Giving Victims Families a voice on the

issue of death penalty: there is no

feasible reason for creating more victims
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ( ICCPR) and it
is Second Optional Protocol on the abolition of the death penalty
approved by all states parties to the ICCPR, seek to ensure that
executions become definitively illegal and explicitly asserts the
principal that the death penalty is a violation of human rights,
specifically, the right to life.
Having considered the further General Assembly Resolution on the
Moratorium on the Use of Death Penalty, beginning in 2007 and the
publication by September 2014 of the document Moving away from
the Death Penalty- Arguments, Trends and Perspectives, it is
indubitable the onward trend for the universal abolition of the death
penalty worldwide and the fact that the support for capital
punishment continues to dwindle day after day.
The capital punishment has been used over the years as a
justification to countervail the responses given by the murder victims
families and the general public, who may consider it as an appropriate
retaliatory measure. The Governments have also projected their own
image of the death penalty as a mean exercised in order to deter
crime on top of make societies more confident on this safe bet. It is
difficult to come to terms with the fact that loss and injury have been
caused by the deliberate act of another human being highlighted the
UNODC in the handbook of Justice for Victims.
The International Commission against the Death Penalty (ICDP) whose
hard work and efforts on the fight against the death penalty are wellknown since its creation in 2010, has concluded that the resumption
of executions as a measure to restraint and monitor the rates of
crime, it has been proved not to be the way out of the problem so far.
ICDP opposes the death penalty under any circumstances believing
that it violates the right to life enshrined in the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights.
Being aware of the facts above mentioned, ICDP wants to highlight
that it is of the utmost importance the role of the victims families
within the process of seeking justice when it comes to talk about the
use of the capital punishment. ICDP further recalls on the recognition
of the right of those victims families to be heard, empowering and
encouraging them to raise their voices and speak out, in order to let
us become more aware of their own understanding of a fair justice
system for all, considering each other as equal human beings rather
than adversaries.

() Human rights, by definition, are not for governments to extend

or deny; they transcend political boundaries and political concerns. If
the death penalty is a violation of human rights, then it has no place
in society, no matter what form of government or criminal justice
system a nation has1
There is need for States to seek for alternatives to the death penalty
highlighting the link between victims rights and human rights in
order to move towards its universal abolition. There are many reasons
why every State should deplore the use of the capital punishment in
their own territories; ICDP would like to highlight these among others2:

1
2

Innocence and Death Penalty: There have been several

cases in which the States have carried out wrongful executions
of innocent persons due to false confessions, eye-witness
errors, governmental misconducts or junk science. More than
150 people have been finally exonerated in America due to data
revealed by DNA testing and a 71% of the population in America
believes that an innocent can be put to death very easily. There
are so many risks to consider before executing an innocent
person in the name of the victims.

High Cost of the Death Penalty: It adds back unnecessary

expenses to the state budget. The money that they can actually
save replacing the death penalty, can be used for crime
prevention programmes rather than for executing people. The
limited resources available can be focused on stopping violence
before it starts, used at early stages of child abuse or drug
addiction, creating programmes to prevent someone to become
the next defendant on death row. The high cost of the use of
capital system verifies the bankrupting system that it involves.

Death Penalty can prolong suffering for victims and

families, perpetrating a virulent sequence of violence:
Families of murder victims support other alternatives to the
Death penalty such as the life without parole as the process
turn out to be a traumatizing experience for them with an
endless reappearance of wounds. Victims families also defend
the use of millions of dollars on violence-prevention
programmes, on solving unsolved cases and increasing victim
services rather than in the useless loss of lives through the
performance of executions. It is of an utmost importance to
place the focus on the human consequences rather than on the
legal ones.

Cushing, Renny; Sheffer, Sussanah Human Rights and Victim Justice (MVFHR)
Death Penalty Focus

Inadequate Legal Representation: The defendants who are

facing a possible death sentence are normally deprived of the
effective assistance of counsel. Almost all the defendants in
capital cases cannot afford their own attorneys and rely on the
State to appoint one for them; in many cases, the appointed
attorneys are overworked, underpaid, or lacking the trial
experience required for those cases.

International Views on the use of Death Penalty: The use

of the death penalty is declining worldwide.

Deterrence: Several empirical research studies attest that the

capital punishment does not deter people from committing
serious crimes; however, those studies state that without death
penalty we would have had lower murder rates.

Arbitrariness:
Capital
punishment
it
is
applied
disproportionately with geographical arbitrariness and to people
who are economically disadvantaged. Ineffective guidelines
which are unclear and unknown for the jury with the main
problem in the distinction between worthy or unworthy victims.

Religious perspectives: Several religions perceive the use of

the death penalty as something immoral, convinced that there
is need to protect the right to life above all. The capital
punishment violates ethical, moral and/or religious beliefs.

Racial disparities and racial bias: Minorities are more likely

to be targeted as perpetrators of a crime and sentenced to
death than white people.

The existence of alternatives to Death Penalty: Replacing

the death sentence with a sentence of life without possibility of
parole, ensuring that the society is safe from murderers who will
spend the rest of their lives in prison.

