( most scholars[111]
[112]

agree that this passage was "certainly not part of the original text of St John's

Gospel."[113]) and others consider Romans 13:34 to support death penalty. Many Christians have understood that Jesus' doctrine of peace speaks to personal ethics and is distinct from civil government's duty to punish crime. Also, Leviticus 20:227 has a whole list of situations in which execution is supported. Christian positions on this vary.[114] The sixth commandment (fifth in the Roman Catholic and Lutheran

churches) is preached as 'Thou shalt not kill' by some denominations and as 'Thou shalt not murder' by others. As some denominations do not have a hard-line stance on the subject, Christians of such denominations are free to make a personal decision.[115] Roman Catholic Church The Church classes capital punishment as a form of "lawful slaying",[clarification
needed]

view derived from the thought of theological authorities such as Thomas Aquinas, who accepted the death penalty as a necessary deterrent and prevention method, but not as a means of vengeance. (See also Aquinas on the death penalty). The Roman Catechism states this teaching thus: Another kind of lawful slaying belongs to the civil authorities, to whom is entrusted power of life and death, by the legal and judicious exercise of which they punish the guilty and protect the innocent. The just use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this Commandment which prohibits murder. The end of the Commandment is the preservation and security of human life. Now the punishments inflicted by the civil authority, which is the legitimate avenger of crime, naturally tend to this end, since they give security to life by repressing outrage and violence. Hence these words of David: In the morning I put to death all the wicked of the land, that I might cut off all the workers of iniquity from the city of the Lord.[116] In Evangelium Vitae, Pope John Paul II suggested that capital punishment should be avoided unless it is the only way to defend society from the offender in question, opining that punishment "ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."[117] The most recent edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church restates this view.[118] That the assessment of the contemporary situation advanced by John Paul II is not binding on the faithful was confirmed by Cardinal Ratzinger when he wrote in 2004 that, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the

Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.
[119]

While all Catholics must therefore hold that "the infliction of capital punishment is not contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church, and the power of the State to visit upon culprits the penalty of death derives much authority from revelation and from the writings of theologians", the matter of "the advisability of exercising that power is, of course, an affair to be determined upon other and various considerations."[120] Southern Baptist Southern Baptist's support the fair and equitable use of capital punishment for those guilty of murder or treasonous acts.[121] Anglican and Episcopalian The Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops condemned the death penalty in 1988: This Conference: ... 3. Urges the Church to speak out against: ... (b) all governments who practice capital punishment, and encourages them to find alternative ways of sentencing offenders so that the divine dignity of every human being is respected and yet justice is pursued;....[122] United Methodist Church The United Methodist Church, along with other Methodist churches, also condemns capital punishment, saying that it cannot accept retribution or social vengeance as a reason for taking human life.[123] The Church also holds that the death penalty falls unfairly and unequally upon marginalised persons including the poor, the uneducated, ethnic and religious minorities, and persons with mental and emotional illnesses.[124] The General Conference of the United Methodist Church calls for its bishops to uphold opposition to capital punishment and for governments to enact an immediate moratorium on carrying out the death penalty sentence. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America

In a 1991 social policy statement, the ELCA officially took a stand to oppose the death penalty. It states that revenge is a primary motivation for capital punishment policy and that true healing can only take place through repentance and forgiveness.
[125]

Other Protestants Several key leaders early in the Protestant Reformation, including Martin Luther and John Calvin, followed the traditional reasoning in favour of capital punishment, and the Lutheran Church's Augsburg Confession explicitly defended it. Some Protestant groups have cited Genesis 9:56, Romans 13:34, and Leviticus 20:127 as the basis for permitting the death penalty.[126] Mennonites, Church of the Brethren and Friends have opposed the death penalty since their founding, and continue to be strongly opposed to it today. These groups, along with other Christians opposed to capital punishment, have cited Christ's Sermon on the Mount (transcribed in Matthew Chapter 57) and Sermon on the Plain (transcribed in Luke 6:1749). In both sermons, Christ tells his followers to turn the other cheek and to love their enemies, which these groups believe mandates nonviolence, including opposition to the death penalty. Mormons The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (also called Mormons) neither promotes nor opposes capital punishment. They officially state it is a "matter to be decided solely by the prescribed processes of civil law."[127] Eastern Orthodox Christianity Eastern Orthodox Christianity does not officially condemn nor endorse capital punishment. It states that it is not a totally objectionable thing, but also that its abolishment can be driven by genuine Christian values, especially stressing the need for mercy.[128] Esoteric Christianity The Rosicrucian Fellowship and many other Christian esoteric schools condemn capital punishment in all circumstances.[129][130]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment

