ST.

STEPHENS MODEL UNITED NATIONS 2012

Council: GENERAL ASSEMBLY Agenda: ABOLITION OF DEATH PENALTY
Chaired by Amogh Dhar Sharma Shirin Rai Gupta

TABLE OF CONTENTS Serial Number Content Page Number 3 5 7 9 11 14 16

1. Introduction to the Committee 2. Introduction to the agenda 3. Historical Background 4. Recent Developments 5. Major Players 6. Key Documents 7. Questions to Consider

Introduction to the Committee:

The General Assembly is the main deliberative organ of the UN. Decisions on important questions, such as those on peace and security, admission of new members and budgetary matters, require a two-thirds majority. Decisions on other questions are by simple majority. Each country has one vote. After discussing the items on the agenda, seeking where possible to harmonize the various approaches of States, the subsidiary organs present their recommendations, usually in the form of draft resolutions and decisions, to a plenary meeting of the Assembly for its consideration. The image below outlines the structure of the United Nations and offers you an overview of the different bodies in place already.

The Main Committees of the UNGA are as follows: 1. First Committee (Disarmament and International Security Committee) is concerned with disarmament and related international security questions; 2. Second Committee (Economic and Financial Committee) is concerned with economic questions; 3. Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Committee) deals with social and humanitarian issues; 4. Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization Committee) deals with a variety of political subjects not dealt with by the First Committee, as well as with decolonization; 5. Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary Committee) deals with the administration and budget of the United Nations; and 6. Sixth Committee (Legal Committee) deals with international legal matters. Besides these, the subsidiary organs of the General Assembly are divided into categories: Boards, Commissions, Committees, Councils and Panels, and Working Groups and others. The Third Committee of The UN GA shall be simulated at Stephens MUN 2012 and we hope to see delegates prepared with a complete understanding of the mandate of the same. The General Assembly allocates to its Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Affairs Committee, commonly referred to as the "Third Committee", agenda items relating to a range of social, humanitarian affairs and human rights issues that affect people all over the world. As in previous sessions, an important part of the work of the Committee will focus on the examination of human rights questions, including reports of the special procedures of the Human Rights Council which was established in 2006. In October 2011, the Committee heard and interacted with 34 such special rapporteurs, independent experts, and chairs of working groups of the Human Rights Council. The Committee also discusses the advancement of women, the protection of children, indigenous issues, treatment of refugees, promotion of fundamental freedoms through elimination of racism and racial discrimination, and the right to self- determination. The Committee also addresses important social development questions such as issues related to youth, family, ageing, persons with disabilities, crime prevention, criminal justice, and international drug control.

Introduction to the Agenda

Death Penalty refers to the punishment of execution, administered to someone convicted of a capital crime. The use of death penalty is often held up on the principle of deterrence. Many people feel that the death penalty will deter criminals from killing. Death Penalty makes sure that convicted criminals do not offend again and is a just penalty for atrocious crimes such as child murders, serial killers or torture murderers. The countries that retain capital punishment believe it increases public safety, and that it is more economical and humane then a life sentence. Opponents of capital punishment argue that not all people affected by murder desire a death penalty, that execution discriminates against minorities and the poor, and that it encourages a "culture of violence" and that it violates human rights. In numerous cases death penalty has led to wrongful execution of innocent people on subsequent discovery of evidence. Moreover the political stature of the country in question shapes the attitude towards the use of death penalty. Some forms of Islamic Law observe execution and stoning to death as justifiable forms of punishment for misconduct. There do exist, variations in practices across various Islamic countries. Similarly non democratic forms of governments are, statistically speaking, more likely to indulge in the use of death penalties. In 2010, 23 countries around the world were known to have carried out executions and at least 67 to have imposed death sentences. Historically, capital punishment has been used by numerous societies worldwide both to suppress political dissent and punish criminals for a crime committed. The opinions of people around the world vary as to whether or not capital punishment is legally, morally, or ethically acceptable. Thus, countries policies on capital punishment differ. Within the discussion of the abolition of the death penalty, the question of capital punishment for minor and juvenile delinquents is hotly debated. The use of the death penalty for crimes committed by people younger than 18 is prohibited under international human rights law, yet some countries still execute juvenile offenders. Such executions are few compared to the total number of executions in the world. Their significance goes beyond their number and calls into question the commitment of the executing states to respect international law. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which forbids capital punishment for juveniles under article 37(a), has been signed by all countries and ratified, except for Somalia and the United States of America. A majority of countries are also party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (whose Article 6.5 also states that "Sentence of death shall not be imposed for crimes committed by persons below eighteen years of age...").

