View previous stories
	Death penalty disproportionately affects the poor, UN rights experts warn by FIDH, Amnesty International, agencies   On 10 October 2017, the 15th World Day Against the Death Penalty aims at raising awareness about the reasons why people living in poverty are at a greater risk of being sentenced to death and executed. The death penalty is used discriminatorily, often against the most vulnerable people and should be abolished.   The application of the death penalty is inextricably linked to poverty. Social and economic inequalities affect access to justice for those who are sentenced to death for several reasons: defendants may lack resources (social and economic, but also political power) to defend themselves and will in some cases be discriminated against because of their social status.   Death penalty disproportionately affects the poor, UN rights experts warn.   United Nations human rights experts are calling for urgent action to end the disproportionate impact of the death penalty on people from poorer communities. They say imposing the death penalty as a result of discrimination constitutes an arbitrary killing and Governments must not stand idly by.   “If you are poor, the chances of being sentenced to death are immensely higher than if you are rich. There could be no greater indictment of the death penalty than the fact that in practice it is really a penalty reserved for people from lower socio-economic groups. This turns it into a class-based form of discrimination in most countries, thus making it the equivalent of an arbitrary killing.   People living in poverty are disproportionately affected by the death penalty for many reasons. They are an easy target for the police, they cannot afford a lawyer, the free legal assistance they might receive is of low quality, procuring expert evidence is beyond their means, tracing witnesses is too costly, and access to appeals often depends on being able to afford extra counsel. Many cannot afford bail and therefore remain in custody before their trials, further hindering their efforts to prepare an effective defence.   Some legal aid systems become active only at the trial stage, meaning that defendants from low socio-economic backgrounds are often interrogated and investigated without a lawyer. By the time the case reaches court, it may already be too late to guarantee a fair trial. Corruption of law enforcement officials is another detrimental factor.   Poverty also compounds obstacles which vulnerable and disadvantaged groups in society are already facing. In many countries, this especially includes people of African descent, as well as others who are discriminated against on the basis of their gender, ethnicity, race or migration status.   Meanwhile, migrants who find themselves caught up in the criminal justice system face multiple obstacles in effectively challenging charges made against them, including unfamiliarity with legal language and procedures, limited awareness of their rights, financial constraints, and the possible lack of a supportive social network.   They may also face bias by judges, police officers and investigators, which can influence the verdict against them, and leave them at increased risk of receiving the death sentence.   We call on all States to treat all migrants involved in the criminal justice systems with respect and dignity as equal rights holders, regardless of their migratory status.   Women living in poverty are also at a severe disadvantage when faced with the risk of a death sentence. In some States, women face the death penalty, including by stoning, not only in cases of murder, but also for alleged adultery, same sex-relationships and drug-related offences.   Discrimination against women is compounded by intersecting factors, including their socio-economic status. This discrimination based on gender stereotypes, stigma, harmful and patriarchal cultural norms and gender-based violence, has an adverse impact on the ability of women to gain access to justice on an equal basis with men.   We are also concerned that it is extremely rare for domestic abuse to be treated as a mitigating factor. Imposing the death penalty in cases where there has been evidence of self-defence constitutes an arbitrary killing.   Poverty continues to affect prisoners - and their families – even after they reach death row. Living conditions are worsened by difficulties in accessing food, medical care and other services. Relatives who themselves live in poverty are unable to provide financial help. These inmates may even lack the resources to stay in touch with their families and friends while in prison.   Around the world, death sentences continue to be imposed in violation of major international standards, including the right to a fair trial and the principle of non-discrimination. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights makes clear that all people are entitled to the equal protection of the law without discrimination, while UN safeguards on the use of the death penalty make clear that people must have received a fair trial, including the right to adequate legal assistance, at all stages.   The disproportionate impact of the death penalty on the poor shows that these international standards are being violated.   We applaud the growing number of countries that have abolished the death penalty and welcome the figures for 2016 showing an overall decrease in its use.   However, the global effort towards its progressive abolition must continue to grow, along with the work to end systemic discrimination against some of the most vulnerable people in our societies.   http://bit.ly/2xQybUC http://www.worldcoalition.org/worldday.html http://www.fidh.org/en/issues/death-penalty/death-penalty-and-poverty http://bit.ly/2yDrh51 http://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/04/death-penalty-2016-facts-and-figures/ Visit the related web page