Hukuman mati http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukuman_mati

Hukuman mati di dunia Keterangan: Biru: dihapus untuk semua kejahatan Hijau: dihapus untuk kejahatan biasa tetapi tidak untuk luar Oranye: secara praktis telah menghapus Merah: masih dilakukan

biasa (perang)

Hukuman mati ialah suatu hukuman atau vonis yang dijatuhkan pengadilan (atau tanpa pengadilan) sebagai bentuk hukuman terberat yang dijatuhkan atas seseorang akibat perbuatannya. Pada tahun 2005, setidaknya 2.148 orang dieksekusi di 22 negara, termasuk Indonesia. Dari data tersebut 94% praktek hukuman mati hanya dilakukan di empat negara: Iran, Tiongkok, Arab Saudi, dan Amerika Serikat. Metode Dalam sejarah, dikenal beberapa cara pelaksanaan hukuman mati: Hukuman pancung: hukuman dengan cara potong kepala

Sengatan listrik: hukuman dengan cara duduk di kursi yang kemudian dialiri listrik bertegangan tinggi Hukuman gantung: hukuman dengan cara digantung di tiang gantungan Suntik mati: hukuman dengan cara disuntik obat yang dapat membunuh Hukuman tembak: hukuman dengan cara menembak jantung seseorang, biasanya pada hukuman ini terpidana harus menutup mata untuk tidak melihat.

Rajam: hukuman dengan cara dilempari batu hingga mati

Replika guillotine Perancis era abad ke-17 dan ke-18. [sunting] Kontroversi Studi ilmiah secara konsisten gagal menunjukkan adanya bukti yang meyakinkan bahwa hukuman mati membuat efek jera dan efektif dibanding jenis hukuman lainnya. Survey yang dilakukan PBB pada 1998 dan 2002 tentang hubungan antara praktek hukuman mati dan angka kejahatan pembunuhan menunjukkan, praktek hukuman mati lebih buruk daripada penjara seumur hidup dalam memberikan efek jera pada pidana pembunuhan. Tingkat kriminalitas berhubungan erat dengan masalah kesejahteraan atau kemiskinan suatu masyarakat dan dan berfungsi atau tidaknya institusi penegakan hukum. Dukungan hukuman mati didasari argumen diantaranya bahwa hukuman mati untuk pembunuhan sadis akan mencegah banyak orang untuk membunuh karena gentar akan hukuman yang sangat berat. Jika pada hukuman penjara penjahat bisa jera dan bisa juga membunuh lagi jika tidak jera,pada hukuman mati penjahat pasti tidak akan bisa membunuh lagi karena sudah dihukum mati dan itu hakikatnya memelihara kehidupan yang lebih luas. Dalam berbagai kasus banyak pelaku

