Links
The Global Persecution of Women
Glossary
Human Rights
UDHR
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 4.
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 6.
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
Article 7.
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 8.
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Article 26
All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
CEDAW
Article 5
States Parties shall take all appropriate measures:
(a) To modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women;DRC
Principle 1
The child shall enjoy all the rights set forth in this Declaration. Every child, without any exception whatsoever, shall be entitled to these rights, without distinction or discrimination on account of race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status, whether of himself or of his family.
Principle 2
The child shall enjoy special protection, and shall be given opportunities and facilities, by law and by other means, to enable him to develop physically, mentally, morally, spiritually and socially in a healthy and normal manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity. In the enactment of laws for this purpose, the best interests of the child shall be the paramount consideration.
Principle 6
The child, for the full and harmonious development of his personality, needs love and understanding. He shall, wherever possible, grow up in the care and under the responsibility of his parents, and, in any case, in an atmosphere of affection and of moral and material security; a child of tender years shall not, save in exceptional circumstances, be separated from his mother. Society and the public authorities shall have the duty to extend particular care to children without a family and to those without adequate means of support. Payment of State and other assistance towards the maintenance of children of large families is desirable.
Principle 7
The child is entitled to receive education, which shall be free and compulsory, at least in the elementary stages. He shall be given an education which will promote his general culture and enable him, on a basis of equal opportunity, to develop his abilities, his individual judgement, and his sense of moral and social responsibility, and to become a useful member of society.
The best interests of the child shall be the guiding principle of those responsible for his education and guidance; that responsibility lies in the first place with his parents.
The child shall have full opportunity for play and recreation, which should be directed to the same purposes as education; society and the public authorities shall endeavour to promote the enjoyment of this right.
Principle 8
The child shall in all circumstances be among the first to receive protection and relief.
Principle 9
The child shall be protected against all forms of neglect, cruelty and exploitation. He shall not be the subject of traffic, in any form.
The child shall not be admitted to employment before an appropriate minimum age; he shall in no case be caused or permitted to engage in any occupation or employment which would prejudice his health or education, or interfere with his physical, mental or moral development.
Iran
Glenda Luymes, “Beauty queen backs condemned teen. Ex-Miss World Canada works to free Iranian on death row who killed rapist,” Vancouver Province, 8 January 2007.
They have one thing in common -- Nazanin Fatehi and Nazanin Afshin-Jam share a name.
But while Fatehi waits on Iran's version of death row, Afshin-Jam, a former Miss World Canada pageant winner, is working to have the Iranian teen's sentence overturned, spending much of her time at a computer in the bedroom of her apartment in Vancouver's Yaletown.
On Wednesday, both women will find out if Fatehi will live or die.
"She is always with me," Afshin-Jam said yesterday. "She is always on my mind. I've been nervous about this for the last 10 months."
The pageant winner and pop singer learned Fatehi's story last winter when she was contacted by a stranger who thought it was interesting the two shared a name.
Before that, Afshin-Jam had never heard of Fatehi, who was sentenced Jan. 3, 2006, to hang after admitting she stabbed to death one of three men who tried to rape her and a 16-year-old niece. Fatehi was 17 at the time.
"When I learned Nazanin's story I was horrified," said Afshin-Jam, 26. "I couldn't get it out of my mind. I felt I had to do something."
Using her fame as Miss World Canada and knowledge gained through an international relations degree, Afshin-Jam started a petition to save Nazanin. So far, she has collected more than 232,000 signatures, which have been delivered to the Iranian government.
She has also visited Ottawa and the United Nations headquarters in New York, asking politicians to put political pressure on Iran to stop the execution.
In June, Fatehi's death sentence was stayed and a retrial ordered. The second trial is scheduled to end Wednesday in Tehran.
"This isn't just about Nazanin," said Afshin-Jam, whose family left Iran when she was two years old. "This is about the right for all people to have a fair trial. It's something that affects us all as human beings."