Murder victims families of crime are often unaware that the

application of the death penalty includes risks of wrongful convictions,
due process violations and discriminatory practices 3 They are told
that imposing the death penalty is a way of achieving justice for
victims, but is that completely true? Victims should be considered as
stakeholders in that process too, should be informed, present and
heard.
One of the most profound changes in criminal justice over the past
40 years has been the rise of the victims lobby 4. On the words of
3
4

Moving away from the Death Penalty- The Rights of Victims OHCHR Global Panel Background note
Cohen, Andrew The Atlantic Jan 30, 2014

Michelle Giger, whose father was murdered in Santa Rosa (New

Mexico) People who commit acts of violence deserve to be held
accountable and the rest of us deserve to be protected from them.
Surely, we can do that, though without acting just like them and
becoming killers ourselves. Also Zelda Simpson, whose son was
killed, said It is fundamentally wrong to create pain and anguish to
another person- irrespective of the reasons () Death Penalty does
not bring the loved ones back, it only feeds a thirst of revenge 5
Several victims family members recognise, that at the end, the
capital punishment system does not meet their demands of justice
and deterrence.
Some of the organisations which are in charge of the promotion and
protection of the rights of those murder victims families, such as
Murder Victims for Reconciliation and for Human Rights, were founded
due to the tiring feeling that the victims families held during years
meanwhile they were told the death penalty was the appropriate
answer to their pain.
These organisations, as well as ICDP, seek to ensure that victims
families opposition to the death penalty is heard by everyone. After
noting with regret that you cannot undo the murder, you can decide
how do you want to live your life afterwards, finding concrete ways to
transform the disempowering effect of victimization into actions that
reclaim power and demand justice and fairness, safety and
compassion6
Bill and Denise Richards, whose son died in the attack in the Boston
Marathon, urged the Department of Justice to bring the case to a
close, stating that We are in favour of and would support the
Department of Justice in taking the death penalty off the table in
exchange for the defendant spending the rest of his life in prison
without any possibility of release and waiving all of his rights to
appeal () We can never replace what was taken from us ()7
Two retired death-row prison officials also described the effect that
carrying out executions has had on them, in fact, Frank Thompson,
who served as a warden in Oregon and Arkansas, said he believed in
capital punishment until he realised that it is being administered
against the poor; it lacks proof and deters anything, I realized that I
was training decent men and women how to take the life of a human
being. Terry Collins, who spent over 32 years working in corrections,
said The system does make mistakes. I dont think you can make a
mistake when you are talking about somebodys life 8

Murder Victims Families for Reconciliation

dem 5
7
Death Penalty Info Centre
8
Idem 7
6

Expressing with satisfaction the growth of this victims movement

speaking out for the abolition of the death penalty, ICDP still mourns
the fact that numerous attorneys and judges refuse to listen to the
murder victims family opinion and block their efforts to speak out
against the use of the capital punishment.
Scott Bass, Executive Director of Murder Victims Families for
Reconciliation (MVFR) stated: () the death penalty is a misguided
response to violence and a system that is irreparably broken. Our
members are particularly aware of ways the death penalty fails victim
families and often even adds to the harm they have experienced. We
have found that the death penalty often deepens the pain of family
members by leading to years of appeals and unwanted publicity and
by distracting attention from the practical needs of victims9
Justice for victims, whose human rights have been so completely
violated, does not come from violating the human rights of others.
Justice instead, must come in another way and that way must include
recognition of the worth and dignity for all and a willingness to work
toward a world that upholds, rather than denies, the value of human
life10
One of the Commissaries of ICDP, H.E. Mr Bill Richardson (President of
New Mexico), has recently alleged that he opposes to the Death
Penalty because it is inconsistent with the basic American Principles
of Justice, Liberty and Equality. Governor Richardsons office set up a
hotline to receive the opinions of New Mexicans (and anyone else) on
the issue of the use of the death penalty. The issue became more
real to me because I knew the day would come when one of the two
things might happen: I would either have to take action on legislation
to repeal the death penalty, or more daunting, I might have to sign
someones death warrant he declared to the CNN.
By 2015, there are around 160 states who had abolished the Death
Penalty completely or who do not practice it nowadays due to an
imposed moratorium. They have done so because experience and
evidence demonstrate that the death penalty is cruel, irrevocable and
a violation of the right to life. It damages and poisons society by
endorsing violence, and by causing injustice and suffering. It has no
particular deterrent effect on violent crime, and in fact, abolitionist
nations often have lower murder rates than those that still execute.
Having studied that abolition is politically right and politically possible
globally, it should be beard in mind that the worlds most prolific
executioners are China, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, the US
and Yemen and every executing state still has the choice and the
opportunity not to be burdened with such an unenviable legacy. With

MacPhail, Lindsay- Bass, Scott , MVFR May 1, 2015

Idem1.

10

political courage, every nation could immediately suspend the use of

the death penalty as a step towards.
The UN General Assembly Resolution supporting Worldwide
Moratorium on Executions recalled the relevant provisions found in
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (customary international
law) , namely the art.3 on the right to life, liberty and security of
everyone; provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, namely the article 6 ; provisions in the Convention on
the Rights of the child, namely article 6 and 37, on the execution of
juveniles and the life imprisonment without possibility of release for
persons under 18; and several provisions enshrined in International
Treaties and Constitutions.
ICDP strongly supports the universal abolition of death penalty as well
as firmly condemn each execution regardless the reasons why the
prisoners have been sentenced to death. With the present report,
ICDP would like to offer assistance and to help those victimss familys
communities in order to create more opportunities for lifting their
voices against the use of the death penalty in their names.