kejahatan yang merupakan residivis yang terus berulang kali melakukan kejahatan karena ringannya hukuman. Seringkali penolakan hukuman mati hanya didasarkan pada sisi kemanusiaan terhadap pelaku tanpa melihat sisi kemanusiaan dari korban sendiri,keluarga, kerabat ataupun masyarakat yang tergantung pada korban.Lain halnya bila memang keluarga korban sudah memaafkan pelaku tentu vonis bisa diubah dengan prasyarat yang jelas. Hingga Juni 2006 hanya 68 negara yang masih menerapkan praktek hukuman mati, termasuk Indonesia, dan lebih dari setengah negara-negara di dunia telah menghapuskan praktek hukuman mati. Ada 88 negara yang telah menghapuskan hukuman mati untuk seluruh kategori kejahatan, 11 negara menghapuskan hukuman mati untuk kategori kejahatan pidana biasa, 30 negara negara malakukan moratorium (de facto tidak menerapkan) hukuman mati, dan total 129 negara yang melakukan abolisi (penghapusan) terhadap hukuman mati. Praktek hukuman mati di juga kerap dianggap bersifat bias, terutama bias kelas dan bias ras. Di AS, sekitar 80% terpidana mati adalah orang non kulit putih dan berasal dari kelas bawah. Sementara di berbagai negara banyak terpidana mati yang merupakan warga negara asing tetapi tidak diberikan penerjemah selama proses persidangan. [sunting] Kesalahan vonis pengadilan Sejak 1973, 123 terpidana mati dibebaskan di AS setelah ditemukan bukti baru bahwa mereka tidak bersalah atas dakwaan yang dituduhkan kepada mereka. Dari jumlah itu 6 kasus di tahun 2005 dan 1 kasus di tahun 2006. Beberapa diantara mereka dibebaskan di saat-saat terakhir akan dieksekusi. Kesalahan-kesalahan ini umumnya terkait dengan tidak bekerja baiknya aparatur kepolisian dan kejaksaan, atau juga karena tidak tersedianya pembela hukum yang baik. Dalam rangka menghindari kesalahan vonis mati terhadap terpidana mati, sedapat mungkin aparat hukum yang menangani kasus tersebut adalah aparat yang mempunyai pengetahuan luas dan sangat memadai, sehingga Sumber Daya manusia yang disiapkan dalam rangka penegakan hukum dan keadilan adalah sejalan dengan tujuan hukum yang akan menjadi pedoman didalam pelaksanaannya, dengan kata lain khusus dalam penerapan vonis mati terhadap pidana mati tidak adalagi unsur politik yang dapat mempengaruhi dalam penegakan hukum dan keadilan dimaksud.

[sunting] Vonis Mati di Indonesia Artikel utama untuk bagian ini adalah: Hukuman mati di Indonesia Di Indonesia sudah puluhan orang dieksekusi mati mengikuti sistem KUHP peninggalan kolonial Belanda. Bahkan selama Orde Baru korban yang dieksekusi sebagian besar merupakan narapidana politik. Walaupun amandemen kedua konstitusi UUD '45, pasal 28 ayat 1, menyebutkan: "Hak untuk hidup, hak untuk tidak disiksa, hak kemerdekaan pikiran dan hati nurani, hak beragama, hak untuk tidak diperbudak, hak untuk diakui sebagai pribadi di depan hukum, dan hak untuk tidak dituntut atas dasar hukum yang berlaku surut adalah hak asasi manusia yang tidak dapat dikurangi dalam keadaan apapun", tapi peraturan perundang-undangan dibawahnya tetap mencantumkan ancaman hukuman mati. Kelompok pendukung hukuman mati beranggapan bahwa bukan hanya pembunuh saja yang punya hak untuk hidup dan tidak disiksa. Masyarakat luas juga punya hak untuk hidup dan tidak disiksa. Untuk menjaga hak hidup masyarakat, maka pelanggaran terhadap hak tersebut patut dihukum mati. Hingga 2006 tercatat ada 11 peraturan perundang-undangan yang masih memiliki ancaman hukuman mati, seperti: KUHP, UU Narkotika, UU Anti Korupsi, UU Anti terorisme, dan UU Pengadilan HAM. Daftar ini bisa bertambah panjang dengan adanya RUU Intelijen dan RUU Rahasia Negara. Vonis atau hukuman mati mendapat dukungan yang luas dari pemerintah dan masyarakat Indonesia. Pemungutan suara yang dilakukan media di Indonesia pada umumnya menunjukkan 75% dukungan untuk adanya vonis mati. [sunting] Daftar eksekusi di Indonesia Sepanjang 2008, terdapat 8 hukuman mati yang dijalankan
[2] [1]

, mereka yang dihukum

adalah dua warga Nigeria penyelundup narkoba, dukun Ahmad Saroji yang membunuh 42 orang di Sumatera Utara, Tugabus Yusuf Mulyana dukun pengganda uang yang membunuh delapan orang di Banten, serta Sumiarsih dan Sugeng yang terlibat pembunuhan satu keluarga di Surabaya. Eksekusi yang paling terkenal pada tahun 2008 dan mendapat perhatian luas dari publik adalah eksekusi Imam Samudra dan Ali Ghufron, terpidana Bom Bali 2002.