If Fatehi had allowed the men to rape her, she would have been given 100 lashes under Iranian law. If she had been married at the time, she could have been found guilty of adultery and sentenced to death by stoning. "It's a double-edged sword," said Afshin-Jam. "Women [in Iran] have no option . . . I feel like I need to be a voice for those who don't have a voice."
Yesterday, members of the Vancouver chapter of the Federation of Iranian Refugees came together to watch a documentary created by Afshin-Jam and her recording label Bodog Entertainment.
After a showing of the documentary, which shows both women's fight for justice and includes moving footage of Fatehi speaking to her family in Iran from prison, the group spoke about their campaign to end all capital punishment in their home country.
"This can't continue. It must stop," said Tammy Sadeghi. "We hope Nazanin's story will touch people's hearts. As we've seen, public pressure can bring about change. The government stopped the execution once before and it can do it again."
Suzanne Mohammidi came to Vancouver as a refugee four months ago. Watching the documentary yesterday she sobbed quietly.
"This woman's situation makes me very upset. It doesn't matter if we're not related. It's just terrible that she tried to defend herself and now she might be put to death."
Abbas Mohammidi was more optimistic. "I'm hopeful we'll have a victory celebration on Wednesday," he said. "I think that the next time we come together, Nazanin will be free."
”Iran: Execution of a teenage girl,” Women in the Middle East, No. 44, July-Aug. 2006.
A television documentary team has pieced together details surrounding the case of a 16-year-old girl, executed two years ago in Iran. On 15 August, 2004, Atefah Sahaaleh was hanged in a public square in the Iranian city of Neka. Her death sentence was imposed for "crimes against chastity".
The state-run newspaper accused her of adultery and described her as 22 years old. But she was not married - and she was just 16. In the year of Atefah's death, at least 159 people were executed in accordance with the Islamic law of the country, based on the Sharia code. But the clerical courts do not answer to parliament. They abide by their religious supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, making it virtually impossible for human rights campaigners to call them to account.
To teach others a lesson, Atefah's execution was held in public. So why was such a young girl executed? And how could she have been accused of adultery when she was not even married? Disturbed by the death of her mother when she was only four or five years old, and her distraught father's subsequent drug addiction, Atefah had a difficult childhood. She was also left to care for her elderly grandparents, but they are said to have shown her no affection.
In a town like Neka, heavily under the control of religious authorities, Atefah - often seen wandering around on her own - was conspicuous. It was just a matter of time before she came to the attention of the "moral police", a branch of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, whose job it is to enforce the Islamic code of behaviour on Iran's streets.
Being stopped or arrested by the moral police is a fact of life for many Iranian teenagers. Previously arrested for attending a party and being alone in a car with a boy, Atefah received her first sentence for "crimes against chastity" when she was just 13. Although the exact nature of the crime is unknown, she spent a short time in prison and received 100 lashes. Atefah was soon caught in a downward spiral of arrest and abuse. When she returned to her home town, she told those close to her that lashes were not the only things she had to endure in prison. She described abuse by the moral police guards.
Soon after her release, Atefah became involved in an abusive relationship with a man three times her age. Former revolutionary guard, 51-year-old Ali Darabi - a married man with children - raped her several times.
She kept the relationship a secret from both her family and the authorities. Atefah was soon caught in a downward spiral of arrest and abuse. Circumstances surrounding Atefah's fourth and final arrest were unusual. The moral police said the locals had submitted a petition, describing her as a "source of immorality" and a "terrible influence on local schoolgirls". But there were no signatures on the petition - only those of the arresting guards.
Three days after her arrest, Atefah was in a court and tried under Sharia law. The judge was the powerful Haji Rezai, head of the judiciary in Neka. No court transcript is available from Atefah's trial, but it is known that for the first time, Atefah confessed to the secret of her sexual abuse by Ali Darabi.
However, the age of sexual consent for girls under Sharia law - within the confines of marriage - is nine, and furthermore, rape is very hard to prove in an Iranian court. When Atefah realised her case was hopeless, she shouted back at the judge and threw off her veil in protest. It was a fatal outburst. She was sentenced to execution by hanging, while Darabi got just 95 lashes.
