INDEX



Document(s)

Death Penalty in Pakistan

By Justice Project Pakistan, on 10 October 2022


2022

NGO report

Pakistan


More details See the document

The implementation of capital punishment has seen substantial shifts over the course of the past decade. During the period from the end of a moratorium on executions in December 2014 to August 2019, an estimated 1,800 death sentences were imposed across the entire court system and 520 people were executed. Various amendments to Pakistan’s criminal law over the past several decades have resulted in a list of 33 offenses, most of which are far removed from the definition of the “most serious crimes” under international law. A full list of offences is attached at the end of the report.

  • Document type NGO report
  • Countries list Pakistan

Document(s)

The Court is Satisfied with the Confession: Bahrain Death Sentences Follow Torture, Sham Trials

By Human Rights Watch, on 10 October 2022


Article

Bahrain

ar
More details See the document

In a February 2019 letter to the United Nations Office in Geneva, the government of Bahrain claimed that its courts “actually hand down very few death sentences.” In fact, since 2011, courts in Bahrain have sentenced 51 people to death, and the state has executed six since the end of a de facto moratorium on executions in 2017. As of June 2022, 26 men were on death row, and all have exhausted their appeals. Under Bahraini law, King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa has the power to ratify these sentences, commute them, or grant pardons.

Document(s)

The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area: Background Paper 2022

By Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, on 7 October 2022


2022

Regional body report


More details See the document

This paper updates The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area: Background Paper 2021. It is intended to provide a concise update to highlight changes in the status of the death penalty in OSCE participating States since the previous publication and to promote constructive discussion of the issue. It covers the period from 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022.

  • Document type Regional body report

Document(s)

Termes de référence – Évaluation sensible au genre de la Journée Mondiale 2021

on 7 October 2022



More details Download [ pdf - 111 Ko ]
  • Document type Array

Document(s)

Terms of Reference – Gender-sensitive evaluation of the 2021 World Day Against

on 7 October 2022



More details Download [ pdf - 91 Ko ]
  • Document type Array

Document(s)

UN Special Procedures toolkit – World Day 2022

By FIACAT and the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty, on 26 September 2022


2022

World Coalition

fr
More details Download [ pdf - 335 Ko ]

There are several ways in which individuals and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) can work with the UN to report human rights violations. One way is through the special procedures of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC). Find out how to work with them here.

Document(s)

Estimating the effect of death penalty moratoriums on homicide rates using the synthetic control method

By Stephen N. Oliphant, on 18 September 2022


2022

Academic report

Moratorium

United States


More details See the document

Research examining death penalty deterrence has been characterized as inconclusive and uninformative. The present analysis heeds a recommendation from prior research to examine single-state changes in death penalty policy using the synthetic control method. Data from the years 1979–2019 were used to construct synthetic controls and estimate the effects of death penalty moratoriums on homicide rates in Illinois, New Jersey, Washington, and Pennsylvania. Moratoriums on capital punishment resulted in nonsignificant homicide reductions in all four states.

  • Document type Academic report
  • Countries list United States
  • Themes list Moratorium

Document(s)

(Not) Talking about Capital Punishment in the Xi Jinping Era

By Tobias Smith, Matthew Robertson and Susan Trevaskes, on 1 September 2022


2022

Academic report

China


More details See the document

An investigation into the death penalty in the People’s Republic of China in the Xi Jinping era (2012–) shows that unlike previous administrations, Xi does not appear to have articulated a signature death penalty policy. Where policy in China is unclear, assessing both the quality and frequency of discourse on the topic can provide evidence regarding an administration’s priorities.
This article was first published in Crime Justice Journal: https://www.crimejusticejournal.com/issue/view/119

  • Document type Academic report
  • Countries list China

Document(s)

Framing Death Penalty Politics in Malaysia

By Thaatchaayini Kananatu, on 1 September 2022


Academic report

Malaysia


More details See the document

The death penalty in Malaysia is a British colonial legacy that has undergone significant scrutiny in recent times. While the Malaysian Federal Constitution 1957 provides that ‘no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law’, there are several criminal offences (including drug-related crimes) that impose the mandatory and discretionary death penalty. Using Benford and Snow’s framing processes, this paper reviews death penalty politics in Malaysia by analysing the rhetoric of abolitionists and retentionists. The abolitionists, comprising activist lawyers and non-government organisations, tend to use ‘human rights’ and ‘injustice’ frames, which humanise the ‘criminal’ and gain international support. The retentionists, such as victims’ families, use a ‘victims’ justice’ frame emphasising the ‘inhuman’ nature of violent crimes. In addition, the retentionist state shifts between ‘national security’ and ‘national development’ frames. This paper finds that death penalty politics in Malaysia is predominantly a politics of framing.
This article was first published in Crime Justice Journal: https://www.crimejusticejournal.com/issue/view/119

  • Document type Academic report
  • Countries list Malaysia

Document(s)

Holdouts in the South Pacific: Explaining Death Penalty Retention in Papua New Guinea and Tonga

By Daniel Pascoe and Andrew Novak, on 1 September 2022


Academic report

Papua New Guinea

Tonga


More details See the document

The South Pacific forms a cohesive region with broadly similar cultural attributes, legal systems and colonial histories. A comparative analysis starts from the assumption that these countries should also have similar criminal justice policies. However, until 2022, both Papua New Guinea and Tonga were retentionist death penalty outliers in the South Pacific, a region home to seven other fully abolitionist members of the United Nations. In this article, we use the comparative method to explain why Papua New Guinea and Tonga have pursued a different death penalty trajectory than their regional neighbours. Eschewing the traditional social science explanations for death penalty retention, we suggest two novel explanations for ongoing retention in Papua New Guinea and Tonga: the law and order crisis in the former and the traditionally powerful monarchy in the latter.
This article was first published in Crime Justice Journal: https://www.crimejusticejournal.com/issue/view/119

  • Document type Academic report
  • Countries list Papua New Guinea / Tonga