Sebelum tahun 2008, terdapat puluhan orang yang dihukum mati. Berikut adalah nama-nama orang yang telah dieksekusi sebelum tahun 2008 menurut data Kontras[3]: Hukuman dilaksanakan Sumiarsih Sugeng 2007 2006 Ayub Bulubili Fabianus Tibo Marinus Riwu Dominggus Dasilva 2005 Astini Turmudi 2004 Ayodya (India) Saelow Prasad (India) Namsong Sirilak (Thailand) 2003 2002 2001 Tidak ada Tidak ada Gerson Pande Fredrik Soru Dance Soru 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 Tidak ada Tidak ada Adi Saputra Tidak ada Tidak ada Chan Tian Chong (?) Karta Cahyadi Pembunuhan (Nusa Tenggara Timur) Pembunuhan (Nusa Tenggara Timur) Pembunuhan (Nusa Tenggara Timur) 10 ? 1 2 ? ? Prasad Mati yang Vonis Mati yang

Tahun 2008

Kasus Pembunuhan Berencana (Jatim) Pembunuhan Berencana (Jatim) Pembunuhan Berencana (Kalteng) Pembunuhan Berencana (Sulteng) Pembunuhan Berencana (Sulteng) Pembunuhan Berencana (Sulteng) Pembunuhan Berencana (Jatim) Pembunuhan

dikeluarkan (PN) -

16

10

Berencana (Jambi) Chaubey Narkoba (Sumatra Utara) Narkoba Utara) Narkoba Utara) (Sumatra (Sumatra

6 7 16

Pembunuhan (Jatim)

Narkoba (?) Pembunuhan (Jateng)

1994 1993 1992 1991 1990

Kacong Laranu Tidak ada Tidak ada Sersan Adi Saputro Azhar bin Muhammad Satar Suryanto Yohannes Surono Simon Petrus Soleiman Noor Rohayan (atau

Pembunuhan (Sulteng) ? ? ? 1 3

Pembunuhan (?) Terorisme (?) Kejahatan politik (kasus 1965) Kejahatan (kasus 1965) Kejahatan politik politik politik politik politik politik politik politik politik

(kasus 1965) Norbertus) Kejahatan (kasus 1965) Kejahatan (kasus 1965) Kejahatan (kasus 1965) Kejahatan (aktivis Islam) Kejahatan (aktivis Islam) Kejahatan (kasus 1965) Kejahatan

1989

Tohong Harahap Mochtar Effendi Sirait

1988

Abdullah Umar Bambang Sispoyo Sukarjo Giyadi Wignyosuharjo

1987

Liong Wie Tong alias Lazarus Tan Tiang Tjoen Sukarman

(kasus 1965) Pembunuhan (?) 22 Pembunuhan (?) Kejahatan politik (kasus 1965) Kejahatan politik politik politik politik politik politik politik

1986

Maman Kusmayadi Syam alias

(aktivis Islam) Kamaruzaman Kejahatan

alias Achmed Mubaudah (kasus 1965) Supono Marsudidjojo alias Kejahatan Pono (kasus 1965) Mulyono alias Waluyo alias Kejahatan Bono Amar Hanefiah (kasus 1965) Kejahatan

(kasus 1965) Wirjoatmodjo alias Jono alias Kejahatan Tak Tanti Kamil (kasus 1965) Kejahatan (kasus 1965)

Abdulah Suparmin Sudijono

Alihamy

alias Kejahatan (kasus 1965) Kejahatan (kasus 1965) Kejahatan (kasus 1965) Terorisme Kejahatan (kasus 1965) Kejahatan (kasus 1965) Kejahatan (kasus 1965) Kejahatan (kasus 1965)

politik politik politik 1 politik politik politik politik ?