Shortly before the execution, but unbeknown to her family, documents that went to the Supreme Court of Appeal described Atefah as 22. "Neither the judge nor even Atefah's court appointed lawyer did anything to find out her true age," says her father. And a witness claims: "The judge just looked at her body, because of the developed physique... and declared her as 22."
Judge Haji Rezai took Atefah's documents to the Supreme Court himself. And at six o'clock on the morning of her execution he put the noose around her neck, before she was hoisted on a crane to her death. During the making of the documentary about Atefah's death the production team telephoned Judge Haji Rezai to ask him about the case, but he refused to comment.
Safa Haeri, “The Islamic Republic condemns a 13 year old girl to stoning,” www.iran.press-service.com, 16 October 2004,
PARIS, 16 Oct. (IPS) Almost two months after having hanged a 16 year old girl, the ruling Iranian ayatollahs are to commit another human crime by condemning another young girl to stoning.
According to Iranian and foreign press, Zhila Izadi, a 13 year old girl from the north-western city of Marivan had been condemned to death by stoning after being found that she had been pregnant from her 15 years-old brother.
The independent Iranian online newspaper “Peyke Iran” (www.peykeiran.com) that had first revealed the news last week reported on Saturday 16 October 2004 that the girl has given birth two weeks ago in prison.
While Zhila as been sentenced to stoning, her brother, jailed in Tehran, is to receive only 150 lashes, in accordance with Islamic laws.
Mrs. Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian outspoken lawyer and human rights activists who became the first Iranian and Muslim female to win the prestigious Nobel Peace Award for 2003 disclosed the news about the case of Zhila Izadi during her recent tour of Scandinavian countries.
The circumstances under which Zhila became pregnant from her brother is still not known, but independent Iranian sources outside the country said it was the father, a devout Muslim, who informed the authorities about the “disgrace” the young girl had caused the family.
Human rights activists in Denmark said though Zhila’s sentence had not been confirmed yet, but the fear is that, with the family’s approval, she faces the same faith as that of Ms. Ateqeh Rajabi, the 16 years-old girl hanged in public by the judge, a cleric, who condemned her on charges of prostitution.
“A court in Marivan has condemned Zhila to death by stoning and the family, which is very fundamental, has agreed”, confirmed Ms. Nahid Riazi of a Copenhagen-based human rights group that fights to the rights of women, adding that the young girl had been separated from her new born baby after the birth.
Ms. Rajabi was publicly hanged on a street in the city centre of Neka in the northern province of Mazandaran, on 15 August, for "acts incompatible with chastity".
Faced with domestic and international outcry of dismay, the authorities said the young girl was “mentally incompetent”.
However, informed sources revealed that Ms. Ateqeh was sentenced to death after, during the "trial", she expressed outrage at the misogyny and injustice in the Islamic Republic and its Islam-based judicial system.
“The lower court judge was so incensed by her protestations that he personally put the noose around her neck after his decision had been upheld by the Supreme Court”, the sources reported.
The execution of Ateqeh Rajabi was the tenth execution of a child offender in Islamic Republic recorded by Amnesty International since 1990.
Amnesty International is alarmed that this execution was carried out despite reports that Ateqeh Rajabi was not believed to be mentally competent, and that she reportedly did not have access to a lawyer at any stage.
As a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Iran is bound not to execute child offenders. Both treaties provide that capital punishment shall not be imposed for offences committed by persons under 18 year of age at the time of committing the offence.
Though it is possible that the Iranian authorities reject the stoning sentence, but it remains that the accused could very probably be condemned to death, human rights sources said, calling on the international community to put pressure on Iranian authorities to save Zhila from death.
The news of Zhila's possible stoning come at a time that the ruling conservatives have increased dramatically crackdown on the very limited social liberties, including more drastic measures on women accused of not respecting islamic codes of dressing and arresting more journalists and intellectuals.