Iran and Saudi Arabia have both executed juvenile offenders, although the use of the death penalty against people convicted of crimes committed when they were under the age of 18 is unequivocally banned in international law. At least seven juvenile offenders were executed in 2009, two in Saudi Arabia and five in Iran. In April 1999, the United Nations Human Rights Commission passed the Resolution Supporting Worldwide Moratorium on Executions. The resolution calls on countries which have not abolished the death penalty to restrict its use of the death penalty, including not imposing it on juvenile offenders and limiting the number of offenses for which it can be imposed. Ten countries, including the United States, China, Pakistan, Rwanda and Sudan voted against the resolution. Each year since 1997, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights has passed a resolution calling on countries that have not abolished the death penalty to establish a moratorium on executions. In April 2004, the resolution was co-sponsored by 76 UN member states. A number of regional conventions prohibit the death penalty, most notably, the Sixth Protocol (abolition in time of peace) and the 13th Protocol (abolition in all circumstances) to the European Convention on Human Rights. The same is also stated under the Second Protocol in the American Convention on Human Rights, which, however has not been ratified by all countries in the Americas, most notably Canada and the United States. Most relevant operative international treaties do not require its prohibition for cases of serious crime, most notably, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This instead has, in common with several other treaties, an optional protocol prohibiting capital punishment and promoting its wider abolition. Several international organizations have made the abolition of the death penalty (during time of peace) a requirement of membership, most notably the European Union (EU) and the Council of Europe. The EU and the Council of Europe are willing to accept a moratorium as an interim measure.

Historical Background
The first established death penalty laws date as far back as the Eighteenth Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammaurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty for 25 different crimes. The death penalty was also part of the Fourteenth Century B.C.'s Hittite Code; in the Seventh Century B.C.'s Draconian Code of Athens, which made death the only punishment for all crimes; and in the Fifth Century B.C.'s Roman Law of the Twelve Tablets. Death sentences were carried out by such means as crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and impalement. There are few if any countries that have not at some point in their history included the death penalty within their criminal justice system. Within colonial Africa it was seen as a deterrent with gruesome modes of execution designed to produce the maximum pain and greatest indignity over the longest periods being used. This is a good demonstration of the widely held belief that the death penalty could be used to deter criminals. Although some countries were to have restricted their use of the death penalty during the 19th century it is only during the 20th and now the 21st centuries that the abolitionist movement has really gained worldwide support. Since the Second World War, and the recognition of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Israel was the first independent state to outlaw the death penalty in 1954, thus reversing the British Mandate Law. In the United Kingdom, it was abolished for murder (leaving only treason, piracy with violence, arson in royal dockyards and a number of wartime military offences as capital crimes) for a five year experiment in 1965 and permanently in 1969, the last execution having taken place in 1964. It was abolished for all peacetime offences in 1998. Abolition occurred in Canada in 1976, in France in 1981, and in Australia in 1973 (although the state of Western Australia retained the penalty until 1984). In 1977, the United Nations General Assembly affirmed in a formal resolution that throughout the world, it is desirable to "progressively restrict the number of offenses for which the death penalty might be imposed, with a view to the desirability of abolishing this punishment". Since World War II there has been a trend toward abolishing the death penalty. In 1977, 16 countries were abolitionist. According to information published by Amnesty International in 2012, 97 countries had abolished capital punishment altogether, 8 had done so for all offences except under special circumstances, and 34 had not used it for at least 10 years or were under a moratorium. The other 58 retained the death penalty in active use. According to Amnesty International, at least 23 countries were known to have had executions carried out in 2010. In addition, there are countries which do not publish information on the use of capital punishment. In the 1980s the international abolition movement gained momentum and treaties proclaiming abolition were drafted and ratified. Protocol No. 6 to the European Convention on Human Rights and its successors, the Inter-American Additional Protocol

