Child execution - Amnesty article

[Spelca]

United States: Shameful isolation -- US leads worldwide execution of child offenders

The USA's willingness to execute prisoners for crimes committed when they were children puts it in a world of its own, Amnesty International said today, as it published a new report on global adherence to the ban on the death penalty against child offenders - - those under 18 at the time of their crimes.

"Two thirds of the world's known executions of child offenders in the past decade occurred in the USA, including the only four in the past 18 months," Amnesty International said. "This is now the only country that openly continues to carry out such executions within the framework of its regular criminal justice system."

"The execution of child offenders has become rare relative to the wider use of capital punishment, with the USA by far the leading perpetrator."

The organization recorded 22,588 executions in 70 countries between 1994 and 2002. Nineteen of these executions were of child offenders, put to death in five countries. Twelve of these internationally illegal killings occurred in the USA.

"Questions have been raised about the USA's commitment to international standards of justice since 11 September 2001.Here is the prime example of a longer-standing US tendency to adopt a selective approach to international human rights law." Amnesty International said.

The international community has adopted four human rights treaties of worldwide or regional scope which explicitly exclude child offenders from the death penalty. This exemption is also contained in the Geneva Conventions and their two Additional Protocols. The ban is so widely recognized and respected that it has become a principle of customary international law.

In today's report, Amnesty International calls for the prohibition to be recognized as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), binding on all countries regardless of which treaties they have or have not ratified, and regardless of any conditions they may have attached to such ratifications. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights reached this conclusion last October in a case of an inmate on death row in Nevada for crimes committed when he was 16.

"Half a century after the Fourth Geneva Convention was adopted, three and a half decades since the adoption of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and over a decade since the Convention on the Rights of the Child came into force, it is surely time for the USA to admit that it is clinging to an unacceptable practice of the past," Amnesty International said.

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child has been ratified by 192 countries, and is the most widely ratified human rights treaty in history. No state party has entered a specific reservation to its provision excluding child offenders from the death penalty. The USA made such a reservation when it ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1992. This US reservation has been widely condemned, including by several other countries as well as the expert body set up to oversee implementation of the treaty.

Background

In 2002, a US government delegation told the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on Children that the USA was "the global leader in child protection". Meanwhile, some 80 prisoners await executions on US death rows for crimes committed when they were 16 or 17. There is also concern that a Canadian national currently held at the US Naval Base in Guantánamo Bay could yet face the death penalty if selected for trial by military commission. Omar Khadr was reported to have been 15 years old when he was captured in Afghanistan in 2002. He may be a suspect in the shooting of a US soldier.

For a fully copy of the report "The exclusion of child offenders from the death penalty under general international law", please see:
http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engact500042003

From: http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engamr511022003

[Animal]

Perhaps I missed something, but I didn't see what crimes were committed by those executed?

[Spelca]

Originally posted by Animal: Perhaps I missed something, but I didn't see what crimes were committed by those executed?

Well, different kinds of crimes I guess. But the point of this article is not what crimes they were punished for, but the fact that they were punished for crimes which they committed when they were under 18.

[Animal]

Originally posted by Spelca: quote: Originally posted by Animal: Perhaps I missed something, but I didn't see what crimes were committed by those executed?

Well, different kinds of crimes I guess. But the point of this article is not what crimes they were punished for, but the fact that they were punished for crimes which they committed when they were under 18. [/QUOTE]Does it lesson the crime if you're under 18?

[Spelca]

Originally posted by Animal: Does it lesson the crime if you're under 18?

No, of course it doesn't. But you are still legally a minor when you commit a crime, so you should be trialled as a minor, and not that they trial you as an adult. As you read, some of the people got executed for crimes they did when they were 15 or 16. Do you think you're as responsible and mature when you're 16 as when you're 45? How about when you're 6? There have been very small children who have killed other children... should they get the death sentence too? And besides, a 45-year-old has more rights than a 16-year-old (talking about voting and other stuff here) because they're an adult, but when it comes to punishment they are sometimes made worse because of political reasons or other things. But, anyway, I'm against the death sentence altogether. [img]tongue.gif[/img] Though it does make me even more angry when children get it.