Alasdair Palmer, ”Under Iran's 'divinely ordained justice', girls as young as nine are charged with 'moral crimes'. The best that they can hope for is to die by hanging,” The Telegraph, 19 Dec. 2004.
As one young woman awaits sentence and another faces death this week, Alasdair Palmer reveals the Iranian legal system's shocking barbarity towards children
"My mother doesn't visit me in prison. If you see her, tell her she promised to bring me cheese curls and chocolate. And she shouldn't forget to bring my red dress."
Those pathetic words may be among the last utterances of a 19-year-old girl, identified only as Leila M, who has been condemned to death in Iran for "acts incompatible with chastity".
According to Amnesty International, Leila has a mental age of eight. What evidence there is of her life so far records an existence of unrelieved misery and brutality.
She was sold into prostitution at the age of eight by her parents. She recalls the experience of when her mother "first took me to a man's house" as "a horrible night. I cried a lot … but then my mum came the next day and took me home. She brought me chocolate and cheese curls."
Forced by beatings and threats to continue "visiting men" from that night onwards, she became pregnant and had twins when she was 14. She was punished with 100 lashes by the Iranian courts for giving birth to illegitimate children.
Leila was bullied back into her degrading and demeaning work. Earlier this year, she confessed to the authorities that she had been working as a prostitute since she was a child – perhaps because she thought that they might help her escape her miserable existence.
The courts did respond by pulling Leila out of prostitution, but they also imprisoned her and used her confession to convict her of "moral crimes", for which the judges have decided the appropriate penalty is death.
They dismissed evidence from doctors and social workers that she has a severe mental handicap. This week, Iran's Supreme Court, which by law must confirm every death sentence imposed by the lower courts, will rule on whether to uphold her execution.
There is every indication that the Supreme Court will decide that Leila must die. Earlier this year, they upheld a sentence of death on 16-year-old Atefeh Rajabi. Atefeh had also been convicted of "acts incompatible with chastity".
In her defence, she said she had been sexually assaulted by an older man. The judges did not care. So, on August 16, at 6am, Atefeh was taken from her cell and hanged from a crane in the main square of the town of Neka.
Witnesses report that she begged for her life as she was dragged kicking and screaming to the makeshift gallows. She shouted "repentance" over and over again – a gesture which, according to Islamic law, is supposed to grant the accused the right to an immediate stay of execution while an appeal is heard.
Atefeh's cries were in vain. Haji Rezaie, the judge who presided over her trial, put the noose around her neck himself. He said he was pleased to do it. "Society has to be kept safe from acts against public morality," he insisted.
He ordered that her body be left hanging from the crane for several hours so people could see what happened to teenagers who "committed acts incompatible with chastity".
In the case of Hajieh Esmailvand, a young woman found guilty of adultery with an unnamed 17-year-old boy, the Supreme Court has not only confirmed the death sentence imposed by the lower court, but changed the means of death from hanging to execution by stoning.
Hajieh's original sentence had been for five years' imprisonment followed by death by hanging. A month ago, the Supreme Court annulled her jail sentence – but only so that Hajieh could be stoned before December 21, and with the recommendation that she should be.
In the next two days, it seems likely that Hajieh will die from wounds caused by stones thrown by "executioners". The Iranian Penal Code states that women should be buried up to their breasts before being stoned. Article 104 is specific about the type of stones that should be used when a woman is to be punished for adultery. They "should not be large enough to kill the woman by one or two strikes, nor should they be so small that they could not be defined as stones". Hajieh will die slowly, in agony, buried in sand, as officials lob correctly sized stones at her head.
It is a fate that also awaits Zhila Izadyar, a 13-year-old girl from the northern province of Mazandaran. She has been sentenced to be stoned to death after her parents reported that she had had an incestuous relationship with her 15-year-old brother and had become pregnant by him.
Zhila has already received a "preliminary punishment" of 53 lashes. A representative from Iran's Society for the Protection of Children's Rights has managed to visit Zhila in prison. She found the 13-year-old in a desperate state, in solitary confinement and unable to keep down food. She has not been allowed to see her child.