to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty, and the United Nation's Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Aiming at the Abolition of the Death Penalty, were created with the goal of making abolition of the death penalty an international norm. In 1977, only 16 countries had abolished the death penalty for all crimes. As of December 2010 that figure stands at 96 and more than two thirds of the countries in the world have abolished the death penalty in law or practice. As per Amnesty International, of the 58 retentionist countries, 23 are known to have carried out executions in 2010.

Recent Developments
A major element in recent developments has been the growing momentum of moving towards a global cohesive treaty pertaining to the status of capital punishment that would be fully/partially binding nature. The question of treatment of terrorists, extremists and participants in genocides and sentencing them to death penalty is also under discussion. Since Cuba stopped carrying out executions in 2003 (commuting the sentences of the majority of death row prisoners), USA has been the only country in the Americas to carry out executions with the exception of St Kitts and Nevis, which executed one person in 2008. Despite continuing to carry out executions, the USA is showing some signs of turning against the death penalty. Although the 52 executions during the year was the highest total for three years, it was still only about half the number (98) executed a decade earlier in 1999. In March 2009, New Mexico became the 15th state to end the death penalty when the state governor signed a new law. Abolitionist bills were considered in a number of other states and may make further progress in future legislative sessions. Many controversies also arose during USAs execution of Saddam Hussein. A UN representative commented on the issue by stating: Based on the principle of respect for the right to life, however, the United Nations remains opposed to capital punishment, even in the case of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. For the first year since Amnesty International started keeping records, no executions took place in Europe in 2009. In Asia, the vast majority of executions were carried out in China however the precise figure remains unreported. Although media coverage is permitted in selected cases, information on the number of executions is classified as a state secret and individuals disclosing state secrets can be held criminally responsible. On 18 December 2008, the General Assembly adopted another resolution (A/RES/63/168) reaffirming its previous call for a global moratorium on capital punishment. Once again on 21 December 2010, the 65th General Assembly adopted a third resolution (A/RES/65/206). The only new part of the text of the Resolution concerns the request in part contained in the 2007 text directing the member states to make information available relevant to the use of the death penalty to allow an informed and transparent national debate.' Today, the Council of Europe requires new members to undertake and ratify Protocol No. 6. This has, in effect, led to the abolition of the death penalty in Eastern Europe. For example, the Ukraine, formerly one of the world's leaders in executions, has now halted the death penalty and has been admitted to the Council. South Africa's parliament voted to formally abolish the death penalty, which had earlier been declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court. In addition, Russian President, Boris Yeltsin, signed a decree commuting the death sentence for all of the convicts on Russia's death row, in

June 1999. Between 2000 and 2004, seven additional countries abolished the death penalty for all crimes, and four more abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes. Another resolution on a moratorium is scheduled to be further discussed under the item entitled Promotion and protection of human rights in 2012.

