|
ROME—October 10, the International Day Against the Death
Penalty, will be an occasion to reaffirm the universal
moratorium on executions, approved on December 18 by the
General Assembly, and to insure it is complied with.
Immediately after the historic approval of the
resolution, skeptics began to denigrate its value and
scope, arguing that “it doesn’t change anything” and
that “it is not juridically binding on governments.” It
is a moot point: Obviously, the UN cannot use a
resolution passed in the General Assembly to require a
member-state to abolish its death penalty.
However,
for death-penalty states, the resolution has an
undeniable moral value and political force. The UN has,
for the first time, established that capital punishment
is not confined to the ambit of domestic justice but
involves the universal sphere of human rights. The
establishment of this principle has placed the sanction
in an entirely new light.
For this
reason, the mere announcement of the debate on the
initiative in New York last year was enough to provoke
numerous positive developments, which were followed by
others this year, as shown in the 2008 report of the
association “Hands Off Cain” and in the UN
secretary-general’s report recently distributed to the
General Assembly.
For
example, between last year and the first months of 2008,
capital convictions in Chinese courts dropped by 30
percent, thanks also to a January 2007 reform that
granted the Supreme Court the exclusive faculty to
approve capital sentences.
Earlier
this year, Cuba commuted all of its pending death
sentences, as did Pakistan, which had one of the most
populous death rows in the world. These are developments
which, though they may not indicate that the elimination
of the death penalty is close at hand, clearly show
there is real movement in that direction.
One of
the issues under debate in the European Union was the
strategy to bring about an abolition of the death
penalty. Last year the Italian government had to work
hard to convince its European partners that the UN
resolution should call for a moratorium and not the
abolition of the death penalty. A death-penalty
moratorium would represent not only a sort of truce in
the practice of capital punishment but also a more
democratic, liberal and nonauthoritarian means of
fighting the practice, the elimination of which would
show respect for parliamentary rules and time frames
that would be involved in changing the texts of national
constitutions, laws and legal codes.
The
antifundamentalist focus of the campaign for the
moratorium was successful and prevented the perception
that it was a paternalistic measure imposed by western
countries on the rest of the world. This inclusive
attitude induced countries that still have the death
penalty, like Burundi and Uzbekistan, to vote in favor
of the resolution, while others decided to abstain
rather than vote against it, like Chad, Equatorial
Guinea, Guinea, the United Arab Emirates, Lebanon and
Vietnam.
As
explicitly planned, the resolution figures in the order
of the day of the General Assembly, which opened its
yearly session on September 23. However, the approval of
the new resolution is not a mere formality, nor should
it lead to new attempts to change the mechanics of the
resolution to “strengthen” it to make it “more
abolitionist,” To really strengthen the resolution, it
would be enough for the General Assembly this year and
in future years to reiterate its support for the
moratorium, which is the route to the eventual
elimination of the death penalty.
There is
also a step that could politically strengthen the
resolution: the elimination of state secrecy around the
death penalty. Many death-penalty countries—almost all
authoritarian regimes—provide no information regarding
executions. This lack of information available to the
public is one of the causes of an increase in the number
of executions.
In
truth, the definitive solution to the problem involves
not only the death penalty but also democracy, the rule
of law and respect for political rights and civil
liberties. At present, we are requesting that this
year’s resolution include a request that death-penalty
countries make available to the UN secretary-general all
information relative to their death penalty and
executions. We are also demanding a new resolution that
creates the position of a UN secretary-general special
envoy charged with monitoring the situation and working
to encourage and reinforce internal processes in
death-penalty countries such that they adhere to the
moratorium on executions.
Emma Bonino, a radical party leader, is a senator and
vice president of the Italian Senate. |