Death Penalty
The World (Court) Is Watching
Today, the International Court of Justice (aka the World Court) issued an order calling for the US to take "all measures necessary" to stay the execution of Jose Medellin and four other Mexican nationals in danger of being put to death in the near future. In its 2004 judgment, the World Court had held that these cases must receive meaningful and effective review on the question of the right to consular assistance. To date, no such reviews have taken place. Jose Medellin is scheduled for execution in Texas on August 5.
This call for execution stays stems from a long-running dispute between Mexico and the US over the fact that Mexican nationals have often been sentenced to death in the US despite not having been informed of their right to seek assistance from Mexican consular officials. The US is obligated by Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR) to inform foreign nationals of this right.
Jose Medellin was not informed of this right when he was arrested. (Few Mexican nationals on death row have been.) Texas officials acknowledge as much, but appeals courts have ruled that this treaty right cannot be invoked because Medellin never raised the issue during his original trial or sentencing. On March 25, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that this procedural bar trumped US obligations under the Vienna Convention, arguing that Congress had to pass implementing legislation before the VCCR could be enforceable domestically.
As Amnesty International noted in its report on March 27: "The Supreme Court has effectively passed the buck to the other branches of government to act to ensure that the USA meets its international obligations."
So what happens next? Will Texas respect the World Court's decision and stay the execution of Jose Medellin? Will Congress eventually pass legislation implementing the VCCR so that the US can honor a treaty it has already signed?
Well, on July 14, Congress introduced the "Avena Case Implementation Act of 2008" which would allow Federal courts to hear the Vienna Convention claims of foreign nationals who were not advised of their consular rights. This legislation has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee.
Brian
DPAC
Comments: 8
Comment modified)
Thanks for your comments. The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations states that foreign nationals must be notified of their right to seek assistance upon their arrest by the court or law enforcement, which was not done in Medellin's case. Also, Medellin was represented by a lawyer who was suspended because of acting unethically in another case, making his new lawyers that much more responsible for trying to save their client's life. The World Court order is so important because when the U.S. signs international human rights treaties they become domestic law. Therefore, failure of Texas and the U.S. to follow these obligations could have very dire consequences for Americans abroad. When the United Nations examines the death penalty in America, they do not have a strictly abolitionist agenda, although a worldwide moratorium is a goal. Also, the trials for Slobodan Milosevic, former president of Serbia, were a result of his indictment for committing crimes of genocide against Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and Kosovo. Milosevic died during the proceedings of the trial. Check out the ICTY's link for information on the charges against him: http://www.un.org/icty/glance/milosevic.htm. In ICTY trials, the death penalty was not an option in sentencing.
~Emily, DPAC
OH yeah, I am a democrat before yuou start the bashing, simply sick of this scum coming to my state and ruining life for thousands
and the rest the illegal MEXICAN invaders sitting on death row will soon follow him to the infernal regions.
Actually - no they do not. Even if an international treaty is ratified (or an attempt at ratification is made) by Congress, such treaties are external matters, are not binding upon the individual States' courts nor do they supercede State statutes. Further, if any provision in an international treaty, ratified by Congress or not, is found to be contrary to State or Federal statutes, it is nullified, having no ability to supercede U.S. law.
No decision - even if well-founded (this one was not) - by the so-called "World Court" can have any enforceable effect on Texas law, absent a clearly-defined decision stating otherwise by the U.S. Supreme Court. Such a decision is just about as likely as that George W. Bush will fly to the Moon on gossamer wings - t'aint gonna happen...
The SCOTUS ruled Texas could proceed. The US Constitution establishes our legal system; not the World Court, the Hague, the European Union, or any other foreign body.
From the US State Department page for US citizens traveling abroad:
"CRIMINAL PENALTIES AND TREATMENT OF PRISONERS: While in a foreign country, a U.S. citizen is subject to that country’s laws and regulations, which sometimes differ significantly from those in the United States and may not afford the protections available to the individual under U.S. law."
Foreign governments should warn their citizens that murder is grounds for execution in the United States and keep their criminals at home.
For all blogs
