One “No” to the Death Penalty in the US Leads to Another
Published in Quotidiano
(Italy) on 6 April 2012
by Giampaolo Pioli (link to original)
(Italy) on 6 April 2012
by Giampaolo Pioli (link to original)
Translated from
by Hourya Herrou.
Edited by Tom Proctor.
The small state of Connecticut also says “no” the death penalty, and California will most probably also do the same in November. The march against capital punishment in the U.S. carries on slowly but surely. Sixteen states have already abolished or suspended lethal injections practiced by a nurse-executioner and turned them into life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. The year of the elections will not help the debate and turmoil that affects a nation still absorbed in the myth of guns. This is an extremely delicate issue for the vote in November.
Obama and Romney have very different positions on this, but even if the president says that “the death penalty does little to deter crime,” he doesn’t want to expose himself to the conservatives. He adds that when someone has committed a horrible crime and consequently loses their honor, it is justified that they pay with their life. This is a rather ambiguous position, although the necessity to proceed with DNA tests is being reinforced, as well as the recording of a possible confession before the death sentence.
Perhaps these may seem like insignificant details, but in a country where dozens of people have been executed unfairly and condemned by superficial juries filled with stereotypes and prejudice, the necessary evidence will eventually weigh in the balance. Even in the U.N., there are an increasing number of countries in favor of abolishing the death sentence permanently or having an open-ended moratorium, which is a very encouraging sign.
Another element that is depressing and a countertrend is the growing number of executions in countries like China and Iran, which are indifferent to the call of the U.N. to respect human rights. The fact that the drafters of the new “democratic constitutions” for countries at war, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, did not exclude it from their recommendations does not help either.
It is not only a fight against barbaric acts; it is also a cultural fight. The bans in the states of New York, New Jersey, New Mexico, Illinois and Connecticut in the past 5 years indicate that a delicate, albeit productive debate is in progress. Ban Ki Moon continuously advocates taking more measures. Even Obama will be able to express himself on the question more firmly if the vote in November favors him. For now, the President seems to be the prisoner of a cautious silence.
Obama and Romney have very different positions on this, but even if the president says that “the death penalty does little to deter crime,” he doesn’t want to expose himself to the conservatives. He adds that when someone has committed a horrible crime and consequently loses their honor, it is justified that they pay with their life. This is a rather ambiguous position, although the necessity to proceed with DNA tests is being reinforced, as well as the recording of a possible confession before the death sentence.
Perhaps these may seem like insignificant details, but in a country where dozens of people have been executed unfairly and condemned by superficial juries filled with stereotypes and prejudice, the necessary evidence will eventually weigh in the balance. Even in the U.N., there are an increasing number of countries in favor of abolishing the death sentence permanently or having an open-ended moratorium, which is a very encouraging sign.
Another element that is depressing and a countertrend is the growing number of executions in countries like China and Iran, which are indifferent to the call of the U.N. to respect human rights. The fact that the drafters of the new “democratic constitutions” for countries at war, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, did not exclude it from their recommendations does not help either.
It is not only a fight against barbaric acts; it is also a cultural fight. The bans in the states of New York, New Jersey, New Mexico, Illinois and Connecticut in the past 5 years indicate that a delicate, albeit productive debate is in progress. Ban Ki Moon continuously advocates taking more measures. Even Obama will be able to express himself on the question more firmly if the vote in November favors him. For now, the President seems to be the prisoner of a cautious silence.