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 one’s 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 mid-

18th 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, the percentage of

Americans in favor of the 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 post-

Gregg 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

v · d · e

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-Léon Gérôme (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. 712–756). 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 states—for example those with fascist or communist

governments—employed 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 trial · Speedy trial

Jury trial · Counsel

Presumption of innocence

Exclusionary rule1

Self-incrimination

Double jeopardy2

Verdict

Conviction · Acquittal

Not proven3

Directed verdict

Sentencing

Mandatory · Suspended

Custodial

Dangerous offender4, 5

Capital punishment

Execution warrant

Cruel and unusual punishment

Life · Indefinite

Post-sentencing

Parole · Probation

Tariff6 · Life licence6

Miscarriage of justice

Exoneration · Pardon

Sexually violent predator legislation1

Related areas of law

Criminal defenses

Criminal law · Evidence

Civil procedure

Portals

Law · Criminal justice

1 US courts.

2 Not in English/Welsh courts.

3 Scottish courts.

4 English/Welsh courts.

5 Canadian courts.

6 UK courts.

v · d · e

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

1 People's Republic of

China

Officially not released.[48][49] At least 1700 (estimated), may

be as many as 10,000 per year.[50]

2 Iran At least 388

3 Iraq At least 120

4 Saudi Arabia At least 69

5 United States 52

6 Yemen At least 30

7 Sudan At least 9

8 Vietnam At least 9

9 Syria At least 8

10 Japan 7

11 Egypt At least 5

12 Libya At least 4

13 Bangladesh 3

14 Thailand 2

15 Singapore At least 1

16 Botswana 1

17 Malaysia Unreleased

18 North Korea 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 of juvenile offenders, for which it has received international

condemnation; the country's record is the focus of the Stop Child Executions

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

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 needed] with compensation paid for people executed between

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

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 non-

binding 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) crimes—including rape—murder 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 person—unless 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 13:3–4 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 20:2–27

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] a

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 non-

existent."[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 9:5–6, Romans 13:3–4, and Leviticus 20:1–27 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 5–7) and Sermon on the Plain

(transcribed in Luke 6:17–49). 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 biasa

(perang)

Oranye: secara praktis telah menghapus

Merah: masih dilakukan

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. [1]

[sunting] Daftar eksekusi di Indonesia

Sepanjang 2008, terdapat 8 hukuman mati yang dijalankan [2], 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] :

TahunHukuman Mati yang

dilaksanakanKasus

Vonis Mati yang

dikeluarkan (PN)

2008 SumiarsihPembunuhan

Berencana (Jatim)-

SugengPembunuhan

Berencana (Jatim)

2007 Ayub BulubiliPembunuhan

Berencana (Kalteng)-

2006 Fabianus TiboPembunuhan

Berencana (Sulteng)16

Marinus Riwu Pembunuhan

Berencana (Sulteng)

Dominggus DasilvaPembunuhan

Berencana (Sulteng)

2005 AstiniPembunuhan

Berencana (Jatim)10

TurmudiPembunuhan

Berencana (Jambi)

2004Ayodya Prasad Chaubey

(India)

Narkoba (Sumatra

Utara)5

Saelow Prasad (India)Narkoba (Sumatra

Utara)

Namsong Sirilak (Thailand)Narkoba (Sumatra

Utara)

2003 Tidak ada 6

2002 Tidak ada 7

2001 Gerson PandePembunuhan (Nusa

Tenggara Timur)16

Fredrik SoruPembunuhan (Nusa

Tenggara Timur)

Dance SoruPembunuhan (Nusa

Tenggara Timur)

2000 Tidak ada 10

1999 Tidak ada ?

1998 Adi Saputra Pembunuhan (Jatim) 1

1997 Tidak ada 2

1996 Tidak ada ?

1995 Chan Tian Chong (?) Narkoba (?) ?

Karta Cahyadi Pembunuhan (Jateng)

Kacong Laranu Pembunuhan (Sulteng)

1994 Tidak ada ?

1993 Tidak ada ?

1992 Sersan Adi Saputro Pembunuhan (?) ?

1991 Azhar bin Muhammad Terorisme (?) 1

1990 Satar SuryantoKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)3

Yohannes SuronoKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

Simon Petrus SoleimanKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

Noor (atau Norbertus)

Rohayan

Kejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

1989 Tohong HarahapKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)4

Mochtar Effendi SiraitKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

1988 Abdullah UmarKejahatan politik

(aktivis Islam)4

Bambang SispoyoKejahatan politik

(aktivis Islam)

SukarjoKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

Giyadi WignyosuharjoKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

1987 Liong Wie Tong alias Lazarus Pembunuhan (?) 22

Tan Tiang Tjoen Pembunuhan (?)

SukarmanKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

1986 Maman KusmayadiKejahatan politik

(aktivis Islam)1

Syam alias Kamaruzaman

alias Achmed Mubaudah

Kejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

Supono Marsudidjojo alias

Pono

Kejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

Mulyono alias Waluyo alias

Bono

Kejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

Amar HanefiahKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

Wirjoatmodjo alias Jono alias

Tak Tanti

Kejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

Kamil Kejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

Abdulah Alihamy alias

Suparmin

Kejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

SudijonoKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

Tamuri HidayatKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

1985 Salman Hafidz Terorisme 1

Mohamad MunirKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

Djoko UntungKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

Gatot LestarioKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

RustomoKejahatan politik

(kasus 1965)

1984 Tidak ada ?

1983 Imron bin Mohammed Zein Terorisme

1982 Tidak ada 1

1980 Hengky Tupanwael Pembunuhan (?)

Kusni Kasdut Pembunuhan (?)

1979 Oesin Batfari Pembunuhan (?)

<1979 ? ? ?

[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)

No NamaProses Hukum

Ditahan di Keterangan

1Agus Santoso (2

004)

PN Purwokerto,

Jawa Tengah

(28/02/2005)

JatengKasusnya terkait dengan

Ruslan Abdul Gani

2 Ruslan Abdul Putusan PN Jateng Kasusnya terkait dengan

Gani (2004)

Purwokerto Jawa

Tengah

(28/02/2005)

Agus Santoso

3Rio Alex Bullo

(2001)Banding ditolak Jateng

4Sumiarsih

(1988)

PK dan grasi

ditolakJatim

Kasusnya terkait dengan

Sugeng

5 Sugeng ( 1988)PK dan grasi

ditolakJatim

Kasusnya terkait dengan

Sumiarsih

6

Suryadi

Swabuana

(1992)

Grasi ditolak.

(2003)Sumatra Selatan

7Jurit bin

Abdullah (1997)

PK dan grasi

ditolakSumatra Selatan

Kasusnya terkait dengan

Ibrahim bin Ujang

8Ibrahim bin

Ujang (1997)

PK dan grasi

ditolakSumatra Selatan

Kasusnya terkait dengan

Jurit bin Abdullah

9Taroni Hia

(2001)

Grasi ditolak

(2004)Sumatra Barat

Kasusnya terkait dengan

Irwan Sadawa Hia

10Irwan Sadawa

Hia (2001)

Grasi ditolak

(2004)Sumatra Barat

Kasusnya terkait dengan

Taroni Hia

11Tumini Suradji

(1988)

PN Lubuk

Pakam, Sumut

(1988) Banding?

Lubuk Pakam,

Sumatra Utara

12Ahmad Suradji

(1998)

PN Lubuk

Pakam Sumut

(1998) PK?

Lubuk Pakam,

Sumatra Utara

13 Syargawi (1998)

PN Bangka.

Kasasi ditolak

(2006)

BangkaKasusnya terkait dengan

Harun dan Syofial

14 Harun (1998)

PN Bangka.

Kasasi ditolak

(2006)

BangkaKasusnya terkait dengan

Syargawi dan Syofial

15 Syofial (1998)

PN Bangka.

Kasasi ditolak

(2006)

BangkaKasusnya terkait dengan

Syargawi dan Harun

16 Tasa Ibro (2001)PN Kayuang

(2002) Banding?Sumatra Selatan

17 Agung Widodo (?) 2002  ?

18Suryadi bin

Sukarno (1992)

Kasasi? Grasi

ditolak (2003)

Palembang,

Sumsel

19

Nurhasan Yogi

Mahendra

(2002, 2004,

dan 2005)

PN Lamongan,

Jawa Timur

(Agustus 2005)

Jatim

20Suud Rusli

(2003)

Pengadilan

Militer II-08,

Jakarta

(4/02/2005)

Penjara militer

Sidoarjo, Jatim

Kasus berhubungan

dengan Syam Ahmad

Sanusi dan Gunawan

Santosa. Suud melarikan

diri dari penjara militer

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)

21Gunawan

Santosa (2003)

Putusan MA

(2004)

Mengajukan PK

Kasus berhubungan

dengan Syam Ahmad

Sanusi dan Suud 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

22Sakak bin Jamak

(?)