Major Players
United States of America The death penalty is legal within the United States although it is up to individual states to decide if it should be an acceptable punishment. Currently 34 states retain the option of the death penalty although in many of these it is used only rarely. The use of the death penalty remains popular within America with a 2005 poll indicating that 74% of Americans agreed with the use of the death penalty in cases of murder. It is therefore unsurprising that the USA voted against the 2007 resolution calling for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty. The number of executions carried out in the United States may be relatively small but due the USAs status in the world it is only right that they should be placed under increased scrutiny as one of only 3 fully developed countries in the world to retain and use the death penalty (the others being Singapore and Japan). China China remains at the heart of much controversy with regards to their policy on the death penalty. With executions classified as a state secret there are no accurate statistics for the number of people executed within China although estimates range from around 470 to the upper end of 3000 according to the Dui Hua foundation. There is obvious concern about the limited information available about executions in China but also worrying is the number of current capital offences with 68 crimes currently punishable by the death penalty (though it is thought that the actual number of offences where the death penalty has been imposed is closer to a third of this). Even with the highest number of executions carried out last year China has begun to show encouraging signs for the future. Even the upper estimates of 3000 executions in 2007 are a significant reduction on the 8000 executions estimated by Amnesty International in 2006. This can be attributed to the need from 1st January 2007 for all death sentences to be approved by the Supreme Peoples Court. Addressing the Human Rights Council in March of 2007 the Chinese representative stated By doing this, we are seeking to limit the application of the death penalty in China. I am confident that with the development and the progress in my country the application of the death penalty will be further reduced and it will be finally abolished. Japan Over 600 people were executed in Japan during the period between 1946 and 1993. The main criticism of Japan comes from Amnesty International which argues that inmates kept on death row, sometimes for decades are mistreated and do not know if the next day may be their last. This has reportedly led to intense stress and has an effect on the mental health of many inmates.

Europe In the European Union member states, Article 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union prohibits the use of capital punishment. The European Union (EU) member states are all vocal opponents of the use of the death penalty. Initially in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) the death penalty was allowed only in the most extreme circumstances. This was subsequently changed to only in times of war with Protocol 6 and then in 2002 with the adoption of Protocol 13 the death penalty was outlawed completely. It is now standard that any state wishing to become a member of the EU or the Council of Europe must agree to abide by the ECHR and therefore must have abolished the death penalty within their country. [considers] that the death penalty has no legitimate place in the penal systems of modern civilised societies, and that its application may well be compared with torture and be seen as inhuman and degrading punishment within the meaning of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The African continent Of the African countries 13 have abolished the death penalty completely, 19 have abolished it in practice while 21 still retain it in practice. The African Charter does not mention the death penalty which has been seen by many to mean it is not outlawed as long as it does not contravene other articles. From Africa come several examples of countries who were abolitionist in practice and the resumed the death penalty. Libya, Chad, Cameroon, Comoros, Guinea and Burundi have all begun using the death penalty again after once being considered de facto abolitionists. This shows that while countries still have the death penalty within their penal codes there is always the possibility of them resuming executions. The most recent developments on the African continent came on the 8th of December 2008 when the African Commission adopted a resolution calling for a moratorium on the death penalty in Africa. Russia Russia is currently a de facto abolitionist state with no executions having taken place since 1996. Despite this and a planned extension to the current moratorium on the death penalty which is due to expire in 2010 it is still codified in Russian law. As a member of the Council of Europe, Russia is not allowed to carry out executions. Islamic Republic of Iran Iran is ranked 2nd in the list for number of executions having taken place in the year 2007 with 317 executions. They are also one of only 3 countries worldwide to have carried out executions on people below 18 years of age (the other two being Saudi Arabia and Yemen) in spite of having signed the Convention on the Rights of the Child. In November 2007 the Iranian minister is recorded as having said that if homosexual activity is in private there is no problem, but those in overt activity should be executed. He argued that homosexuality is against human nature and that humans are here to reproduce.

Saudi Arabia In 2007 Saudi Arabia executed the third highest number of prisoners with 143 executions. However in terms of population this makes Saudi Arabia first when looking at executions per capita. Saudi Arabia remains the only country in the world which still uses beheading as an official method of execution. Perhaps more worryingly from the international point of view is the wide range of crimes for the death penalty is applied, including homosexuality and fornication with Amnesty International also reporting on one man killed for practicing sorcery. Pakistan With 135+ executions in 2007 Pakistan was the 4th highest executing country in the world. Nearly a quarter of the countrys 31,000 convicts are currently sentenced to death. There have also been concerns raised about the fairness of trials by certain courts within Pakistan. During the 1900s Pakistan was to receive criticism for its execution of minors however the law has since been changed so that the minimum age is 18.

