INDEX

The order struck during the regulatory years following Furman v. Georgia and Gregg v. Georgia has been inverted. Executions once were rarities of newsworthy moment; now, they are nearly twice-a-week occurrences that often pass with nary a notice. Skeptical scrutiny of death penalty cases once was the professed and practiced mission of the federal judiciary; now, words like weariness, ennui, and resentment seem better choices to capture the spirit of the federal courts when confronted with complaints from death row. As we will see, the various lines of objection join to form a sophisticated and comprehensive critique.

• Document type 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 $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 121
  
• Themes list Networks,
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

In the past thirty years, American attitudes towards those convicted of crimes have followed a devastating progression toward the dehumanization of criminal defendants. The evolution of law and policy has mirrored these changing attitudes. The philosophies behind incarceration have shifted from “facilitat[ing inmates’] productive re-entry back into the free world” to “using imprisonment merely to punish criminal offenders by … “containing’ them behind bars … for as long as possible.” 4 Rather than preventing crime or rehabilitating offenders, incarceration has become a means to satisfy society’s desire for vengeance and retribution. Responding to this push to punish, prosecutors in their haste to obtain a conviction are more likely to stress the heinousness of crimes rather than questioning the circumstances surrounding …

• Document type 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 $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 121
  
• Themes list Networks,
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

The study results indicate that when test subjects, many of whom are likely retributivists, are presented with information about the problem of innocence, the drop in support for capital punishment spans all points on the Likert scale. Our study suggests that more rigorous testing may demonstrate that an individual’s knowledge of the “innocence problem” can generate more profond changes in attitudes toward the death penalty than indicted by previous studies of the marshall Hypotheses.

• Document type 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 $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 121
  
• Themes list Public opinion, Innocence,
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

Although there is no constitutional requirement that a jury participate in the death penalty process, most states do provide, through their capital punishment statutes, that a jury will participate in the decision. The preference for jury sentencing in these circumstances reflects a reluctance to leave power over life solely in the hands of one judge. Still, some scholars have long criticized juries for administering punishment.

• Document type 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 $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 121
  
• Themes list Fair Trial,
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

The attitude of international law and practice to supreme penalties has evolved enormously over the past half-century. At Nuremberg, in 1946, capital punishment was imposed upon Nazi war criminals. But at the Rome Conference in 1998, when the international community provided for the establishment of the International Criminal Court, not only was capital punishment excluded, the text also limited the scope of life imprisonment. These changes were driven principally by evolving norms of international human rights law. The first changes became apparent in the early work of the International Law Commission on the Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, during the 1950s. When criminal prosecution returned to the international agenda, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, there was widespread agreement to exclude capital punishment. But at the Rome Conference, a relatively small and geographically isolated group of States made an aggressive attempt to defend capital punishment. Ultimately unsuccessful, their efforts only drew attention to a growing rejection of both capital punishment and life imprisonment in international and national legal systems

• Document type Article
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_pays in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 107
  
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 114
  
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 121
  
• Themes list Networks,
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

Capital punishment is not practiced by a majority of the world’s states. Anti-capital punishment domestic policies have led to an international law of human rights that emphatically prohibits cruel and inhuman punishment. International concern for the abolition of capital punishment has prompted Islamic states that still endorse and practice the death penalty to respond with equally compelling concerns based on the tenets of Islamic law. Professor William A. Schabas suggests that Islamic states view capital punishment according to the principles embodied in the Koran. Islamic law functions on the belief that all people have a right to life unless the administration of Islamic law determines otherwise. Professor Schabas emphasizes that capital punishment exists in the domestic law of all Islamic states, but the ways by which these states employ capital punishment are varied and inconsistent. Although Professor Schabas acknowledges that Islamic states correctly argue that capital punishment is an element of Islamic law, he maintains that Islamic states do not recognize the more limited role of the death penalty articulated by the Islamic religion.

• Document type Article
• Countries list Bangladesh
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 114
  
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 121
  
• Themes list Religion ,
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

In this Essay, Professor Thomas C. Berg examines how religious conservatives, especially Roman Catholics and evangelical Protestants, have dealt with the recent concerns over the death penalty. Part I of the Essay documents how Roman Catholics and evangelical Protestants traditionally approach the death penalty.Part II analyzes the particular theological arguments and practical concerns that will be most effective in persuading religious conservatives to oppose the death penalty.

• Document type 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 $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 121
  
• Themes list Religion ,
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

Exactly what went wrong and why is the theme of this article. How and why did the Labour government, despite its massive majority in Parliament and a long-standing commitment to abolition, fail to get rid of the death penalty? Why was this “window of opportunity” to abolish capital punishment shut for another decade and a half? The answers to these questions will be sought primarily in the realm of government and Parliament.

• Document type 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 $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 121
  
• Themes list Public opinion, Public debate,
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

The article discusses the difficulties and controversies surrounding the 1999 Draft Resolution on the Death Penalty to the United Nations General Assembly.

• Document type Article
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_pays in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 107
  
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 114
  
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 121
  
• Themes list Networks,
  Warning: Undefined variable $lien_langue in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 127
  

In its resolution 1999/35, the Commission on Human Rights requested the Special Rapporteur to continue monitoring the implementation of existing international standards on safeguards and restrictions relating to the imposition of capital punishment, bearing in mind the comments made by the Human Rights Committee in its interpretation of article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the Second Optional Protocol thereto.

• Document type International law - United Nations
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_pays in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 107
  
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 114
  
  Warning: Undefined variable $liste_themes in /home/worldcoa/coalition2020/wp-content/themes/WCADP/template-parts/contents-document.php on line 121
  
• Themes list Trend Towards Abolition,
• Available languages حالات الإعدام خارج نطاق القضاء أو بإجراء اتموجة أو تعسفاً تقرير المقرر الخاص اسمة جهانقير, مقدم مطابقا لقرار لجنة الحقوق الانسان 1999/35Внесудебные, суммарные и произвольные казни: Отчет специального докладчика Асмы Джахангир (Asma Jahangir) предоставленный в ответ на резолюцию 1999/35 Комиссии по правам человекаExécutions extrajudiciaires, sommaires ou arbitraires: Rapport de Mme Asma Jahangir, Rapporteuse spéciale, présenté conformément à la résolution 1999/35 de la Commission des droits de l'homme法外处决即审即决或任意处决: 特别报告员阿斯玛贾汉吉尔女士根据人权委员会第1999/35 号决议提交的报告Las ejecuciones extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias: Informe de la Relatora Especial, Sra. Asma Jahangir, presentado en cumplimiento de la resolución 1999/35 de la Comisión de Derechos Humanos