OBJECTIVE
Many countries have now abolished the death penalty and the international community encourages this development. However, capital punishment still remains on the statute books in several countries.
Prison administrations have no responsibility for the imposition of the death penalty, but they sometimes have to deal with its consequences and implementation, i.e. holding prisoners under sentence of death, sometimes for many years when there are lengthy appeal procedures or when a State has suspended executions but has not abolished the death penalty or commuted existing sentences. Prison administrations are sometimes also responsible for carrying out executions. These tasks place a heavy burden on the staff who are involved. The objective of this chapter is to define how prisoners who are under sentence of death should be treated according to the international instruments.
ESSENTIAL PRINCIPLES
Every human being has the inherent right to life, which shall be protected by law.
In countries which have not abolished the death penalty, it shall be imposed only for the most serious crimes and after a final judgement rendered by a competent court.
The death penalty shall not be imposed for crimes committed by persons below the age of 18 and shall not be carried out on pregnant women, nor on new mothers or persons who have become insane.
Where capital punishment occurs, it shall be carried out so as to inflict the minimum possible suffering.
Abolition of the death penalty is encouraged.
These principles should be presented visually and remain on display throughout the session.
BASIS IN INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS Exercise:
Using the Compilation of Instruments, the trainees should work in pairs in order to dis-cover the basis for each of these principles.
Their findings should be reported back to the group.
IMPLICATIONS
This is an extremely difficult and distressing area of a prison officer’s work; it is essential that this fact is recognized in the presentation of this section.
The main point is that the international instruments encourage abolition of the death penalty. This is not something the trainees can do anything about, but it is important that they are aware of the position. The second point is that, where capital punishment
remains on the statute book, it is the job of prison staff to fulfil their duties with sym-pathy and understanding for all parties involved.
PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
These should be presented in the same manner, allowing time for discussion and com-ment but not permitting a debate to develop on the question of capital punishcom-ment.
TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION
A list of topics is provided in the Manual.
Methodology:
The trainees should be divided into small groups for discussion. Each group should be given two topics to discuss and report its findings at the end of the session.
This is stressful material. Prison staff in some jurisdictions may have to deal with such situations on a regular basis; others will never have experienced them. The instruments clearly encourage the abolition of the death penalty.
Points to be highlighted/suggested areas for discussion:
39. – Prisoners under sentence of death need access to materials and personnel associated with a legal appeal;
39. – Such prisoners should be allowed sensitive contact with their families and friends;
39. – Such prisoners should not have to endure an excessively restrictive environment because of the seriousness of their situation;
39. – Cruel or inhuman treatment of prisoners held under sentence of death would include the absence of information relating to their case or the progress of their appeal; confinement in very sparsely appointed accommodation on a so-called
“death row”; restricted access to family and friends; and insensitive visiting facilities, e.g. a lack of privacy;
39. – Prison staff assigned to work with prisoners under sentence of death should receive training to prepare them for the difficulties and special requirements of the task. They also need considerable support to cope with this uniquely onerous task;
39. – Medical staff have a duty to care for their patients’ health and well-being; the fact that their patients are prisoners is irrelevant. This means that they cannot be involved in administering the death penalty;
39. – There is a particularly unwelcome task for the authorities in a jurisdiction that allows the death penalty: the act usually has to be witnessed by the elected or appointed person in charge to ensure that it is carried out in accordance with the statutes, and also to ensure that the prisoner is dead at the end of it;
39. – In addition, members of the prisoner’s family may be seen as having a right to attend;
39. – Anyone nominated by the prisoner, outside his or her immediate family, may also have a right to attend, e.g. a church or religious group; or perhaps no one at all, if that is the prisoner’s wish;
39. – The victim’s family may claim a right to be present;
39. – The national and/or local press may consider it their duty to report the event;
39. – It is easy to see how an execution could become a media event; it could even be glamorized by the media. This should not be the intention.
CASE STUDIES Methodology:
The trainees will need expert direction in discussing these two cases. It is recommended that a group of trainees, different for each case, join members of the training team in a round-table discussion.
Time should be allowed for comment and discussion at the end of each study.
Points to be highlighted/suggested areas for discussion:
CASE STUDY 1
39. – The prison director’s responsibilities relate to the holding of the prisoner, not to the legal intricacies of the court hearing. No specific legal knowledge or training can be assumed;
39. – The director does have a duty to ensure that only those who are detained legally are held in the prison;
39. – The director would have the authority to grant urgent legal visits to allow the prisoner’s legal adviser to hear the evidence and to take any appropriate action;
39. – The director would almost certainly have access to the government minister through the chain of command.
CASE STUDY 2
39. – The international instruments state that, where the death penalty exists, it should be carried out so as to inflict minimal possible suffering;
39. – The method in question would need to be investigated by the appropriate specialists, or the existing evidence revisited, in a thoroughly open manner in order to assure the public that no unnecessary or gratuitous pain was inflicted;
39. – The presence at the execution of various members of the community is partly to ensure that this assurance is maintained.