Key Documents
United Nations Documents can be found on http://www.un.org/en/documents/index.shtml Delegates are hereby requested to bear in mind that only Reuters, Al-Jazeera and United Nations Offices Reports will be accepted as evidence in Committee. Other reports, such as country specific facts (may be supported by a government report of the concerned country), Amnesty International and BBC shall be considered but accepted only depending upon the situation. Kindly carry web-page print outs and refrain from using MS Word Documents as evidence. Aiming at restricting the use of capital punishment with a view to abolition have been adopted by the General Assembly since 1959, when resolution 1396 (XIV) mandated the UN Economic and Social Council to initiate a study of the question of capital punishment, of the law and practices relating thereto, and of the effects of capital punishment, and the abolition thereof, on the rate of criminality. Subsequently, the General Assembly, in resolutions 2393 (XXIII) of 26 November 1968, 2857 (XXVI) of 20 December 1971, 3011 (XXVII) of 18 December 1972 and 32/61 of 8 December 1977, expressly confirmed the continuing interest of the United Nations in the study of the question of capital punishment with a view to promoting full respect for everyones right to life (resolution 32/61, adopted by consensus). The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), adopted by the General Assembly in 1966, outlines restrictions on the use of the death penalty and sets out safeguards to be observed in capital cases. While the use of the death penalty is not explicitly prohibited in the ICCPR, Article 6(6) clearly states that Nothing in this article shall be invoked to delay or to prevent the abolition of capital punishment by any State Party to the present Covenant. The UN Human Rights Committee observed in a General Comment, that Article 6 refers generally to abolition in terms which strongly suggest that abolition is desirable, and that all measures of abolition should be considered as progress in the enjoyment of the right to life Pursuing the desire to establish an international commitment to abolish the death penalty, in 1989 the General Assembly adopted the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty. As of September 2011, 73 countries are State parties to the Protocol and three others are signatories to it. In 1984 the Economic and Social Council adopted Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, which were endorsed that same year by General Assembly in resolution 39/188. In 2007, the General Assembly adopted, with strong cross-regional support, resolution 62/149 on moratorium on the use of the death penalty. The resolution confirmed the commitment of the UN towards abolition of the death penalty and called upon states

that still retain it to, inter alia, respect international safeguards guaranteeing the rights of those facing the death penalty, reduce the number of offences for which this punishment may be imposed and establish a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty. The calls of the 2007 resolution were reaffirmed by the General Assembly in resolution 63/168 adopted on 18 December 2008. It calls on States that maintain the death penalty to establish a moratorium on the use of the death penalty with a view to abolition, and in the meantime, to restrict the number of offences which it punishes and to respect the rights of those on death row. It also calls on States that have abolished the death penalty not to reintroduce it. Like all General Assembly resolutions, it is not binding on any state.

Questions to Consider:
The ultimate goal of this committee in debating this topic is to look at how the use of the death penalty can be further restricted with a view to eventually eliminate it completely. In looking to achieve this, delegates may wish to consider some of the following: 1. How can the continuing lack of accurate information with regards to use of the death penalty in retentionist countries be addressed? 2. What methods can be used to ensure the death penalty is only applied in the most serious of crimes? 3. What can be done to make sure that in retentionist countries the death penalty is applied equally and fairly? 4. What can be done to persuade currently abolitionist in practice countries to remove the death penalty from their legal codes? 5. Should the UN play a more active role in ensuring that those condemned to die have received a fair trial and are sufficient right to appeal the decision? 6. Should the UN look to enforce the moratorium on the death penalty more strictly or continue with its current policy? 7. How can currently retentionist countries be convinced to gradually reduce their use of the death penalty with a view to eventually abolishing it? 8. What criteria should exclude someone from receiving the death sentence? 9. Should countries be allowed to carry out executions using whatever methods they wish? Would specifying more acceptably human methods be seen as a way of accepting the death penalty? Please contact the undersigned for clarifications: Co- Chairpersons: Amogh Dhar Sharma and Shirin Rai Gupta amoghdhar@hotmail.com shirinraigupta@gmail.com