The Death Penalty in the United States

Mr. Chairman, the United States takes note of the EU and other delegation's interventions concerning Messieurs Patterson, Jones, and Suarez.

Mr. Chairman, the issue of whether a State imposes the death penalty is a political issue each country has to decide for itself. In the United States, under our Constitution, individual states make that decision. It is an issue with respect to which reasonable people disagree. There is an on going, and I might even say passionate and extensive debate on this issue in the legal and greater community in the United States. As you may be aware, 12 of our states do not impose capital punishment.

Also, our political system has a built in opportunity for those who are elected by the majority of the voters, those who make the laws at the state and federal levels, to constantly assess—and reassess—their decision on this issue.

However, in those states that do carry the death penalty, it is applied only after most rigorous adherence to strictly constructed rules of substance and procedure that are constantly assessed and reassessed by courts, almost daily, somewhere in the United States, after open and fair trials and conviction by juries upon findings of guilt beyond reasonable doubt in narrowly circumscribed circumstances--essentially aggravated, intentional homicide. Even then, usually after additional, separate jury decisions on the imposition of this most ultimate of societal decisions.

We assure you that the U. S. and its states take seriously due process guarantees and provide exhaustive appeals before this ultimate punishment is carried out. The great importance and vigorous public debate in the United States on this issue was most recently evidenced by the two very high profile Supreme Court decisions regarding the death penalty.

One was the case of Atkins v. Virginia, which was just decided this past June, and decided that execution of mentally retarded criminals constitutes "cruel and unusual" punishment in the words of our Constitution. Prior to this decision, 18 states of the 38 that have adopted the death penalty had already banned executions of the mentally retarded. In addition, there was a second decision also this past month, in which the Supreme Court ruled in a vote of 7-2, in the case of Ring v. Arizona, that a jury, not a judge, must determine whether a capital defendant is eligible to receive the death penalty. The court held that a judge's finding of aggravating factors sufficient to support capital punishment—even that—violates the constitutional right to a jury determination on this issue.

With all that said, let us not forget that the citizenry supports the death penalty. Polls in the U.S. continue to indicate that a majority of Americans support the death penalty, as does a significant percentage of Europeans. A Gallop poll conducted in the United States in May of this year, indicated that 72 percent of those who were polled support the death penalty for a person convicted of murder, slightly up from 68 percent six months prior, but still down slightly from the high support level of 80 percent back in 1994.

As noted, however, the debate and divergent points of view continue. In closing, I would also like to note that there is no OSCE commitment prohibiting use of the death penalty, and that international law clearly permits the imposition of that penalty.

The United States will continue to keep the Permanent Council apprised of developments regarding the death penalty in our country.

With respect to the issue of consular notification, the United States takes very seriously its obligations under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, and is engaged in extensive efforts to improve compliance by state, local and federal officials having such obligations. Thank you.