Grasi ditolak

(2002)Riau

Kasusnya terkait dengan

Sahran dan Sabran bin

Jamak

23Sahran bin

Jamak (?)

Grasi ditolak

(2002)Riau

Kasusnya terkait dengan

Sahran dan Sabran bin

Jamak

24Sabran bin

Jamak (?)

Grasi ditolak

(2004)Riau

Kasusnya terkait dengan

Sahran dan Sabran bin

Jamak

25Edi Alharison

(2005)

PT Sumatra

Barat (2006)Padang, Sumbar

26Dodi Marsal

(2005)

PT Sumatra

Barat (2006)Padang, Sumbar

27Kolonel M. Irfan

Djumori (2005)

Pengadilan

Militer Sidoarjo

(2006) Banding?

Jatim

28Tan Joni (alias

Aseng)(?) Pakanbaru, Riau

29

Harnowo

Dewanto (alias

Oki) (1991-

1992)

Grasi dan kasasi

ditolak ?

30

Saridi alias Ridi

bin Ratiman

Purbalingga

(2002)

Kasasi ditolak

(2003) Grasi?

LP

Nusakambangan

31Bahar bin Matar

(1970)

PN Tembilahan,

Riau, 1970 Grasi

ditolak 1972

LP

Nusakambangan.

Menghadapi ancaman

eksekusi selama 34 tahun

32

Ridwansyah bin

Atung Daeng

(alias Iwan)

(2002)

MA menolak

kasasi (?)Kalimantan Barat

33

Dini Syamsudin

alias Andi

Mapasisi bin

Sumedi(?)

2001? MA

menolak kasasi

(?)

Kalimantan Barat

34Ronald Sagala

(2006)

PN Lubuk

Pakam, Sumatra

Utara (2006)

Sumatra UtaraKasusnya terkait dengan

Nasib Purba

35 Nasib Purba

(2006)

PN Lubuk

Pakam, Sumatra

Sumatra Utara Kasusnya terkait dengan

Ronald Sagala

Utara (2006)

36 Nursam (?)

PN Sekayu,

Sumsel (1990)

Banding?

Sumsel

37

Waluyo bin

Resosentono (?)

PK?

Grasi(?) Lampung

38Benged Siahaan

alias Lilis (2002)

PN Cibinong,

Jabar 2003

Banding?

Jawa BaratKasusnya terkait dengan

Heru Lamia

39Heru Lamia

(2002)

PN Cibinong,

Jabar 2003

Banding?

Kasusnya terkait dengan

Benged Siahaan

40Adul bin Syamsi

(2002)

PN Martapura

(2002) Banding?Martapura, Kaltim

41Jufri bin H. Muh

Dahri (?)

PN Maros

Putusan MA

(2002)

Sulawesi Selatan Melarikan diri

42

Bambang Ponco

Karno alias

Popong bin

Sudarto Daud

Efendi (?)

PK(?)Banjarmasin,

Kalsel

43

Zaenal Arifin

alias Ipin bin

Maryono (?)

2001(?)  ?

44Aswin Siregar

(?)2000(?) LP Pekanbaru

45 Imran Sinaga (?)

PN Batam

Putusan MA

(2001)

LP Pekanbaru. Melarikan diri

46Rambe Hadipah

Paulus Purba (?)

PN Batam

Putusan MA

(2001)

LP Pekanbaru. Melarikan diri

47Mochamad

Syamsudin (?)

Putusan MA

(2000)(?) ?

48Aris Setiawan

(?)1997(?)  ?

49Lt. Sanurip

(1995)

Pengadilan

Militer Jayapura,

Papua (1997)

 ?

50

Sugianto alias

Sugih (Sugik)

(1996)

(?) Surabaya?

51Sokikin bin

Abubakar (?)

PN

Lubuklinggau,

Sumsel (1994)

Banding?

 ?

52Koh Kim Chea

(Malaysia, 1991)

PN Batam

(1992) Banding?Cipinang, Jakarta

53Koptu Soedjono

(?)

Putusan MA

(1988) ?

