INDEX

Published in December 2023.

In popular, intellectual and political culture, the Middle Ages are intrinsically tied to violent images of public executions. To historians of the medieval period, this temporal attachment of the death penalty to a remote period is puzzling, especially since it is still widely enforced in the world today and was only relatively recently abolished in Europe. Capital punishment is not only a part of history, but a modern-day reality. Why, therefore, do we pin this punishment to the Middle Ages? This paper aims to analyse the discourses surrounding the usage of the Middle Ages in modern discussions on the death penalty, and to clarify medieval practices of capital punishment, showing how remote they are from our contemporary understanding

• Document type Academic Article
• Countries list United Kingdom
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 114
  
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

Published in December 2023.

This paper reflects on the role of international human rights treaties in promoting universal abolition and progressive restriction of the death penalty. It suggests that over the past quarter of a century a ‘new human rights dynamic’ has aimed to generate universal acceptance that however it is administered, the death penalty violates the human rights of all citizens exposed to it. Nevertheless, defences of capital punishment based on principles of national sovereignty are engrained in some parts of the world, particularly in Asia and the Middle East. The human rights project struggles to make inroads into such jurisdictions where political will is opposed to abolition, and trenchant protection of sovereignty threatens the very universality of these rights.

• Document type Academic Article
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_pays in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 107
  
• Themes list Trend Towards Abolition
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

This publication seeks to make visible the gender and intersectional discrimination faced by women in the judicial process leading to the death penalty. Through the various articlesin this publication, the authors bring to light the reality of women facing the death penalty through a different lens.

The first author, Shekinah Bright Kiting’a, in making a compelling case for abolition of the death penalty, explores how the death penalty uniquely affects women in the context of motherhood. Further, she highlights the rights and well-being of the children affected by their mothers’ death sentences, revealing flaws in our legal and ethical systems. With the overall aim of advocating for its abolition due to its significant impact on both parenthood and children’s rights, her article seeks to push for reforms that honour motherhood and prioritize children’s well-being in these difficult circumstances.

Kenaya Komba dissects gender disparity in the judicial system by exploring the intersection of domestic violence and the death penalty. In making a case for a restorative approach to justice, her article analyses the impact of capital punishment on victims of domestic violence and the systemic injustice and biases they continue to grapple with. Her elaborate analysis of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 and the Protection Against Domestic Violence Act, 2016, highlights the urgent need for reform in the legal system.

While Analyzing the role the media plays in shaping perceptions of women on death row, Patricia Chepkirui evaluates the implications of positive and negative media portrayals of such women by highlighting the ethical responsibilities of media in the coverage of women on death row cases. The article ultimately underscores the significance of responsiblemedia coverage in ensuring that media exposure of cases of women on death row is fair,balanced, and respectful of their rights and dignity.

Alex Tamei delves into the intricacies of abuse, gender-based violence, and trauma as mitigating factors in death penalty sentencing for women. His article comparatively analyses two Kenyan cases of murder in retaliation to intimate partner violence, seeking to shed light on the plight of victims of gender-based violence. The article effortlessly brings out the nexus between the death penalty and intimate partner violence and makessolid recommendations for change.

The fifth author, Patience Chepchirchir, delves into the nexus between psychological abuse and provocation. Through her article, she brings out the scope of psychological abuse while focusing on the linkage between emotional abuse and provocation and how the same can be considered as mitigating factors. Through an elaborate analysis of case law, she makes a case for psychological abuse of women as a mitigating circumstance during sentencing.

Stella Cherono’s article reflects on the intersectional discrimination faced by women in the criminal trial process leading to death row. The article highlights the complex and overlapping forms of discrimination women experience during the pretrial, trial and sentencing stages. Through her comprehensive analysis of gendered pathways to offending and imprisonment, she challenges how society perceives discrimination.

Loraine Koskei Interrogates the emerging jurisprudence on Intimate Partner Violence.Her article lays out the gendered factor in the commissioning and sentencing of women convicted of murder and offers possible recommendations.

• Document type NGO report
• Countries list Kenya
• Themes list Death Row Conditions / Fair Trial / Gender / Women
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

Published in October 2023.

For capital punishment to be lawful in the United States of America, it must occur without cruelty, a requirement of the traditional reading of the Eighth Amendment. There has never been a consensus on what form of execution is cruel, although some historic practices are shockingly barbaric to modern sensibilities— I think of the “draw and quarter” technique. The family of the murdered victim may fairly argue that the murderous behavior should be the minimum degree of cruelty meted out. But western countries eschew that standard and seek moderate forms, partly to deter by punishment and partly as a forfeit of the murderer’s life for the victim’s life when execution is allowed in that state. Certainly, there is substantial support for continuation of execution in states that allow it. The judges must be respectful of that, but still, they must respect the 8th amendment. At present, the prevalent method of execution in the United States is “lethal injection” using injectable medicines in very high doses that are repurposed to kill the prisoner. Because it is impossible to ask an executed individual about the cruelty experienced during their own death, the state instead relies on the empathy of witnesses to gauge the cruelty of a prisoner’s execution. Lethal injection was expected to be a bloodless execution and aimed to eliminate the visible appearance of cruelty, sometimes through the use of a paralytic.

• Document type Academic Article
• Countries list United States
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 114
  
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

Published in October 2023.