"I am scared. I want to go home," said Zhila. "I want to go back to school like the other children." But if Iran's judges have their way, Zhila will see neither her school nor her home again. She will be buried up to her neck and the last thing she will see will be stones hurtling towards her head.
The barbarity towards children of the Iranian legal system is all the more surprising in that it contradicts the international legal obligations on the treatment of children, which the Iranian government has adopted. Iran is a signatory both to the International Convention on Human Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, both of which explicitly forbid the execution of minors - let alone their killing by stoning.
Even Iran's chief justice has seemed to recognise that, although stoning is prescribed by Sharia law as the punishment for women who have sexual relations with men to whom they are not married, pelting a woman to death with rocks counts as excessively cruel.
Two years ago, he ruled that, while stonings should still be the nominal punishment for adultery and pre-marital sex, that sentence should be routinely commuted to execution by hanging.
It appears from the fate in store for Zhila Izadyar, however, that his commitment to the de facto abolition of stoning was about as sincere as the Iranian government's commitment to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. There are no plans to change any of the provisions of the Penal Code that relate to children, and which state that girls as young as nine can be executed (boys have to reach the age of 14 before they can be killed).
Many Iranians are revolted by the brutality and injustice of their judges' attitude to children. Shadi Sadr, an extremely brave lawyer who represents Atefeh Rajabi's family, has filed a suit against the judiciary for wrongful execution, and is preparing a murder charge against the judge who hanged her.
While fundamentalist mullahs still hold on to power in Iran, her suit is unlikely to succeed. Indeed, those who are disgusted by judicial decisions cannot even safely express their condemnation of a system that not only hangs children, but beats them to death in public: Kaveh Habibi-Nejad, a 14-year-old boy, suffered this fate on November 12 for eating on the streets during Ramadan. A witnesses said that they thought he died because "the metal cable being used to flog him hit his head".
Mahbobeh Abbasgholizadeh, an Iranian academic, was arrested on November 1 after having queried some aspects of Iranian justice in a speech she made at a conference. She was held for a month before being released and charged with "acting against the security of the country". If she is convicted, it could mean an indefinite prison sentence.
The European Union has said that it is ready to "intensify" political and economic ties with Iran if the Iranian government takes steps to allay international concerns over its involvement in terrorism and the abuse of human rights. But the Islamic administration seems to care more about protecting what many of the religious hierarchy regard as "divinely ordained justice" than achieving fresh political and economic concessions from the EU.
Britain, France and Germany, acting on behalf of the EU, have already agreed to further trade links with Iran, after Tehran agreed to suspend its uranium-enrichment process, which could yield material suitable for nuclear bombs.
For Hajieh Esmailvand and Zhila Izadyar, the prospects are bleak. The best they can hope for is to die by hanging rather than being stoned. As for the mentally retarded Leila M - she seems likely to hang in public before Christmas.
"Iran: Execution of a teenage girl," Women in the Middle East, Vol. 44, July to August 2006.
A television documentary team has pieced together details surrounding the case of a 16-year-old girl, executed two years ago in Iran. On 15 August, 2004, Atefah Sahaaleh was hanged in a public square in the Iranian city of Neka. Her death sentence was imposed for "crimes against chastity".
The state-run newspaper accused her of adultery and described her as 22 years old. But she was not married - and she was just 16. In the year of Atefah's death, at least 159 people were executed in accordance with the Islamic law of the country, based on the Sharia code. But the clerical courts do not answer to parliament. They abide by their religious supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, making it virtually impossible for human rights campaigners to call them to account.
To teach others a lesson, Atefah's execution was held in public. So why was such a young girl executed? And how could she have been accused of adultery when she was not even married? Disturbed by the death of her mother when she was only four or five years old, and her distraught father's subsequent drug addiction, Atefah had a difficult childhood. She was also left to care for her elderly grandparents, but they are said to have shown her no affection.