54La Aja bin La

Feely (?)

PN Ujung

Pandang

(1988)?

 ?

55Burhan bin

Gingan (?)

PN Bengkalis

(1987) Putusan

MA. Grasi

ditolak (1990)

Pekanbaru, Riau

56Yehezkiel

Ginting (2005)

PN Batam

(2006)Batam

57

Rois alias Iwan

Dharmawan

Mutho (Bom di

Kedutaan

Australia,

Jakarta, 2004)

PT DKI Jakarta

(13/09/2005)Jakarta

Kasus terkait dengan

Ahmad Hasan

58 Ahmad Hasan

alias Agung

Cahyono (Bom

di Kedutaan

Australia,

PT DKI Jakarta

(14/09/2005)

Jakarta Kasus terkait dengan Rois

Jakarta, 2004)

59

Imam Samudra

(Bom Bali I,

2002)

Grasi dan kasasi

ditolak

Nusakambangan,

Jawa Tengah

60Amrozi (Bom

Bali I, 2002)

Grasi dan kasasi

ditolak

Nusakambangan,

Jawa Tengah

61

Ali Gufron alias

Mukhlas (Bom

Bali I, 2002)

Mengajukan PKNusakambangan,

Jawa Tengah

62

Edi Setiono

(alias Abas alias

Usman) (Bom

Atrium Mall,

Jakarta, 2001)

PN Jakarta Pusat

(2002) Banding?Jakarta

63

Taufik bin

Abdullah Halim

(Malaysia) (Bom

Atrium Mall,

Jakarta, 2001)

PN Jakarta Pusat

(2002) Banding?Jakarta

64 Meirika Pranola

Putusan MA

(2001) Grasi?

PK?

Tangerang,

Banten

65 Rani Andriani

Putusan MA

(2001) Grasi?

PK?

Tangerang,

Banten

66 Merri UtamiPT Banten

(2002) Kasasi?

Tangerang,

Banten

67

Deni Setiawan

(alias Rapi

Mohamed Majid)

Putusan MA

(2001) PK?

Grasi?

Tangerang,

Banten

68Indra B. Tamang

(Nepal)

Putusan

MA(2002) Grasi

ditolak (2004).

Tangerang,

Banten

69Ozias Sibanda

(Zimbabwe)

Putusan MA

(2002)

Tangerang,

Banten

70 Samuel Putusan PT Tangerang,

Iwuchukuwu

Okoye (Nigeria)

Banten High

(2001) Kasasi?Banten

71

Hansen Anthony

Nwaliosa

(Nigeria)

Putusan MA

(2002) Grasi

ditolak (2004)

Tangerang,

Banten

72

Okwudili

Ayotanze

(Nigeria)

Putusan MA

(2002) Grasi?

Tangerang,

Banten

73Namaona Denis

(Malawi)

Putusan MA

(2002) Grasi

ditolak (2004)

Tangerang,

Banten

74

Muhammad

Abdul Hafeez

(Pakistan)

Putusan MA

(2002) Grasi

ditolak (2004)

Tangerang,

Banten

75Edith Yunita

Sianturi

Putusan MA

(2002)

Tangerang,

Banten

76

Okonwo Nonso

Kingsley

(Nigeria)

Putusan MA

(16/2/2006)

Grasi?

Lapas Medan,

Sumatra Utara

77Denny (alias

Kebo)

PN Tanjung

Pinang (Riau)

(12/6/06)

Lapas Batu

Nusakambangan,

Jateng

Kasus terkait dengan A

Yam dan Jun Hao

78 A Yam

PN Tanjung

Pinang (Riau) (1

2/6/06)

Lapas Batu

Nusakambangan,

Jateng

Kasus terkait dengan

Denny dan Jun Hao

79

Jun Hao (alias

Vans Liem alias

A Heng)

PN Tanjung

Pinang (Riau)

(12/6/06)

Lapas Batu

Nusakambangan,

Jateng

Kasus terkait dengan

Denny dan A Yam

80

Humphrey Ejike

(alias Doctor)

(Nigeria)

PN Tanjung

Pinang, Riau

(12/6/06)

Cipinang, Jakarta

81Gap Nadi (alias

Papa) (Nigeria)(?) Cipinang, Jakarta

82 Ek Fere Dike Ole

Kamala (alias

Samuel)

(?) Cipinang, Jakarta

(Nigeria)

83Bunyong Khaosa

Ard (Thailand)

PN Tangerang

(22/10/2002)

Banding?