Tamuri Hidayat 1985 Salman Hafidz Mohamad Munir Djoko Untung Gatot Lestario Rustomo 1984 1983 1982 1980 1979 <1979 Tidak ada Imron bin Mohammed Zein Tidak ada Hengky Tupanwael Kusni Kasdut Oesin Batfari ?

Terorisme 1 Pembunuhan (?) Pembunuhan (?) Pembunuhan (?) ?

[sunting] Daftar vonis di Indonesia Berikut data tahun 2006 tentang terpidana yang menunggu hukuman mati, versi Kontras[3] Mereka yang Terancam Dieksekusi di Indonesia (Total 118 Orang) Proses Hukum No Nama Ditahan di Keterangan Agus Santoso (2 004) PN Jawa Purwokerto, Tengah Jateng Kasusnya terkait dengan

(28/02/2005) Putusan PN Abdul Purwokerto Jawa Tengah (28/02/2005) Jateng

Ruslan Abdul Gani

Ruslan

Kasusnya

terkait

dengan

Gani (2004) Rio Alex Bullo

Agus Santoso

3 4 5

(2001) Sumiarsih

Banding ditolak Jateng PK dan grasi Jatim Kasusnya Sugeng Kasusnya terkait terkait dengan dengan

(1988) ditolak Sugeng ( 1988) PK dan

grasi Jatim

ditolak Suryadi 6 Swabuana (1992) Jurit Grasi (2003) bin PK dan grasi grasi ditolak ditolak Lubuk Sumut ditolak. Sumatra Selatan

Sumiarsih

7 8 9 10

Abdullah (1997) ditolak Ibrahim bin PK dan Ujang (1997) ditolak Taroni Hia Grasi (2001) Irwan (2004) Sadawa Grasi (2004) PN Pakam,

Sumatra Selatan Sumatra Selatan Sumatra Barat Sumatra Barat Lubuk Pakam,

Kasusnya

terkait

dengan dengan dengan dengan

Ibrahim bin Ujang Kasusnya terkait Jurit bin Abdullah Kasusnya terkait Irwan Sadawa Hia Kasusnya terkait Taroni Hia

Hia (2001) Tumini (1988) Ahmad (1998) Suradji Suradji

11

(1988) Banding? PN Lubuk Pakam Sumut (1998) PK? PN Bangka. (2006) PN Bangka.

Sumatra Utara Lubuk Pakam,

12

Sumatra Utara Kasusnya terkait dengan

13

Syargawi (1998) Kasasi

ditolak Bangka

Harun dan Syofial Kasusnya terkait dengan

14

Harun (1998)

Kasasi

ditolak Bangka

(2006) PN Bangka. 15 Syofial (1998) Kasasi ditolak Bangka (2006) PN Kayuang

Syargawi dan Syofial Kasusnya terkait dengan

Syargawi dan Harun

16 17 18

Tasa Ibro (2001)

Sumatra Selatan (2002) Banding? Agung Widodo (?) 2002 ? Suryadi bin Kasasi? Grasi Palembang, Sukarno (1992) ditolak (2003) Sumsel Nurhasan Yogi PN Lamongan, Mahendra Jawa Timur Jatim (2002, 2004, (Agustus 2005) dan 2005) Suud Rusli Pengadilan Penjara (2003) Militer Jakarta (4/02/2005)

19

20

militer Kasus dengan Sanusi Santosa. diri dari dan

berhubungan Syam Suud Ahmad Gunawan melarikan militer

II-08, Sidoarjo, Jatim

penjara

Cimanggis 2 kali (5 Mei 2005, ditangkap pada 31 Mei 2005, dan melarikan diri lagi pada 6 November 2005 dan ditangkap pada 23 November 2005) Kasus berhubungan dengan Sanusi Gunawan Santosa (2003) Putusan (2004) Mengajukan PK MA Syam dan Suud Ahmad Rusli.