In a town like Neka, heavily under the control of religious authorities, Atefah - often seen wandering around on her own - was conspicuous. It was just a matter of time before she came to the attention of the "moral police", a branch of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, whose job it is to enforce the Islamic code of behaviour on Iran's streets.
Being stopped or arrested by the moral police is a fact of life for many Iranian teenagers. Previously arrested for attending a party and being alone in a car with a boy, Atefah received her first sentence for "crimes against chastity" when she was just 13. Although the exact nature of the crime is unknown, she spent a short time in prison and received 100 lashes.
Atefah was soon caught in a downward spiral of arrest and abuse. When she returned to her home town, she told those close to her that lashes were not the only things she had to endure in prison. She described abuse by the moral police guards.
Soon after her release, Atefah became involved in an abusive relationship with a man three times her age. Former revolutionary guard, 51-year-old Ali Darabi - a married man with children - raped her several times.
She kept the relationship a secret from both her family and the authorities. Atefah was soon caught in a downward spiral of arrest and abuse. Circumstances surrounding Atefah's fourth and final arrest were unusual. The moral police said the locals had submitted a petition, describing her as a "source of immorality" and a "terrible influence on local schoolgirls". But there were no signatures on the petition - only those of the arresting guards.
Three days after her arrest, Atefah was in a court and tried under Sharia law. The judge was the powerful Haji Rezai, head of the judiciary in Neka. No court transcript is available from Atefah's trial, but it is known that for the first time, Atefah confessed to the secret of her sexual abuse by Ali Darabi.
However, the age of sexual consent for girls under Sharia law - within the confines of marriage - is nine, and furthermore, rape is very hard to prove in an Iranian court.
When Atefah realised her case was hopeless, she shouted back at the judge and threw off her veil in protest. It was a fatal outburst. She was sentenced to execution by hanging, while Darabi got just 95 lashes.
Shortly before the execution, but unbeknownst to her family, documents that went to the Supreme Court of Appeal described Atefah as 22. "Neither the judge nor even Atefah's court appointed lawyer did anything to find out her true age," says her father. And a witness claims: "The judge just looked at her body, because of the developed physique... and declared her as 22."
Judge Haji Rezai took Atefah's documents to the Supreme Court himself. And at six o'clock on the morning of her execution he put the noose around her neck, before she was hoisted on a crane to her death. During the making of the documentary about Atefah's death the production team telephoned Judge Haji Rezai to ask him about the case, but he refused to comment. BBC News
United States
Stephen Hume, "Brutal treatment of young prisoners isn't restricted to Iraq," Vancouver Sun, 24 April 2003.
Upon discovering that Saddam Hussein's henchmen maintained a brutal prison for the children of the disloyal, one of my colleagues in the national press expressed a predictable loathing:
"I was stunned," she wrote with a stylish rhetorical flourish. "What kind of regime locks up and tortures children?"
Now that's a good question. Because juvenile detention facilities in the U.S. were recently found by federal investigators to show a "pattern of egregious conditions." Violations of incarcerated children's rights included physical abuse, excessive use of discipline, overcrowded and unsafe conditions, inadequate educational, medical and mental health services.
Just as the Americans were announcing that the liberation of Iraq would be followed by "steadfast commitment . . . to advance internationally agreed human rights principles worldwide," the U.S. was for the fourth time in 12 months preparing to participate in a practice that Amnesty International denounces as "indecent and illegal."
The U.S. has the barbarous distinction of having executed more people for crimes committed as children than any other country -- and that during a period when 40 more nations were abolishing the death penalty entirely, bringing the global total to 111. When it comes to the execution of juvenile offenders, it seems the U.S. is a rogue state in the international community.
Last year, even among the bloody dictatorships it identifies as the "axis of evil," the U.S. was the only country known to have executed juvenile offenders. And it executed its first juvenile offender for 2003 on April 3.
Some of those executed committed dreadful crimes.
