Post by Anja Nieser on Sept 17, 2006 23:34:47 GMT -5
A proposal to curb Asia's over-active death row
George Orwell's famous account of a hanging in colonial Burma provides a
compelling critique of the death penalty. Walking behind the condemned man
on the way to the gallows, Orwell noticed him step slightly aside to avoid
a puddle on the path.
"It is curious, but till that moment I had never realised what it means to
destroy a healthy, conscious man," he wrote. "When I saw the prisoner step
aside to avoid the puddle, I saw the mystery, the unspeakable wrongness,
of cutting a life short when it is in full tide. This man was not dying,
he was alive just as we were alive ... his brain still remembered,
foresaw, reasoned -- reasoned even about puddles."
If you were to judge from the western press you might think this kind of
gruesome scene takes place most often in the American boondocks. But while
it is always good sport to criticise the US, in terms of lives lost it is
marginal.
Asia -- the region in which Orwell's essay was set -- is the world's best
practice when it comes to executing people, accounting for well over 80 %
of known executions worldwide: 15 Asian states retain the death penalty;
their execution methods include hanging, shooting and lethal injection.
Singapore scores the world's highest per capita execution rate, with more
than 400 hung since 1991, according to United Nations figures.
China, meanwhile, is the death-penalty superpower, executing at least
1,770 people last year, according to Amnesty International. The true total
is likely to be much higher but, like a number of Asian states (but unlike
the muchmaligned US), China refuses to provide official statistics on
death sentences passed and executions carried out.
However, the news is not all bad for those Asians who oppose capital
punishment. Five Asian states have abolished the death penalty in the past
decade: Cambodia, Nepal, Timor-Leste, Bhutan and the Philippines, where
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed a bill outlawing the death
penalty in June.
To build on this momentum, abolitionist states in the region should
establish a coalition against the death penalty. Support and counsel from
Europe would be welcome but in order to forestall any claims about
neocolonialism, the running should be made by Asian leaders.
The coalition should be guided by a single consideration: effectiveness.
Rather than issuing loud condemnations and raising indiscriminate trade
sanctions, which would be unlikely to save a single life, it should look
for creative ways to nudge regional countries toward abolition.
There are several ways to structure the coalition's work, none of which
would involve megaphones. It could be politic to start with de facto
abolitionist countries (such as Burma) and seek to move them up the
spectrum towards formal abolition. It could focus initially on liberal
democracies, which tend to be easier to influence than more closed
societies.
A particular opportunity exists in South Korea, which has not executed
anyone since 1998 but maintains a death row of 60-odd individuals. There
is a growing abolitionist movement in the country, supported by Kim
Daejung, former president. A similar debate is stirring in Malaysia.
Ultimately this issue will be decided in Seoul and Kuala Lumpur, but a
regional grouping may be able to influence the thinking in these and other
capitals. Rather than simply demanding immediate universal abolition, the
coalition should employ more nuanced strategies. It could, for example,
encourage retentionist countries to restrict the number and type of
offences for which capital punishment is imposed, abolish mandatory death
penalties, release comprehensive official statistics on regional
executions and institute safeguards to protect the basic rights of those
on death row.
The coalition could also consider appointing a high-level advisory body
composed of eminent people, in order to generate ideas and provide
political cover. A good model for such a body was Canada's International
Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, which first identified
the collective international "responsibility to protect" civilians in the
case of genocide, ethnic cleansing and egregious human rights violations.
The task for abolitionists is extremely difficult but not hopeless. If
advocates in Asia put a shoulder to this wheel, they may be able to move
it a good distance. Certainly, wheels rarely shift without being pushed.
(source: Michael Fullilove--The Financial Express -- the writer directs
the global issues programme at the Lowy Institute for International Policy
in Sydney)
George Orwell's famous account of a hanging in colonial Burma provides a
compelling critique of the death penalty. Walking behind the condemned man
on the way to the gallows, Orwell noticed him step slightly aside to avoid
a puddle on the path.
"It is curious, but till that moment I had never realised what it means to
destroy a healthy, conscious man," he wrote. "When I saw the prisoner step
aside to avoid the puddle, I saw the mystery, the unspeakable wrongness,
of cutting a life short when it is in full tide. This man was not dying,
he was alive just as we were alive ... his brain still remembered,
foresaw, reasoned -- reasoned even about puddles."
If you were to judge from the western press you might think this kind of
gruesome scene takes place most often in the American boondocks. But while
it is always good sport to criticise the US, in terms of lives lost it is
marginal.
Asia -- the region in which Orwell's essay was set -- is the world's best
practice when it comes to executing people, accounting for well over 80 %
of known executions worldwide: 15 Asian states retain the death penalty;
their execution methods include hanging, shooting and lethal injection.
Singapore scores the world's highest per capita execution rate, with more
than 400 hung since 1991, according to United Nations figures.
China, meanwhile, is the death-penalty superpower, executing at least
1,770 people last year, according to Amnesty International. The true total
is likely to be much higher but, like a number of Asian states (but unlike
the muchmaligned US), China refuses to provide official statistics on
death sentences passed and executions carried out.
However, the news is not all bad for those Asians who oppose capital
punishment. Five Asian states have abolished the death penalty in the past
decade: Cambodia, Nepal, Timor-Leste, Bhutan and the Philippines, where
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed a bill outlawing the death
penalty in June.
To build on this momentum, abolitionist states in the region should
establish a coalition against the death penalty. Support and counsel from
Europe would be welcome but in order to forestall any claims about
neocolonialism, the running should be made by Asian leaders.
The coalition should be guided by a single consideration: effectiveness.
Rather than issuing loud condemnations and raising indiscriminate trade
sanctions, which would be unlikely to save a single life, it should look
for creative ways to nudge regional countries toward abolition.
There are several ways to structure the coalition's work, none of which
would involve megaphones. It could be politic to start with de facto
abolitionist countries (such as Burma) and seek to move them up the
spectrum towards formal abolition. It could focus initially on liberal
democracies, which tend to be easier to influence than more closed
societies.
A particular opportunity exists in South Korea, which has not executed
anyone since 1998 but maintains a death row of 60-odd individuals. There
is a growing abolitionist movement in the country, supported by Kim
Daejung, former president. A similar debate is stirring in Malaysia.
Ultimately this issue will be decided in Seoul and Kuala Lumpur, but a
regional grouping may be able to influence the thinking in these and other
capitals. Rather than simply demanding immediate universal abolition, the
coalition should employ more nuanced strategies. It could, for example,
encourage retentionist countries to restrict the number and type of
offences for which capital punishment is imposed, abolish mandatory death
penalties, release comprehensive official statistics on regional
executions and institute safeguards to protect the basic rights of those
on death row.
The coalition could also consider appointing a high-level advisory body
composed of eminent people, in order to generate ideas and provide
political cover. A good model for such a body was Canada's International
Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, which first identified
the collective international "responsibility to protect" civilians in the
case of genocide, ethnic cleansing and egregious human rights violations.
The task for abolitionists is extremely difficult but not hopeless. If
advocates in Asia put a shoulder to this wheel, they may be able to move
it a good distance. Certainly, wheels rarely shift without being pushed.
(source: Michael Fullilove--The Financial Express -- the writer directs
the global issues programme at the Lowy Institute for International Policy
in Sydney)