Myanmar

RetentionistLegal status of the death penalty*
9Number of individuals currently under sentence of death
4Executions in 2022
0Executions in 2021
0Executions in 2020

2022Last known execution
HangingMethod(s) of execution
NoParty to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
NoParty to the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty
Not applicableParty to the American Convention on Human Rights
Not applicableParty to the Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty
NoUN Moratorium Resolution (2010): cosponsor
AgainstUN Moratorium Resolution (2010): vote
YesUN Moratorium Resolution (2010): has signed the Note Verbale of Dissociation
NoUN Moratorium Resolution (2012): cosponsor
AgainstUN Moratorium Resolution (2012): vote
YesUN Moratorium Resolution (2012): has signed the Note Verbale of Dissociation
UnclearDoes the country have a mandatory death penalty?
2023-05-23Last update


Source: Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide
*Source of classification: Amnesty International

Related document(s)

Document(s)

The politics of abolition: Reframing the death penalty’s history in comparative perspective

By Carolyn Strange, Daniel Pascoe, and Andrew Novak, on 5 December 2024


2024

Academic Article

Canada

Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and Punishment

Mali

Mexico

Myanmar

Philippines

Trend Towards Abolition

United Kingdom


More details See the document

Literature on opposition to the death penalty typically characterizes abolition as inexorable and attributes its fulfillment to the age of human rights. Although most countries abolished capital punishment after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, this article uses three comparative case studies to demonstrate abolition’s entanglement with a broader range of political, legal, and cultural factors. Applying a historically grounded nonteleological approach, we offer three insights. First, civilizationist values drove abolitionism in countries in the “vanguard,” such as Canada and England/Wales, where human rights rationales were expressed well after abolition and as a mark of superiority. Second, death penalty abolition has often allied with decolonization and penal reform, but assertions of independence and sovereignty have periodically provoked reinstatement, as in Mexican and Philippine history, which underscores the fragility of abolition. Third, state-centric approaches to de jure and de facto abolition overlook the practice of extrajudicial and summary “rebel” executions in polities such as Myanmar and Mali, which lack a state monopoly on force. Further historical studies that do not presuppose a human rights explanation of abolition and that compare jurisdictions within as well as between the Global North and South will better grasp the death penalty’s complex history.

  • Document type Academic Article
  • Countries list Canada / Mali / Mexico / Myanmar / Philippines / United Kingdom
  • Themes list Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and Punishment / Trend Towards Abolition

Document(s)

Note verbale dated 16 April 2013 from the Permanent Mission of Egypt to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General

By United Nations, on 8 September 2020


2020

United Nations report

Afghanistan

Antigua and Barbuda

Bahrain

Bangladesh

Barbados

Botswana

Brunei Darussalam

Chad

China

Democratic People's Republic of Korea

Egypt

Equatorial Guinea

Eritrea

Eswatini

Ethiopia

Grenada

Guyana

India

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Iraq

Jamaica

Kuwait

Lao People's Democratic Republic

Libya

Malaysia

Mauritania

Moratorium

Myanmar

Nigeria

Oman

Pakistan

Papua New Guinea

Qatar

Saint Kitts and Nevis

Saint Lucia

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

Saudi Arabia

Singapore

Solomon Islands

Somalia

Sudan

Syrian Arab Republic

Tonga

Trinidad and Tobago

Uganda

United Arab Emirates

Yemen

Zimbabwe

aresfrruzh-hant
More details See the document

The permanent missions to the United Nations in New York listed below have the honour to refer to General Assembly resolution 67/176, entitled “Moratorium on the use of the death penalty”, which was adopted by the Third Committee on 19 November 2012, and subsequently by the General Assembly on 20 December 2012 by a recorded vote. The permanent missions wish to place on record that they are in persistent objection to any attempt to impose a moratorium on the use of the death penalty or its abolition in contravention of existing stipulations under international law, for the following reasons:

Document(s)

Note verbale dated 11 March 2011 from the Permanent Mission of Egypt to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General

By United Nations, on 8 September 2020


United Nations report

Afghanistan

Antigua and Barbuda

Bahamas

Bahrain

Bangladesh

Barbados

Botswana

Brunei Darussalam

Central African Republic

Chad

China

Democratic People's Republic of Korea

Democratic Republic of the Congo

Dominica

Egypt

Equatorial Guinea

Eritrea

Eswatini

Ethiopia

Grenada

Guinea

Guyana

Indonesia

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Iraq

Jamaica

Kuwait

Lao People's Democratic Republic

Libya

Malaysia

Moratorium

Myanmar

Niger

Nigeria

Oman

Pakistan

Papua New Guinea

Qatar

Saint Kitts and Nevis

Saint Lucia

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

Saudi Arabia

Sierra Leone

Singapore

Solomon Islands

Somalia

Sudan

Syrian Arab Republic

Tonga

Trinidad and Tobago

Uganda

United Arab Emirates

Yemen

Zimbabwe

aresfrruzh-hant
More details See the document

The permanent missions to the United Nations in New York listed below have the honour to refer to General Assembly resolution 65/206, entitled “Moratorium on the use of the death penalty”, which was adopted by the Third Committee on 11 November 2010, and subsequently by the General Assembly on 21 December 2010 by a recorded vote. The permanent missions wish to place on record that they are in persistent objection to any attempt to impose a moratorium on the use of the death penalty or its abolition in contravention of existing stipulations under international law, for the following reasons:

Document(s)

Note verbale dated 10 February 2009 from the Permanent Missions to the United Nations of Afghanistan, the Bahamas, […] and Zimbabwe addressed to the Secretary-General

By United Nations, on 8 September 2020


United Nations report

Afghanistan

Bahamas

Bahrain

Bangladesh

Barbados

Botswana

Brunei Darussalam

Central African Republic

Chad

China

Comoros

Democratic People's Republic of Korea

Dominica

Egypt

Equatorial Guinea

Eritrea

Eswatini

Ethiopia

Fiji

Gambia

Grenada

Guinea

Guyana

Indonesia

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Iraq

Jamaica

Japan

Jordan

Kuwait

Lao People's Democratic Republic

Libya

Malaysia

Maldives

Mauritania

Mongolia

Moratorium

Myanmar

Niger

Nigeria

Papua New Guinea

Qatar

Saint Kitts and Nevis

Saint Lucia

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

Saudi Arabia

Singapore

Solomon Islands

Somalia

Sudan

Suriname

Syrian Arab Republic

Thailand

Tonga

Trinidad and Tobago

Uganda

United Arab Emirates

Yemen

Zimbabwe

aresfrruzh-hant
More details See the document

The Permanent Missions to the United Nations in New York listed below present their compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and have the honour to refer to resolution 62/149, entitled “Moratorium on the use of the death penalty”, which was adopted by the Third Committee on 15 November 2007, and subsequently by the General Assembly on 18 December 2007 by a recorded vote. The Permanent Missions wish to place on record that they are in persistent objection to any attempt to impose a moratorium on the use of the death penalty or its abolition in contravention to existing stipulations under international law, for the following reasons:

Other documents
flag

News