Canadian Opinion on the Death Penalty
Recent survey reveals persistence of death penalty myths
To hear a recent radio interview on this subject by the author (Aubrey Harris, Coordinator for the Campaign to Abolish the Death Penalty for Amnesty International Canada) on Vancouver’s 980CKNW with host Scott Shantz you can listen here.
Opinion polls on the death penalty are nothing new. Singapore claims such polls justify their continued use of the death penalty in violation of international law and rely on keeping the population from being informed. Routine polling has also revealed a continual drop in support for the death penalty in the United States - a trend that began after a peak in the 1990s. Polling in abolitionist countries, like Canada and the United Kingdom, have a further element of fantasy involved given the that the penalty is not a local factor. In fact, in both Canada and the United Kingdom, a return of the death penalty would violate international law.
So, such polls are unlikely to result in a return to capital punishment. What is more interesting however is the information buried behind the answers.
Researchco conducts such surveys in Canada and released their latest findings earlier last month. Contrary to the US trend, Researchco claims that Canadian public opinion in favour of an (impossible) return of the death penalty has been rising. They are therefore most useful as a measure of how informed the public is on the reality of capital punishment and managing crime.
Comparing surveys of the general public to surveys of those more informed on the death penalty and criminology by their profession also reveals a stark difference. Law enforcement surveys show the death penalty ranking last in what makes for effective solutions to crime. A 2009 survey of criminologists revealed that over 88% believed the death penalty was NOT a deterrent to murder.
The Researchco survey found these reasons being cited by those in favour of the death penalty:
A belief that the death penalty would deter someone from committing murder
A belief that they just “deserve” to die
A belief that the death penalty would “save money”
A belief that the death penalty would "provide closure” to the families of victims
A belief that “murders can’t be rehabilitated”
This provides a useful opportunity to address these beliefs:
The Death Penalty is Not a Deterrent
Decades upon decades of research has failed to conclusively show the death penalty to have any unique deterrent effect in relation to the targeted crimes. One challenge is the quality of data available, but another challenge is that the data that is available may indicate the opposite to be true. Correlation between otherwise similar jurisdictions on per capital homicide rates (a fairly objective data point compared to other crimes) tends to show higher per capita rates of homicide in those jurisdictions that retain the death penalty than those that do not. Comparisons of changes in rates over time also fail to show deterrence. Law enforcement officers illegally killed on duty also tend to happen more in places with the death penalty than those without it.
There have been some studies that made the claim to find deterrence, however to date these studies have been quickly debunked after they were found to contain substantial flaws.
Matching the Crime is a Fallacy
The claim that some crimes “just deserve the death penalty” is a reflection of anger or virtue signalling that is little better than saying “just because.” Logically it begs the question, since the argument is essentially: the death penalty must exist because some crimes exist that require the death penalty. Yet the question truly being asked is is the death penalty necessary or reasonable.
At its worst it is pure anger of the kind that they claim the offender has been guilty of themselves. Anger does not necessarily lead to good policy or accurate decisions over things such as guilt. When faced with the opportunity to impose death, that anger can sometimes be tempered. In the USA, to serve on a capital jury, jurors must be ‘death qualified’ - meaning any potential juror who opposes the death penalty is disqualified from serving. Yet at the sentencing phase of death penalty trials (in the USA capital trials are in two parts: guilt and sentencing/punishment), juries have become increasingly reluctant to impose death.
The virtue signalling by those who call for death for those accused of certain offences also ignores that those organisations and voices who argue against the death penalty most often come from those who speak out against some of the worst crimes humanity knows: human rights violations, genocide etc.. What is different is that we call for justice systems that include human rights in the design and implementation.
The Death Penalty is Extremely Expensive
Studies of the cost of the death penalty consistently show that the death penalty in a modern system is the most expensive form of punishment, not even factoring in the lack of deterrent results. Why is capital punishment so expensive? It is expensive because of the immediate legal costs incurred at and for the first trial. Even if you eliminated all appeals (which is not only morally wrong, but would result in even higher rates of wrongful conviction and execution), it would still cost more than LWOP.
That said, even if it were cheaper, killing a human being just to save money would be a gross violation of human rights.
The Myth of Closure
There have been attempts to study the psychological impact of executions. Advocates of the death penalty turned to the claim of ‘closure’ when study upon study had failed to show deterrence.
Contrary to the expectation that families must be death penalty supporters if they have lost a loved one, there are groups of murder victims’ families that actively campaign against the death penalty. Furthermore, studies have attempted to examine the impact of executions on family members of the original victims and failed to find evidence of closure linked to execution.
Studies have also found that those who have witnessed or participated in executions often experience post traumatic stress disorder. Such impacts should not be surprising when you have anecdotal evidence of executioners who battled alcoholism or take their own life.
Reoffending Rate for Murder is Second Lowest of Violent Crimes
Canadian statistics show that the reoffending rate for those convicted of homicide are among the lowest of all categories of violent crime (with those convicted of violent robbery at the highest rate of reoffending).
What’s more, even in Canada we still convict innocent people. In the United States since 1973, there have been 197 exonerations of those previously sentenced to death. Innocence Canada, a small but effective not-for-profit, has successfully defended 24 people since 1993. This includes people wrongly convicted in cases of severe violent crime, or where there was no crime at all.
Exonerations are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to innocence. The legal system makes overturning a sentence after an initial conviction extremely hard to do and actual innocence is not seen by some judges as sufficient grounds even to stop an execution. Anyone who has followed Amnesty International Urgent Actions on the death penalty has seen plenty of examples where the courts ignored strong claims of innocence just to allow an execution to proceed. Some high profile cases, such as Troy Davis in Georgia and Cameron Todd Willingham in Texas have helped to highlight wrongful executions. Canadians like Hamid Ghassemi Shall, Saeed Malekpour and the Kohail Brothers show that Canadians are still at risk and affected by brutal regimes that will impose death sentences after unfair trials, torture and fabricated “evidence.” Canadians remain on death row in China and the USA, so even though Canada will not see a legal return to executions, Canadians may still be executed.
Where to go From Here
There are many human rights issues in the news today. The death penalty is just one, but it is the one human rights violation that the world is most likely to eventually end. Of all the human rights concerns, the death penalty is the only one which is a matter of what laws are on the books. Already most of the countries in the world have abandoned the death penalty. More than half have abolished it in law and a substantial number of the remaining countries have stopped executing. A world without the death penalty is possible and it will be a better world than one that still executes prisoners.
A great way to stay informed on the death penalty is to sign up for Amnesty International Urgent Actions and read the case files of active death penalty appeal cases. You can also look forward to Amnesty International’s annual reports on the death penalty - our next one should be published soon.