The most commonly observed fact of American capital punishment is its present outlier status: the United States (U.S.) is the only developed Western democracy that retains the death penalty, and it does so not simply as a matter of law, but as a matter of practice, conducting numerous executions every year. This “exceptionalism” with respect to the death penalty is noteworthy, but focusing on present-day American retention obscures many additional aspects of American death penalty exceptionalism. This Keynote will trace several ways in which the American death penalty was an outlier at its founding and throughout its subsequent history, as well as the varied aspects of its exceptionalism today. I will conclude by predicting that U.S. exceptionalism will soon come to an end–with an “exceptional” form of death penalty abolition, traceable to the distinctive path of the American death penalty

• Document type Academic Article
• Countries list United States
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 114
  
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

Published on October 12, 2023.

In the seminal Furman v. Georgia case from 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court (in effect) invalidated all death penalty statutes then inforce in American jurisdictions. After many states went back to their legislative drawing boards, some of the revised statutes were approved by the Court in 1976. At that time, Gallup found that 66 percent of the American public supported the death penalty, while 26 percent stood opposed. While support grew to 80 percent in 1994, a recent Gallup Poll from October 2022 shows that this figure has dropped to 55 percent. Recently, only 36 percent of Americans still support the death penalty given the alternative punishment of life imprisonment.

• Document type Academic Article
• Countries list United States
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 114
  
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

Published in 2023.

This article is the first in a series that will systematically explore how gender has affected the criminal proceedings of women currently on death row. For this inaugural article, we have undertaken the first—and, to our knowledge, only comprehensive analysis of gender-based violence (“GBV”) in the lives of all women currently on death row, examining the prevalence of GBV and how it has shaped the lives and affected the criminal prosecutions of women facing execution. Our research reveals, for the first time, that almost every woman on death row in the United States has experienced GBV. Indeed,the great majority have experienced more than one incident of GBV in their lifetime. Our findings align with previous studies demonstrating that women’s pathways to incarceration are paved with physical, sexual, and psychological abuse. Our research further shows that both in the United States and around the world, defense attorneys frequently fail to present evidence of GBV in women’s capital trials. When they do introduce such evidence, they fail to fully explain the nature of their clients’ victimization and the harm they have suffered as a result. Moreover, prosecutors frequently rely on gendered tropes to discredit women’s accounts of violence such as childhood sexual abuse, rape, and intimate partner violence. Consequently, those who sentence women to die rarely comprehend the extensive trauma that the women have endured throughout their lives, and how that trauma relates to their legal and moral culpability.

• Document type Academic Article
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_pays in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 107
  
• Themes list Gender / Women
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

Published in 2023.

While 70% of the world’s countries have abolished the death penalty, also known as capital punishment, much of the United States continues to use it in its criminal legal proceedings.According to the Death Penalty Information Center, at least 190 people were exonerated prior to their fated execution date after being wrongly convicted and sentenced to death in the United States. There is no way to tell how many of the 1,562 people, who have been executed in the United States, were actually innocent. As there are wrongful convictions still happening today, it is no surprise that most countries consider the death penalty a human rights issue.

• Document type Academic Article
• Countries list United States
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 114
  
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

Published in 2023.

This article assesses whether there is evidence to suggest that the UPR can influence the timing of a country’s decision to abolish the death penalty. The evidence arises out of the examination of thirty case studies of countries that abolished the death penalty, or ratifiedthe leading treaty calling for abolition. This article concludes that in some circumstances the UPR does appear to influence that timing. These conclusions can assist civil society organizations as they refine their advocacy to encourage more countries to abolish the death penalty.

Part I of this article offers an introduction to the global abolitionist movement and two of its advocacy targets: the U.N. Human Rights Council and the UPR. Part II makes the case for focusing on the UPR to assess the efficacy of U.N. advocacy. Part III describes the process of abolition and offers several theories as to how the UPR might influence a country’s trajectory toward abolition. Part IV sets out the study’s methodology and encompasses the analysis of the case studies, focusing first on countries that have abolished the death penalty early in a UPR cycle, then on countries that have abolished at mid-cycle, and finally on countries that have abolished during the tail end of the cycle. The conclusion discusses the implications of these findings for civil society organizations working toward abolition of the death penalty.

• Document type Academic Article
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_pays in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 107
  
• Themes list Trend Towards Abolition
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

Published on July 2, 2023

This article focuses on the cases of 664 foreign nationals, the majority of whom are migrant workers, under sentence of death across the Gulf states (including Jordan and Lebanon) between 2016 and 2021. The features of these cases suggest that they are inextricably linked to migrant workers’ dependency under the kafala system, with examples of migrants duped into smuggling drugs across the border by their migrant broker, and once in country, accounts of violent altercations due to disputes about exit visas, and in the case of migrant domestic workers, self-defence against sexual violence. Engaging with the burgeoning literature on immigration, exploitation and criminalisation, as well as scholarship on capital punishment, this article will explore the multiple and unique layers of dependency fostered by the kafala system that place migrant workers at higher risk of the death penalty in these Gulf jurisdictions.

• Document type Academic Article
• Countries list Jordan / Kuwait / Lebanon / Qatar / Saudi Arabia / United Arab Emirates
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 114
  
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127