Tangerang,

Banten

84Michael Titus

Igweh (Thailand)

PT Banten

(12/1/2004)

Kasasi?

Tangerang,

Banten

85

Nonthanam M.

Saichon

(Thailand)

PT Banten

(2002)

Tangerang,

Banten

86

Hillary K.

Chimizie

(Nigeria)

PT Banten

(12/1/2004)

Kasasi?

Tangerang,

Banten

87

Eugene Ape

(alias Felixe)

(Nigeria)

(?) Cipinang, Jakarta

88Obina Nwajagu

(Nigeria)

PN Tangerang

(2002) Banding?

Tangerang,

Banten

89

Ang Kim Soe

(alias Kim Ho

alias Ance

Thahir alias

Tommi Wijaya)

(Netherland)

PN Tangerang

District Court

(2003) Banding?

Tangerang,

Banten

90

Stephen

Rasheed

Akinyami

(Nigeria)

PN Tangerang

(2004) Banding?

Tangerang,

Banten

91

Marco Archer

Cardoso

Moneira (Brazil)

Putusan MA

(2006) Grasi

ditolak (2006).

Tangerang,

Banten

92

Sylvester

Obiekwe

(Nigeria)

PN Tangerang

(?)

Tangerang,

Banten

93 M. Ademi Wilson

(alias Abu)

PN Tangerang

Court (?)

Tangerang,

Banten

(Malawi)

94

Gurdip Singh

(alias Vishal)

(India)

PN Tangerang

(Juli 2004)

Banding?

Tangerang,

Banten

95Rodrigo Gularte

(Brazil)

PN Tangerang

(Juli 2004)

Banding?

Tangerang,

Banten

96Zulfikar Ali

(Pakistan)

PN Tangerang

(Juni 2005)

Banding?

Tangerang,

Banten

97Dan El Enemo

(Nigeria)

PN Tangerang

(?)

Tangerang,

Banten

98

Martin Anderson

(alias Belo)

(Ghana)

PN Jakarta

Selatan (?)Cipinang, Jakarta

99Seck Osmone

(Nigeria)

PN Jakarta

Selatan (?)Cipinang, Jakarta

100 Sastra WijayaPN Jakarta Barat

(2005) Banding?Cipinang, Jakarta

101Yuda (alias

Akang)

PN Jakarta Barat

(2005) Banding?Cipinang, Jakarta

102

Rahem Agbaje

Selami (Rep of

Cordova)

PN Surabaya (?) Jatim

103

Zainal Abidin bin

Mgs. Mahmud

Badaruddin

PN Palembang

(?)

Palembang,

Sumatra Selatan

104

Kamjai Khong

Thavorn

(Thailand)

PN Samarinda

(?)Kalimantan Timur

105Andrew Chan

(Australia)

PT Bali (2006)

Kasasi?Bali

106

Myuran

Sukumaran

(Australia)

PT Bali (2006)

Kasasi?Bali

107Scott Anthony

Rush (Australia)

Putusan MA

(2006) Grasi?

PK?

Bali

108

Tan Duc Tanh

Nguyen

(Australia)

Putusan MA

(2006) Grasi?

PK?

Bali

109Si Yi Chen

(Australia)

Putusan MA

(2006) Grasi?

PK?

Bali

110

Matthew James

Norman

(Australia)

Putusan MA

(2006) Grasi?

PK?

Bali

111

Emmanuel

Iherjirika (Sierra

Leone)

(?) Bali

112

Masagus Zainal

Abidin bin

Masagus

Mahmud

Badaruddin

Kasasi? PK? Palembang

113Ken Michael

(Nigeria)

PN Jakarta Barat

(2001)Jakarta

114Tham Tuck Yen

(Malaysia)

PN Jakarta Pusat

(1995) Banding?Cirebon, Jabar

115John Sebastian

(Nigeria)

PN Cibinong

(2002) Banding?Jabar

116Federikk Luttar

(Zimbabwe)

PN Jakarta Barat

(2006)Jakarta

117

Benny Sudrajat

(alias Tandi

Winardi alias

Beny Oei)

PN Tangerang

(2006)Banten

118

Iming Santoso

(alias Budi

Cipto)

PN Tangerang

(2006)Banten

Keterangan:

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)