Kosovo

Abolitionist for all crimesLegal status of the death penalty*

Related document(s)

Document(s)

Travailler avec les Procédures spéciales des Nations unies – Journée mondiale 2022

By FIACAT et la Coalition mondiale contre la peine de mort, on 26 September 2022


2022

Coalition mondiale

en
More details Download [ pdf - 400 Ko ]

Les individus et les organisations non-gouvernementales (ONG) peuvent collaborer de plusieurs manières avec les Nations unies pour signaler des cas de violations des droits humains. L’une d’entre elles consiste à saisir les procédures spéciales du Conseil des droits de l’Homme (CDH) des Nations unies. Découvrez comment travailler avec elles ici.

Document(s)

UN Special Procedures toolkit – World Day 2022

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

(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 Download [ pdf - 557 Ko ]

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 Download [ pdf - 359 Ko ]

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
Other documents