By Stephanie Wilkinson
"I regard the death penalty as a savage and immoral institution that undermines the moral and legal foundations of society. I reject the notion that the death penalty has any essential deterrent effect on potential offenders. I am convinced that the contrary is true — that savagery begets only savagery." — Andrei Sakharov
In 1972 the death penalty was suspended in the USA partly because many people being executed were black males accused of raping white women in the southern states. The US Supreme Court found that the death penalty was capricious and arbitrary; the states were instructed to rewrite their laws under which people could be sentenced to death. After four years, on July 2, 1976, the court reinstated the death penalty. The first execution was on January 17, 1977, when Garry Gilmore was killed by firing squad in Utah.
Since that time, 240 persons have been executed, and there are now more than 2800 awaiting execution. You might think that all these executions would have reduced the US murder rate, but there is obviously a great deal of truth in Sakharov's observation, because the USA now has the highest recorded murder rate in the world.
The FBI publication Crime in the US for 1992 shows that murder rates in states which have abolished the death penalty averaged 4.9 murders per 100,000 population, whilst states still using the death penalty averaged 9.1 murders per 100,000 population.
Since 1976, when the United States reinstated capital punishment, 41 countries have abolished it. The only countries which allow the execution of juveniles under the age of 18 are Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia — and the USA.
Human rights abuses
At the same time that the Clinton administration is accusing China of human rights abuses, the same human rights are being violated in the USA, where people are being killed nearly every week — most of them people who are of colour, poor, mentally ill or retarded, and including many juveniles. There are constant reports of dubious forensic "experts" and court-appointed attorneys (particularly in Texas) who have little interest in protecting the rights of their indigent clients.
There are also rumours of a cover-up by state prosecutors and police over the use of false evidence. Many judicial officers seem to believe that if the evidence of guilt is overwhelming, then the accused should have no due process rights. Thus, these poor wretches are sent to death row and treated inhumanely until they are executed.
Michael L. Riley, a prisoner on death row in Texas, writes of "unending hours of mental and physical torment. In summer the temperature reaches sometimes the 120s and in the winter drops to below freezing. The daily diet consists of starch and pork. The few vegetables that we may get are so overcooked and dirty that they do more harm than good. The water we are forced to drink makes you sick just to smell it."
Racism, abuse and violence thrive when the state has decreed that prisoners' lives are worthless: "We are forced to buy soap, toothpaste and other necessities — but the officers are given the authority to take all those things from us when they feel like it. We have regulations that are only intended to make us react so we can be subjected to being beaten, stomped on and disrespected."
The US government claims that it is all right to execute people who have been convicted of murder. It is not seen as a human rights issue. The government of China also claims that it is only executing "criminals".
When capital punishment was abolished in Britain in 1965, Lord Chancellor Gardiner said: "When we abolished the punishment for treason that you should be hanged and then cut down while still alive, then disembowelled while still alive, and then quartered, we did not abolish that punishment because we sympathised with traitors, but because we took the view that this was a punishment no longer consistent with our self-respect."
Innocent executed
In a 1987 study by the Stanford Law Review, it was found that at least 350 persons were mistakenly convicted of potentially capital crimes from 1900 to 1985. Of these innocent people, 139 were sentenced to death, and 23 were executed.
Judicial review of capital cases has discovered more than 50 innocent persons sentenced to death since 1972. In 1993 alone, seven innocent people were released from death row. This represents one innocent person discovered and released for every five executions carried out during that year. The death penalty is irreversible — if a person is found innocent after he has been executed, it is too late to rectify the situation.
The poor are primary targets of the death penalty. More than 90% of those on death row were financially unable to hire an attorney to represent them at trial. Court-appointed lawyers are poorly paid, and there is a great shortage of lawyers willing to take such cases. Many prisoners have to depend on their own efforts or on other death row prisoners to present their appeals.
Racial discrimination
People of colour are more likely to be sentenced to death than whites, for the same crimes. Blacks and Latinos constitute nearly half of the death row population, but only 18% of the population.
Since 1930, 4048 people have been executed in the USA; 56% have been black or of other minority groups. For the crime of rape, 455 have been executed; 405 of those were black.
Since 1972, 84% of those executed were convicted of killing white persons; only one white person has been executed for the murder of a black. In the same period, almost half of all homicide victims were black. In a 1983 study of Georgia sentencing, capital defendants who kill white victims are 11 times more likely to receive the death sentence than those who kill black victims.
Public opinion polls have consistently shown a preference for imprisonment rather than execution. In 10 states where polis asked about specific alternatives, many more people wanted a life sentence without parole, or a combination of long-term incarceration and restitution, rather than the death penalty.
The death penalty keeps society from finding effective ways of reducing crime. The death penalty is a popular symbol of politicians' "get tough on crime" attitude, but it has proved worthless as a solution to violent crime. States whose resources and energies are not drained by the use of capital punishment are able to develop more effective methods of reducing violent crime.
Executions cost more than life imprisonment. Because life is at stake, court procedures take more time. The investigation is longer, jury selection is longer, and the appeals process can take years and generate enormous legal costs. By 1988, Florida had spent $57.2 million to accomplish the execution of 18 people. In Texas, six years of death penalty have cost the state an estimated $183.2 million, while schools, housing, health care and child-care are starved of funds, thus perpetuating the cycle of crime.
In Australia
Since the abolition of capital punishment in Australia over 25 years ago, and contrary to public perception, the murder rate has remained the same. Australian politicians calling for the reintroduction of capital punishment should first educate themselves about the use of executions in other countries and the terrible negative effects it has on the population.
It would be far better for politicians to address the causes of crime, including unemployment, poverty, child abuse and alcoholism, and to adopt positive measures in dealing with these causes. More government funding is needed for housing and family welfare and counselling services so that there will be fewer families under stress, less child abuse and less violence in the home.
In 1993 there were more than 50,000 reported cases of child abuse in Australia. These children grow into adults seeking to hurt others. Last year the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics showed that children are more likely to be killed by members of their own family than by a stranger.
Families of victims of violent crime need better trauma counselling facilities and other forms of support. We need to develop a more caring society towards the needs of all underprivileged persons. Obviously we will achieve a reduction in violent crime only by addressing these issues — capital punishment is going in the wrong direction.