Death Penalty

The California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice issued a 117-page report yesterday on the administration of the death penalty in California. They have agreed unanimously that capital punishment in California is broken and that implementing reforms will cost a fortune. Through four years of extensive research into those on death row, the crimes eligible for capital punishment, and the duration of time between convictions and executions, the Commission called for a major overhaul of the California Criminal Justice system. California currently has the largest death row in the nation, with 670 prisoners. However, since the reinstallation of the death penalty in 1976, California has only executed 13 people.

The commission's examination of the criminal justice system, wrongful convictions, and the quality of life on death row all reveal a process that is "dysfunctional" and severely flawed. The state's death penalty system is close to collapse, and many death row prisoners are effectively sentenced to life incarceration, though at death penalty prices, which are 10 times more expensive. As this report makes plain, the cost of the death penalty in California is staggering.  California without the death penalty would cost taxpayers just $11.5 million a year.  The current system costs more than 10 times as much - $137 million annually -  and reforming the death penalty as recommended would cost almost a quarter of a billion dollars a year.   And even reforming the system will not eliminate the risk that errors will lead to the execution of an innocent man.

Overhauling the system would likely bankrupt the already destitute state budget. Meanwhile, California has also been proposing to move their death row to San Quentin, and to build a new unit in the prison already there. Beginning estimates have already multiplied in size, with each prison cell costing an average of 800,000 dollars per inmate. California's current lethal injection gurney is housed in their former gas chamber.

Recent cost studies in other states have all shown that the death penalty is a money pit.  In Kansas a 2003 study showed that death penalty cases cost 70% more than non-death penalty case.  A 2004 Tennessee study showed that death penalty trials cost 48% more than non-death penalty trials.  And in Maryland earlier this year a study determined that death penalty cases cost 3 times more than non-death penalty cases.

In California, as in other states, the death penalty takes up resources that could be used for more effective crime prevention measures and meaningful victims' services.  Education, drug treatment, mental health care, or more police on the streets are far better investments that can have a real impact on reducing crime.  Surely the people of California deserve more for their $100 or $200 million a year.   

Brian

DPAC

Today Philip Alston, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary and Arbitrary Executions concluded a two-week tour of the US by issuing a strong statement on a variety of issues, including the death penalty.  Professor Alston visited two states, Alabama and Texas.  The former, because it has the highest per capita execution rate, and the latter, because it has the most executions period. 

Logical choices given his limited amount of time.  His statement comes to unsurprising conclusions. 

That, in Texas, he met with officials who "acknowledged that innocent people might have been executed." 

That: "While some officials seem to consider due process rights as mere 'technicalities', the growing number of exonerations underscores that they are in fact indispensible safeguards against injustice in cases in which an error can be fatal." 

That, in Alabama: "Government officials seem strikingly indifferent to the risk of executing innocent people and have a range of standard responses, most of which are characterized by a refusal to engage with the facts."

A less anticipated part of the statement concerns Alabama's cozy economic relationship with Germany:

"Alabama's systematic rejection of concerns that basic international standards are being violated sits oddly alongside the Government's determined and successful bid to attract foreign investment from the European Union in particular. Indeed, Alabama's largest export market in 2007 was Germany. It would thus be appropriate for Alabama to engage in a dialogue on due process concerns in its death penalty with the international community."

Of course, given their "refusal to engage with the facts", it is highly doubtful that Alabama would be the one to initiate a "dialogue on due process concerns in its death penalty with the international community."  So it would probably be up to the international community to make the first move.

According to this AP article from about a month ago, "Alabama is now home to 50 German industries that state officials say employ upward of 12,000 people. Thousands more work in related companies."  Major German investors include ThyssenKrupp, currently building "a mammoth, $3.7 billion steel plant near the Gulf of Mexico in Mobile County", as well as BASF AG, Degussa AG and DaimlerChrysler AG's Mercedes-Benz.  Much more information on this interesting relationship can be had at the Alabama Germany Partnership.

Beyond this unexpected aside about EU and German investment, the lion's share of the Special Rapporteur's statement is devoted to death penalty flaws that are all too familiar to those of us who follow this issue regularly.  The Rapporteur recommends, among other things, that problems related to "judicial independence and the absence of an adequate right to counsel should be addressed immediately"; and that "the federal courts should be able to review all substantive claims of injustice in capital cases."  In far far too many cases, procedural technicalities cut off review of important issues, including questions of innocence, in capital cases, and the Rapporteur's recommendation seems reasonable: 

"The best way forward would be for Congress to enact legislation permitting federal courts to review all issues in death penalty cases on the merits, with appropriate exceptions, such as where a defendant attempts to deliberately bypass state court procedures."

Yet, despite saying all the right things and making completely reasonable recommendations, the influence of this Special Rapporteur's visit, or indeed any United Nations criticism of the US death penalty system, will probably be seriously limited. 

Which makes it even more interesting that today's statement drops such a strong hint about other possible avenues of influence.

