First World Congress Against the Death Penalty

Intervention at the Council of Europe

21 June 2001

[Delivered on behalf of Chris Patten by Angel Viñas, Director for Multilateral Relations and Human Rights at DG Relex]

I thank the organisation Together Against the Death Penalty for taking the initiative to organise this Congress and its president Michel Taube for providing this possibility to transmit a message to you.

Some 50 years ago a movement started in Europe to abolish the death penalty. Since then, all of the EU Member States have abandoned this punishment. This afternoon, the twentieth anniversary of France's abolition will be celebrated. Its abolition in 1981 was very much the result of a long battle fought by one man, Mr Badinter. We are immensely grateful for all of your efforts, Mr Badinter.

Although Member States' experience of abolition has differed, they have shared common ground: they insist on the inhumane, unnecessary and irreversible character of capital punishment, no matter how cruel the crime committed by the offender. Furthermore, this logic now seems to be shared by the international community as a whole, insofar as both the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the United Nations Security Council Resolutions establishing the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda do not provide for the death penalty among the range of sanctions, even when the most serious crimes, including genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes are tried.

The EU has decided, as an integral part of its human rights policy, to strengthen its international activities in opposition to the death penalty. The EU is opposed to the death penalty in all circumstances and has agreed to campaign for its universal abolition. That stance is rooted in our belief in the inherent dignity of all human beings and the inviolability of the human person. This EU commitment was also reaffirmed in the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights, which was officially proclaimed at the Nice Summit in December 2000.

The EU believes that it is impossible to reduce to zero the risk of applying the penalty in error. That risk alone, the risk of taking innocent life, is reason enough for many of us to outlaw it as a punishment. Nor do we accept the argument that the death penalty is a deterrent to violent crime. In our countries the evidence simply does not support that claim.

The EU therefore works towards the universal abolition of the death penalty. In the process of attaining this objective, where the death penalty still exists, the EU calls for its use to be progressively restricted, and insists that it be carried out according to minimum standards. The EU also presses, where relevant, for moratoria to be introduced. The EU has produced internal guidelines for the demarches and representations it makes on capital punishment, where relevant, in multilateral fora and towards third countries.

Abolition is also a requirement for countries seeking EU membership. Almost all of the candidate countries have acceded to Protocol No. 6 to the European Convention on Human Rights concerning the Abolition of the Death Penalty. There is only one exception: Turkey.

We also actively pursue this policy in international human rights fora. A recent example is the EU initiative at the UN-Commission for Human Rights in Geneva last April for a resolution on the abolition on the death penalty.

The EU introduced the text, which calls on states to consider acceding to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This instrument is aimed at abolishing the death penalty and to ensure that - in states where death penalty has not yet been eradicated it is only imposed for the most serious crimes and to establish a moratorium on executions. The resolution, amassing more than 60 co-sponsors, was adopted after a roll-call vote: of 53 CHR Members, 27 voted for, 18 against and 7 abstained.

The adoption of this resolution was needless to say the result of teamwork, very efficiently led by the EU Presidency, Sweden.

Another way for the Commission to pursue this policy is through EC assistance to programmes for promotion of human rights and democracy. Through mobilisation of public opinion against capital punishment we hope to attain the goal of seeing the death penalty consigned to the history books as a form of punishment which has no place in the modern world.

Funding such projects has recently been re-affirmed as a priority in the Commission's Communication, or policy paper, of 8 May 2001 on the Union's role in promoting human rights and democratisation in third countries.

The projects we support are often very practical. I would like to give you a couple of examples. One works with the University of the Philippines to increase use of DNA testing in capital cases. In the Philippines there are more than 1,000 death row convicts, most of whom lack the means to hire legal assistance. Challenging these death row convictions with DNA testing could greatly affect the current pro death penalty opinion.

We also fund projects to foster public awareness. We have a joint programme with the Council of Europe that originally covered Albania, the Russian Federation, Turkey and Ukraine. Since this programme was agreed, Ukraine has, however abolished the death penalty. Maybe this proves the success of the programme!

The programme includes training for parliamentarians and other opinion makers on the practice in states that no longer practise the death penalty and how to speak persuasively to the public on these matters. It is well known that public opinion often demands that the death penalty be maintained and thus needs to receive information about the need to respect basic human rights.

There is still a long way to go. Let me just mention a few examples.

The figures emanating from China about its use of the death penalty under the 'strike hard' policy are so horrifying as to be almost unbelievable. It is therefore a central and regular element the EU-China human rights dialogue. Last April we discussed issues such as imposition of alternative sanctions to the death penalty.

In Iran, according to reports, the practice of executing women by stoning has recently been resumed. This cruel method had not been applied since 1997. We have also learned that other women have recently been sentenced to execution through this method. It has therefore been necessary for me to raise this issue with my Iranian counterparts in recent meetings.

In relation to the US, EU activity aims at US withdrawal of its reservation concerning Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights. In addition, the EU has invited the US to respect the strict conditions for use of death penalty that are enumerated in several international instruments, notably in relation to juveniles and mentally retarded.

These questions and others will certainly be among those discussed tomorrow under the specific agenda point on the US that will be chaired by Mr Badinter.

I wish you fruitful discussions and congratulate all of you for your endeavours to obtain universal abolition of the death penalty.