A matter to rethink and reanalyse

Marking the 14^th World Day Against the Death Penalty on October 10, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has asserted that the death penalty has no place in the 21^st century. While it would be welcomed to see a similarly high level strong conviction of anti-terrorism measures, such as detaining alleged enemy combatants without a charge in overseas detention facilities such as Guantanamo, the fact that many countries have begun using the threat of terror to ramp up executions still remains an issue of legitimate concern.

Globally, 65 countries currently use the death penalty for terrorism-related offences. Out of these, 38 countries have not imposed any death penalty sentences or carried out any executions for terrorism over the last 10 years, despite having the legislative provision for doing so. On the other hand, several countries including Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Nigeria, Tunisia have adopted laws that expanded the scope of the death penalty.

Pakistan lifted a moratorium on executions in the name of the fight against terrorism in December 2014. Although the re-established death penalty was initially only applied to terrorist offences, it was expanded in February 2015 to other offenders convicted of murder.

Even use of the death penalty to curb terrorism itself is a contested issue. There is no real international consensus on what the term terrorism means. This has allowed some states to criminalise the legitimate exercise of fundamental freedoms such as participation in peaceful protests and criticism of a government through the Internet or in the media using ambiguous counter-terrorism legislation. The UN Secretary General had thus also criticised death sentences for terrorism being handed down after unfair trials by special courts that disrespect human rights and the rule of law. The use of the death penalty for convicted terrorists also becomes problematic if confessions are obtained under duress or if the right to appeal is not respected. Squarely countering the argument that capital punishment deters terrorism, the Human Rights Council has pointed out how capital punishment does not evidently serve a useful deterrent either, since it often serves to glorify terrorists as martyrs.

Despite all these contentions, Pakistan was ranked by Amnesty International as the third-most prolific executioner in the world in 2015 after having lifted its moratorium on the death penalty. Even more troubling is the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan’s recent assessment that only around 10 per cent of those executed in Pakistan until earlier this year were associated with terrorism, while 73 per cent were convicted of murder after rape, robbery, or kidnapping. Even juveniles and people with disabilities were placed on the death penalty list.

Lifting the ban on death penalty in the name of curbing terrorism,and then widening its use to put to death those convicted of murder was a troubling move, especially given the wide range of flaws plaguing our criminal justice system.

It was thus surprising to note that 92 per cent of Pakistanis said they support “the rule of hanging terrorists”, as per a Gilani Research Foundation Survey carried out by Gallup Pakistan, back in February. Yet, while this endorsement may serve as a tool in the arsenal of proponents of the death penalty, it should be noted that the specific question posed by the survey was whether people were for or against the hanging of terrorists. However, the vast majority of executions to date have little to do with acts of hardcore terrorism.

Besides rethinking whether executing convicted terrorists serves as an effective deterrent, the Pakistani public and opinion-makers must push back and compel the state to reverse its ill-advised decision of applying the death penalty to anyone convicted of murder.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 21^st, 2016.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.