Hukuman Mati
-
Upload
maria-marcella -
Category
Documents
-
view
65 -
download
3
description
Transcript of Hukuman Mati
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)