Melarikan diri dari penjara di MA pada 2004 namun ditangkap kembali. Pada Mei 2006, melarikan diri lagi dari Penjara Cipinang, Jakarta. Ditangkap lagi pada Juli 2007 Kasusnya terkait Riau Sahran dan Jamak Kasusnya Riau Sahran Jamak Kasusnya Riau Sahran Jamak

21

22

Sakak bin Jamak Grasi (?) Sahran Jamak (?) Sabran Jamak (?) Edi (2005) Dodi (2005) Kolonel M. Irfan Djumori (2005) Tan Joni (alias (2002) bin Grasi (2002) bin Grasi (2004)

ditolak

dengan bin

Sabran

23

ditolak

terkait

dengan bin

dan

Sabran

24

ditolak

terkait

dengan bin

dan

Sabran

25 26

Alharison PT

Sumatra

Barat (2006) Marsal PT Sumatra Barat (2006) Pengadilan Militer (2006) Banding? (?)

Padang, Sumbar Padang, Sumbar

27

Sidoarjo Jatim

28

Aseng) Harnowo Dewanto Oki)

Pakanbaru, Riau

29

(alias Grasi dan kasasi (1991- ditolak

30

1992) Saridi alias Ridi Kasasi

ditolak LP

bin (2002) 31

Ratiman (2003) Grasi? PN Tembilahan, Riau, 1970 Grasi ditolak 1972 Daeng MA menolak Nusakambangan

Purbalingga

Bahar bin Matar (1970) Ridwansyah bin

LP

Menghadapi

ancaman

Nusakambangan. eksekusi selama 34 tahun

32

Atung (alias

Iwan) kasasi (?)

Kalimantan Barat

(2002) Dini Syamsudin 33 alias Mapasisi Sumedi(?) 34 Ronald (2006) Nasib (2006) Purba Sagala Andi bin

2001? (?) PN

MA

menolak kasasi Kalimantan Barat

Lubuk

Pakam, Sumatra Sumatra Utara Utara (2006) PN Lubuk Pakam, Sumatra Sumatra Utara Utara (2006) PN Sekayu, Sumsel Banding? (1990) Sumsel

Kasusnya

terkait

dengan

Nasib Purba Kasusnya terkait dengan

35

Ronald Sagala

36

Nursam (?) Waluyo bin

37

Resosentono (?) Grasi(?) PK? PN Jabar Cibinong,

Lampung

38

Benged Siahaan alias Lilis (2002) Heru (2002) Lamia

2003 Jawa Barat

Kasusnya Heru Lamia Kasusnya

terkait

dengan

Banding? PN Cibinong, Jabar 2003

39

terkait

dengan

40

Banding? Adul bin Syamsi PN Martapura (2002) Jufri bin H. Muh Dahri (?) (2002) Banding? PN Maros Putusan

Benged Siahaan Martapura, Kaltim

41 42

MA Sulawesi Selatan Melarikan diri Banjarmasin, Kalsel

(2002) Bambang Ponco PK(?) Karno Popong alias bin

Sudarto Efendi (?) Zaenal 43 alias Ipin

Daud Arifin bin 2001(?) ?

44

Maryono (?) Aswin Siregar (?)

2000(?) PN Batam

LP Pekanbaru

45

Imran Sinaga (?) Putusan (2001) PN Putusan (2001) Putusan

MA LP Pekanbaru. Batam MA LP Pekanbaru. MA

Melarikan diri

46

Rambe Hadipah Paulus Purba (?) Mochamad

Melarikan diri

47 48

49

? Syamsudin (?) (2000)(?) Aris Setiawan 1997(?) ? (?) Pengadilan Lt. Sanurip Militer Jayapura, ? (1995) Papua (1997) Sugianto alias Sugih (1996) PN Sokikin Abubakar (?) Koh Kim bin Lubuklinggau, Sumsel (1994) Banding? Chea PN Batam (Sugik) (?) Surabaya?

50

51

52 53

(Malaysia, 1991) (1992) Banding? Koptu Soedjono Putusan MA (?) La Aja bin La Feely (?) (1988) PN Pandang (1988)? PN Bengkalis bin (1987) MA. Putusan Grasi Ujung

Cipinang, Jakarta ?