Brian

DPAC

Virginia became only the second state in the U.S. to reach the grim milestone of 100 executions yesterday when Robert Yarbrough was put to death by lethal injection at 9:28pm.  Virginia is joined only by Texas, a state that has now executed 406 inmates since the reinstatement of their death penalty.  Yes, you read that number correctly ... 406.  Not good company to keep, Virginia ...

There are currently 2 other executions schedule for this summer in Virginia, which you can view here.  This sad day in Virginia's history comes at a time when the rest of the country is moving away from executions.  Visit Amnesty's Mid-Atlantic Regional Office or Virginians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty to find out how you can get more involved and help end capital punishment in Virginia!

~ Jessie, DPAC

                With all of the atrocities the world has seen committed since World War II, academics and the public have gradually seen Human Rights as global and not just rights enjoyed by a few in privileged Western nations. While this seems like a no-brainer; sadly, International Law and Human Rights are predicated by state and federal laws, which have MORE jurisdiction than those treaties and agreements signed by many of the nations of the world.

                This perspective in International Relations has begun to ignite an already strained relationship between Texas and Mexico that has become increasingly difficult over the Merida Initiative and immigration debates. However, as Texas prepares to execute five Mexican Nationals, Mexico has appealed to the World Court for a second time after the United States declared the ICJ's ruling arbitrary.

                The International Court of Justice ruled in 2004 that fifty one Mexican nationals in the U.S. were not given their consular rights to contact their government for assistance and that their cases should be reviewed. President Bush, former governor of Texas, signer of 152 death warrants and staunch defender of the death penalty and its "deterrent effects", directed state courts to review the cases that the Word Court had cited, stating that the World Court must adhere to its international treaty obligations. At the same time he withdrew the U.S. from a second optional protocol that required governments to accept ICJ decisions. Texas refused to review the cases, on the grounds that the ICJ couldn't overstep them legally in their jurisdiction. And the Supreme Court agreed with Texas that Bush had overstepped his authority in the order to review the cases.  How is this possible? Although the U.S. signed onto the Vienna Convention, which guarantees consular assistance to those imprisoned, it was never enacted into U.S. Federal Law, making it ineffective. Don't mess with Texas.

                Mexico has filed an appeal to the ICJ , stating that the U.S. "cannot invoke municipal law as justification for failure to perform its international legal obligations". Representatives from the U.S. stated that although they did not dispute the 2004 decision, Mexico abused the court to put pressure on the U.S. to retry the 51 Mexican Nationals. Texas acknowledged that they had NOT given consular rights to the nationals on death row, but that "intervention at this stage could significantly complicate and undermine dialogue" between the two countries, and that the argument was raised too late and would not have impacted the sentencing.

                As the Mexican delegation to the World Court awaits the decision, 5 Mexican Nationals in Texas are in immediate danger of being executed, as Texas will most likely execute Jose Medellin on August 5th.

                The U.S. death penalty has come before the World Court three times, all of which the U.S. ignored orders to stop executions of Foreign Nationals. Mexico opposes the U.S. death penalty and abolished their own capital punishment in 1937. Meanwhile, our neighbors to the North are becoming incensed over Canadian Nationals on death row, and the U.S.'s death sentences to extradited convicts who the U.S. had promised to Canada not to seek the death penalty for.

Emily

DPAC

Execution delayed in Texas!

Since yesterday, death penalty advocates and opponents have their eyes focused on Texas. Charles Hood was supposed to be executed for the 1989 murders of Ronald Williamson and Tracie Lynn Wallace, but his execution was put on hold after hours of legal wrangling between attorneys and judges.

On June 16^th, Charles Hood's lawyers filed evidence that the judge and the prosecutor at Hood's trial were having an affair at the time of the trial, which raised doubts about the fairness of the proceedings. However, the Court of Criminal Appeals rejected the appeal, saying that the allegations were not new.

On June 17^th, the day of the scheduled execution, the Texas judge who had set Charles Hood's execution date withdrew the execution warrant, and then withdrew from the case. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals subsequently ordered reinstatement of the warrant but this was not immediately possible because of the withdrawal of the judge from the case. As the midnight deadline for the execution approached and litigation continued in the courts, the prison authorities said that they would not have time to carry out the lethal injection in line with its execution protocol, which led Governor Rick Perry to issue a one-off 30-day reprieve from execution.

So although Hood was able to gain a stay, his execution will probably be impending as Texas rushes to execute him as fast as possible. Hood's execution has been postponed five times as Texas courts have deliberated over the ethics of his trial. However, the United States still managed to execute someone-Terry Lyn Short was put to death last night by the state of Oklahoma, despite a conviction based on evidence from a jailhouse informant who received a lesser sentence in exchange for his testimony. The court refused to hear another inmate's testimony that would have refuted much of the evidence, saying that Short was entitled to a "fair trial, and not a perfect one".

Mathilde

DPAC