DEATH PENALTY NOT A DETERRENT BUT A CAUSE OF VIOLENCE
By Fatima Aburto

IPS COLUMNIST SERVICE, JULY 2007

//NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN AUSTRALIA, CANADA, NEW ZEALAND, CZECH REPUBLIC, IRELAND, POLAND, THE UNITED STATES, AND THE UNITED KINGDOM//

MADRID, Jul (IPS) Fortunately for humanity, the death penalty is being eradicated from the world. Executions have dropped by 25 percent between 2005-2006 and the countries that still have the sanction are growing fewer and fewer. In fact between 1977 and 2006 the number of abolitionist countries has increased from 16 to 89; if you include countries that have not imposed a death sentence for the last ten years, the number rises to 129 that are free of this blight. Ninety percent of the executions worldwide are carried out by six countries: China, Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, Sudan, and the United States.

Important progress has been made recently. On April 26, 2007, the European Parliament adopted a resolution calling for a world moratorium on the death penalty, and on March 14 the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs undertook the preparation of a resolution calling for a world moratorium on the death penalty for presentation at the UN General Assembly this September.

In response, the Spanish Chamber of Deputies unanimously approved a motion calling for the introduction of a universal death penalty moratorium at the next session of the UN General Assembly.

While a moratorium is not the same as abolition, it does offer the opportunity to demonstrate what is already clear: that the death penalty is not a deterrent but in fact a cause of violence and vengeance. The moratorium also frees its supporters from the feeling of complicity, however indirect, in causing the death of a human being through execution.

Why expend so much energy to abolish the death penalty?

To begin with, it is important to remember that the right to life is considered a fundamental human right and is not subject to claims of state sovereignty. This invocation of state sovereignty was the reason that previous attempts at passing a moratorium in the UN Assembly failed. It is, however, a flimsy argument, since human rights are universal, inalienable, and all stem from the most basic right to life. This is why international tribunals never impose the death penalty.

Moreover, the death penalty is a violation of human dignity because there is no humane way to impose it. Indeed it violates the dignity not only of the condemned but also of those who carry out the execution (some of whom are in fact healthcare workers, and even doctors), the witnesses, and the society that supports this useless, irrevocable, and demeaning act. It even violates the dignity of the victim's family, which is made to believe it will find some satisfaction in vengeance, which is not the case. To the contrary, vengeance never eases pain but often intensifies it.

The death penalty also involves a form of torture and inhuman treatment that the condemned experiences waiting for his or her sentence to be carried out.

Tragically, although the number of conflicts and wars between countries is dropping, largely as a result of UN mediation, violence within countries sparked by inequality or ethnic or religious motivations is on the rise. Any measure that can reduce violence is thus welcome. It is therefore the duty of politicians to explain to their citizens that the death penalty leads only to more violence and social degradation and to persist until they reject this barbaric punishment.

On the other hand, deterrence works only when there is certainty that the guilty will be brought to justice and made to serve the full sentence imposed by the law. The nature of a punishment plays no part in deterrence; what is important is the understanding that no crime will go unpunished.

This lesson is all the more relevant today in the context of international terrorism, which is apparently intended to work through intimidation and fear. Unfortunately it can also be easily manipulated by those in power to convince the people that a barbaric punishment like the death penalty might increase security. Apart from the fact that this argument is flat wrong, tapping people's fears in order to awaken their i nstincts for vengeance and cruelty is absolutely despicable.

The fight against terrorism will only succeed when it is rooted in a complete respect for human rights and fundamental liberties, in addition to solidarity with its victims.

The abolition the death penalty will always be a basic obligation for any politician who defends human rights, life, human dignity, desires an end to torture, and wants to bring about a state in which no human being is guilty of killing another, at least legally. (END/COPYRIGHT IPS)

(*) Fatima Aburto, Socialist spokesperson for the Commission on Foreign Affairs of the Spanish Chamber of Deputies.