54

55

Burhan Gingan (?) Yehezkiel

Pekanbaru, Riau

56 57

Batam Ginting (2005) (2006) Rois alias Iwan PT DKI Jakarta Jakarta

ditolak (1990) PN Batam

Kasus

terkait

dengan

Dharmawan Mutho (Bom di Kedutaan Australia, Jakarta, 2004) Ahmad Hasan alias 58 Cahyono di Australia, Jakarta, 2004) Imam Samudra 59 (Bom 2002) Amrozi Bali I, Agung (Bom PT DKI Jakarta Kedutaan (14/09/2005) Jakarta Kasus terkait dengan Rois (13/09/2005) Ahmad Hasan

Grasi dan kasasi Nusakambangan, ditolak Jawa Tengah

60

(Bom Grasi dan kasasi Nusakambangan, Jawa Tengah Nusakambangan, Jawa Tengah

Bali I, 2002) ditolak Ali Gufron alias Mukhlas (Bom Mengajukan PK Bali I, 2002) Edi Setiono (alias Abas alias

61

62

Usman) Atrium

(Bom Mall,

PN Jakarta Pusat (2002) Banding?

Jakarta

Jakarta, 2001) Taufik bin Abdullah 63 Atrium Halim Mall, (Malaysia) (Bom Jakarta, 2001) Putusan 64 Meirika Pranola (2001) PK? Putusan 65 Rani Andriani (2001) PK? PT MA Grasi? MA Grasi? Tangerang, Banten Tangerang, Banten PN Jakarta Pusat (2002) Banding? Jakarta

66 67

Merri Utami Deni (alias

Banten Tangerang,

(2002) Kasasi? Banten Setiawan Putusan MA Tangerang, Rapi (2001) PK? Banten

68

69

Mohamed Majid) Grasi? Putusan Indra B. Tamang Tangerang, MA(2002) Grasi (Nepal) Banten ditolak (2004). Ozias Sibanda Putusan MA Tangerang, (Zimbabwe) Samuel Iwuchukuwu (2002) Putusan Banten Banten PT High Tangerang, Banten Tangerang, Banten

70

Okoye (Nigeria) (2001) Kasasi? Hansen Anthony Putusan MA 71 Nwaliosa (Nigeria) Okwudili 72 Ayotanze (Nigeria) 73 Namaona Denis (Malawi) Muhammad 74 Abdul (2002) Grasi ditolak (2004) Putusan (2002) Grasi? Putusan (2002) MA Grasi

MA Tangerang, Banten Tangerang, Banten Tangerang,

ditolak (2004) Putusan MA Grasi

75

Banten (Pakistan) ditolak (2004) Edith Yunita Putusan MA Tangerang, Sianturi Okonwo Kingsley (Nigeria) (2002) Nonso Putusan (16/2/2006) Grasi? PN Pinang Banten MA Lapas Medan,

Hafeez (2002)

76

Sumatra Utara Batu Kasus terkait dengan A

77

Denny Kebo)

(alias

Tanjung Lapas

(Riau) Nusakambangan, Batu

(12/6/06) Jateng PN Tanjung Lapas 2/6/06) Jateng (alias PN Tanjung Lapas

Yam dan Jun Hao Kasus terkait dengan

78

A Yam Jun Hao

Pinang (Riau) (1 Nusakambangan, Batu

Denny dan Jun Hao Kasus terkait dengan

79

Vans Liem alias Pinang

(Riau) Nusakambangan,

A Heng) (12/6/06) Jateng Humphrey Ejike PN Tanjung 80 (alias Doctor) Pinang, Riau Cipinang, Jakarta (Nigeria) (12/6/06) Gap Nadi (alias (?) Papa) (Nigeria) Ek Fere Dike Ole (?)

Denny dan A Yam

81 82

Cipinang, Jakarta Cipinang, Jakarta

Kamala Samuel) (Nigeria) 83

(alias

Bunyong Khaosa Ard (Thailand) Michael Titus

PN

Tangerang

(22/10/2002) Banding? PT Banten (12/1/2004) Kasasi? PT (2002)

Tangerang, Banten Tangerang, Banten

84

Igweh (Thailand) Nonthanam M.