But almost universally, the international community rejects the execution of juvenile offenders -- and that includes the U.S. ploy of sentencing child criminals to death and then warehousing them until they age enough to be killed. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights describes this as a violation of moral law from which no country can exempt itself.
Today, there are more than 80 inmates in the U.S. who were sentenced to death while they were still minors and now await some grisly form of execution.
Among those on death row are an illiterate with an IQ of 69; another who believes people can't see him when his eyes are closed; and a former mental patient previously committed to a mental hospital for paranoid schizophrenia who required sedation during the trial to suppress hallucinations.
Among those already executed are a man with the intellectual capacities of a 12-year-old who acted while under the domination of other adults and one who, after confessing to a murder, crawled into the lap of his interrogator hoping for a cuddle.
What's more, although violent crimes by juveniles have been falling in the U.S., excessive numbers of children still go to jail. Over the last decade, Amnesty International points out, 40 states enacted legislation making it easier for children to be tried as adults and 42 states held children in adult jails while awaiting trial.
Although every major international human rights treaty expressly prohibits execution for crimes committed by individuals before the age of 18, the U.S.-based National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty reports scores of people who committed crimes while legally children have been electrocuted, gassed or killed by lethal injection in the U.S. in the last 30 years.
As recently as 1996, prosecutors in the state of Mississippi sought the death penalty for offenders as young as 13. Some have had the death penalty imposed for crimes committed when they were as young as 10. The coalition points out that one 14-year-old black child executed in South Carolina was so small that his mask fell off while he was being electrocuted.
In case you hadn't guessed already, I am opposed to capital punishment under any circumstances. I have been in the abolitionist camp since reading the eyewitness description of the execution of Socrates.
The Greek philosopher actually accepted the argument that the state had the right to execute him. He abided by the law and accepted its decision. Thus the greatest thinker of his age, an honoured veteran whose only crime was to ask troubling questions, executed himself at the state's direction by drinking poison. He refused to beg mercy from his persecutors or to flee, although both options were available.
Consider Socrates' decision in the context of Jesus Christ, another individual who accepted the authorities' right to order his execution -- and who publicly absolved them of their judicial sin. Of course, the righteous executioners cared nothing for that. What was to be forgiven? Christ had his trial, drew the death penalty and that was that.
The justification for killing the famous two remains the same justification used for killing any criminals -- for only in hindsight was their innocence determined. Should the accidental killing of one innocent person in the name of justice today be considered less of a moral crime than those inherent in the legal executions of Christ, or Socrates?
For me, the honourable way in which these individuals faced their executions at the hands of insufferably righteous fools casts into eternal doubt and dishonour the argument that execution can ever be the state's proper prerogative. In that context, executing people for crimes committed as children seems particularly odious and indefensible.
Just as there are no half measures in an execution, there's no grey zone in the death penalty debate. Like it or not, those who believe that killing people is an appropriate judicial process choose to ally themselves with those who approved the death penalty for Socrates, Christ and with those who conducted "legal" executions in Iraq. Likewise, those who brutalize juvenile offenders in the U.S. place themselves on the same side as those who do so in Iraq.
For me, the ethically impoverished eye-for-an-eye principle cannot be reconciled with civilized attempts to make the world a better, more humane place. The state, which is valuable only as a collective aspiration toward what is best in human conduct, has no place behaving in a primitive, vengeful fashion, torturing people by keeping them on death row for decades and then snuffing out their lives as casually as one turns out the light.
Yet last September, one dismayed Texas judge chose his words carefully in criticizing the state judicial system of which he'd been a part for more than 30 years. He used the "a spirit of vengeance" to describe the court's treatment of mentally ill offenders.
The month before that, four U.S. Supreme Court justices said that the American practice of executing juvenile offenders is "shameful." They said "executing such offenders is a relic of the past and is inconsistent with evolving standards of decency in a civilized society."
We all might do well to think about that notion of decency amid the jingoistic clamour to condemn Iraq's evil regime. By all means, let us have no illusions about Saddam. But let's harbour none about ourselves, either.
Links
The Global Persecution of Women
Glossary
