The death penalty is inhumane as it is irreversible, too often tainted by racial prejudice and financial disadvantages, and conflicts with the United States’ ideals as a humane, Western nation. Amnesty International is campaigning for complete abolition of the death penalty in the United States on the grounds that it violates the human rights of the individuals being executed. Reggie Clemons, the leading case of the Amnesty campaign, was a man sentenced to death despite allegations of police misconduct and a stacked jury. Amnesty International claims that the death penalty is too permanent and too susceptible to mistakes.  The Amnesty website documents four instances in which innocent people were sentenced to death. The justice system is far from perfect and therefore is not able to take adequate measures to ensure the guilt of every convict. Many defendants do not have the means to pay for lawyers for their cases. Nearly all death row prisoners couldn’t afford their own lawyer, suggesting a correlation between strong legal aid and death sentencing. Often decisions are infected by racial bias. The Amnesty Website sites that 77% of death penalty cases involved a white homicide victim, even though about half of all homicide victims are African American, suggesting that a jury is more likely to sentence the murderer of a white victim than that of a black victim to death. Additionally, 82% of all executions have occurred in the South, a region traditionally more influenced by racial prejudice. Studies have shown that African Americans are three times more likely to receive the death penalty in cases where the victim was white. Lastly, the United States is lagging behind the rest of the Western world in terms of progressiveness on this issue. According to Amnesty, the US is one of the top ten countries with the most executions, among countries such as China, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. The United States is also the only “western” country which still carries out executions, with twelve scheduled before 2015 is over. Though many of the scheduled executions have been granted a stay, the statistics show our country’s willingness to sentence people to death. Lastly, a common counterargument claims that tax payers should not have to support the lives of atrocious criminals. This argument is not only flawed, but also irrelevant. Death penalty cases are documented to cost 70% more than regular cases because of expenses due to court fees. Even so, tallying the costs should not be discussed in matters of human life and death.

          

          This issue relates to our Human Rights course because of the several human rights that are violated by the death penalty. Referring to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, basic rights are not granted with the existence and discrimination of its harsh sentencing. Firstly, the first article and universal right that all humans are created equal not based on any criteria other than being a human is clearly violated. The sentencing of the death penalty shows a prejudice towards people who live in a certain region of the world. Not only does the sentencing of the death penalty happen more frequently for Americans, but being more common in the South shows the discrepancies between the punishments for certain crimes even within one country. The death penalty also directly violates article 3 stating that all humans have the right to life through its brutal punishment of murdering humans for their crimes. The punishment humans receive for sometimes unproven crimes also violates article 5 of the UDHR in that humans should not be subject to inhuman me punishment. The death penalty is far from humane and clearly is based off of cruel principles. Article 7 is not aligned with the death penalty as well as it clearly discriminates against impoverished people while allowing wealthy people a better chance to fight for their freedom. This discrimination shows a difference in standards and freedoms depending on both wealth, class, and as shown above, race. This connects to our summer reading book, Just Mercy, in which Bryan Stevenson discusses the desperation of the wrongly condemned or disadvantaged and his experience defending them. The death penalty, through news stories and Stevenson's accounts, holds obvious signs of discrimination towards a certain type of human being and this is not just nor does it follow the outlines of basic human rights. Lastly, article 11 of the UDHR states that all humans have the right to prove themselves innocent in a court of law. However, this right is taken away once the discrimination of this punishment comes into play. For example, impoverished people are not given the same right to defend themselves, therefore giving them an unequal opportunity to stand up for themselves and prove that they are not guilty. Overall, the death penalty is a cruel punishment that enforces inequality and discrimination among the human race. The geographic element to the sentencing of the death penalty not only shows how the human ethos differs across the world, but that it is not equally accepted among all humans for its harsh characteristics, and therefore controversy surrounds its existence in the United States. 

Discussion questions:

1. Should the United States continue to carry out the death penalty? Is it possible for the death penalty to exist without violating basic human rights?

2. In what ways can the criminal justice system be reformed to minimize these issues?
Whose responsibility is it to act against these crimes? 

Should activists be focusing on cultural tolerance and reform rather than a justice reform? 

4. How would the United States react if other nations invoked pressure on our country about this issue? Would this situation parallel times when the United States has gotten involved in international issues? 

Links discussing this issue: 

http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts

https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/death-penalty/

http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/cases/usa-reggie-clemons​