85

Saichon (Thailand) Hillary

Banten Tangerang, Banten Banten Tangerang, Banten

K. PT Kasasi? Ape Felixe) (?)

86

Chimizie (Nigeria) Eugene

(12/1/2004)

87

(alias

Cipinang, Jakarta Tangerang Tangerang,

88

(Nigeria) Obina Nwajagu PN (Nigeria) Ang Kim (alias Kim alias Thahir Tommi Soe Ho Ance alias Wijaya) PN

(2002) Banding? Banten

Tangerang Court

89

District

Tangerang, Banten

(2003) Banding?

(Netherland) Stephen 90 Rasheed Akinyami PN Tangerang Tangerang, (2004) Banding? Banten MA Grasi

(Nigeria) Marco Archer Putusan 91 Cardoso (2006)

Tangerang,

92

93 94

Banten Moneira (Brazil) ditolak (2006). Sylvester PN Tangerang Tangerang, Obiekwe (?) Banten (Nigeria) M. Ademi Wilson PN Tangerang Tangerang, (alias Abu) Court (?) Banten (Malawi) Gurdip Singh PN Tangerang Tangerang,

(alias (India) 95

Vishal) (Juli

2004)

Rodrigo Gularte (Brazil) Zulfikar (Pakistan) Dan El Ali

Banding? PN Tangerang (Juli 2004) Banding? PN Tangerang (Juni 2005)

Banten Tangerang, Banten Tangerang,

96

97

Banten Banding? Enemo PN Tangerang Tangerang,

(Nigeria) (?) Banten Martin Anderson PN Jakarta 98 (alias Belo) Cipinang, Selatan (?) (Ghana) Seck Osmone PN Jakarta 99 Cipinang, (Nigeria) Selatan (?) PN Jakarta Barat 100 Sastra Wijaya Cipinang, (2005) Banding? Yuda (alias PN Jakarta Barat 101 Cipinang, Akang) (2005) Banding? Rahem Agbaje 102 Selami (Rep of PN Surabaya (?) Jatim Cordova) Zainal Abidin bin 103 Mgs. Mahmud Badaruddin Kamjai Khong 104 Thavorn

Jakarta

Jakarta Jakarta Jakarta

PN (?) PN (?)

Palembang Palembang, Sumatra Selatan Samarinda

Kalimantan Timur

105

(Thailand) Andrew Chan PT (Australia) Myuran (Australia)

Bali

(2006)

Kasasi? PT Bali (2006)

Bali

106 Sukumaran

Kasasi? Putusan (2006) MA

Bali

107

Scott

Anthony

Rush (Australia) Tan Duc

Grasi? Bali MA Grasi? Bali MA Bali Grasi?

PK? Tanh Putusan (2006)

108 Nguyen

(Australia) PK? 109 Si Yi Chen Putusan (Australia) (2006)

Matthew 110 Norman (Australia) Emmanuel

PK? James Putusan (2006) PK?

MA Grasi? Bali

111 Iherjirika (Sierra (?) Leone) Masagus Zainal Abidin 112 Masagus Mahmud Badaruddin Ken Michael PN Jakarta Barat (Nigeria) (2001) Tham Tuck Yen PN Jakarta Pusat (Malaysia) (1995) Banding? John Sebastian PN Cibinong (Nigeria) Federikk (2002) Banding? Luttar PN Jakarta Barat bin Kasasi? PK?

Bali

Palembang

113 114 115 116

Jakarta Cirebon, Jabar Jabar Jakarta

(Zimbabwe) (2006) Benny Sudrajat (alias Winardi Tandi PN Tangerang alias (2006)

117

Banten

Beny Oei) Iming Santoso 118 (alias Cipto) Keterangan: Budi

PN

Tangerang

(2006)

Banten

PK = Pengajuan Kembali Banding = Banding Kasasi = Kasasi Grasi = Grasi PN/PT = Pengadilan Negeri/Pengadilan Tinggi PM = Pengadilan Militer MA = Mahkamah Agung Lapas = Lembaga permasyarakatan / Penjara A. No. 1-56: Kasus Pembunuhan (56 kasus)

B. No. 57-63: Kasus Terorisme (7 kasus) C. No. 64-118: Kasus Narkoba (55 kasus)