[The Hunter of Jahanna]

Dont these people have something better to do with their time?Why dont they do something about this, http://www.inq7.net/nat/2003/jul/03/nat_4-1.htm or this, http://iafrica.com/news/sa/251288.htm , or maybe even this, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3046426.stm . Then again maybe if Amnestey International went poking around in places like that none of them would come back in one piece. It shouldnt matter if you are 8 or 80, murder is murder. The law is pretty clear, if you know the diffrence between right and wrong and choose to do something wrong, then there are gonna be consequences. Age should not be a get out of jail free card. Maybe we should just turn all of our juvenile offenders over to Amnestey International and let them deal with the problem. Maybe if they had to deal with it instead of complain about it they would realize just how off base they realy are.

[ 07-18-2003, 09:07 PM: Message edited by: The Hunter of Jahanna ]

[Animal]

Originally posted by Spelca: quote: Originally posted by Animal: Does it lesson the crime if you're under 18?

No, of course it doesn't. But you are still legally a minor when you commit a crime, so you should be trialled as a minor, and not that they trial you as an adult. As you read, some of the people got executed for crimes they did when they were 15 or 16. Do you think you're as responsible and mature when you're 16 as when you're 45? How about when you're 6? There have been very small children who have killed other children... should they get the death sentence too? And besides, a 45-year-old has more rights than a 16-year-old (talking about voting and other stuff here) because they're an adult, but when it comes to punishment they are sometimes made worse because of political reasons or other things. But, anyway, I'm against the death sentence altogether. [img]tongue.gif[/img] Though it does make me even more angry when children get it. [/QUOTE]So if you want to commit a violent, hate crime do so when your legally considered a child? I'm confused as to why a 15 or 16 year old should be treated differently than a 20 or 21 year old?

[Animal]

Originally posted by The Hunter of Jahanna: Dont these people have something better to do with their time?Why dont they do something about this, http://www.inq7.net/nat/2003/jul/03/nat_4-1.htm or this, http://iafrica.com/news/sa/251288.htm , or maybe even this, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3046426.stm . Then again maybe if Amnestey International went poking around in places like that none of them would come back in one piece. It shouldnt matter if you are 8 or 80, murder is murder. The law is pretty clear, if you know the diffrence between right and wrong and choose to do something wrong, then there are gonna be consequences. Age should not be a get out of jail free card. Maybe we should just turn all of our juvenile offenders over to Amnestey International and let them deal with the problem. Maybe if they had to deal with it instead of complain about it they would realize just how off base they realy are.

Couldn't agree more [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Animal: So if you want to commit a violent, hate crime do so when your legally considered a child? I'm confused as to why a 15 or 16 year old should be treated differently than a 20 or 21 year old?

A fews years of psycological and physical development. A twenty year old is usually is past puberty.

And why do some of you imply these offenders being let off the hook is what's being advocated? That is not the case. The issue here is the nature of the so called punishment, ie. permanent irrevokable death, when alternate punishments exist that at least allow rehabilitation and reveiws by parole boards and even exhonoration if they were falsely convicted.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by The Hunter of Jahanna: Dont these people have something better to do with their time?Why dont they do something about this, http://www.inq7.net/nat/2003/jul/03/nat_4-1.htm or this, http://iafrica.com/news/sa/251288.htm , or maybe even this, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3046426.stm . Then again maybe if Amnestey International went poking around in places like that none of them would come back in one piece. It shouldnt matter if you are 8 or 80, murder is murder. The law is pretty clear, if you know the diffrence between right and wrong and choose to do something wrong, then there are gonna be consequences. Age should not be a get out of jail free card. Maybe we should just turn all of our juvenile offenders over to Amnestey International and let them deal with the problem. Maybe if they had to deal with it instead of complain about it they would realize just how off base they realy are.

Thanks for showing your vast knowledge of Amnesty International. To use your words- Murder is murder, so the state shouldnt be doing it, especially to children.

[ 07-18-2003, 09:58 PM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]