	How to make Latin America’s most violent cities safer by Robert Muggah and Ilona Szabó Igarapé Institute, agencies Brazil   Few cities are more dangerous for civilians than San Pedro Sula in Honduras. Victims of its legendary violence include bus drivers, journalists, farmers, students and shop owners. According to a local crime observatory, the city of roughly 740,000 people had a homicide rate of 111 per 100,000. The figures are routinely disputed by law enforcement officials – police there are prohibited from giving interviews – but the bodies nevertheless keep piling up.   It’s not like local authorities haven’t tried to prevent the killing spree. Since 2003, the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) has supported a peace and citizen co-existence project in the Sula Valley covering some 17 municipalities. Working with the mayor’s office, police and researchers, the project focused on high-risk neighbourhoods and at-risk people, especially young men. While well intentioned, the intervention stumbled early on.   Some of the challenges were not linked to the programme. The country was buffeted by massive tropical storms in 2008 and a constitutional crisis and coup in 2009. This resulted in IADB funds being diverted and eventually frozen. A recent evaluation found that the most significant challenges were internal, with the project facing major obstacles to full implementation. Contracts were sloppily prepared and accountability mechanisms were side-stepped.   The most widespread complaint about the peace and citizen co-existence project was that local residents themselves were left out of the process. This eroded their trust in the initiative, thus exacerbating the already poor coordination. To complicate matters, there were no monitoring systems in place to correct course once the problems were recognised. These kinds of challenges are likely to sound familiar to people working in public policy, but in San Pedro Sula, they mean the difference between life and death.   Latin America is the world’s most violent region. The statistics are shocking. The continent is home to eight of the 10 most murderous countries in the world and 47 of the world’s 50 most murderous cities are located there. It hardly comes as surprise, then, that one in every three adults consider crime and violence to be Latin America’s most pressing issue.   Not all Latin Americans experience violent crime in the same way. People living in Central American countries are facing almost war-like conditions. The world’s most violent non-war country is El Salvador, with 116 murders per 100,000 people, and the rate soars to 188 per 100,000 in its capital city. Meanwhile, Chile has a homicide rate of less than three per 100,000 and one of its cities – La Serena-Coquimbo – is considered South America’s safest.   It was not always like this. Between the 1960s and 1980s, in some Latin American countries murder rates hovered around the global average of six or seven per 100,000, in spite of civil wars and dictatorships. Since then, homicidal violence has declined in most parts of the world, especially North America and western Europe. Yet, with few exceptions, murder, assault and victimisation worsened across Central and South America, and the Caribbean.   There are many factors in what makes a city dangerous, but some stand out. At the top of the list is income inequality – Latin America is home to 10 of the 15 most unequal countries on the planet. There is a strong correlation between social and economic inequality and the incidence of lethal violence. Other factors include high rates of youth unemployment, chronically weak security and justice institutions, and high levels of unregulated urbanisation.   However, the news is not all bad. There are promising examples from some governments – especially when led by municipal authorities – of efforts to turn things around. The most exciting activities are bubbling up in cities. This is to be expected: mayors often have more intimate contact with constituents, greater discretion to undertake prevention and visible priorities (and repercussions if they don’t meet them).   A study published by the IADB, Igarapé Institute and World Economic Forum highlights the ways in which some Latin American cities are tackling violent crime. A review of 10 municipalities shows they are investing in a combination of proven approaches. Their successes are neither incidental nor accidental, but the result of targeted investment.   In the process, some of the world’s most violent cities have witnessed remarkable reversals. Take the case of Bogota, which between 1995 and 2013 saw homicidal violence decline by 70% – from 59 to 17 per 100,000 inhabitants. It’s sister city, Medellin, experienced an even more dramatic decline in murder between 2002 and 2014 of over 85% (from 179 to 27 homicides per 100,000). Most impressive of all was Ciudad Juarez, which saw homicide drop from 282 to 18 murders per 100,000 people from 2010 to 2015.   There are a few lessons from Bogota, Medellin and Cuidad Juarez about how to design out crime and make cities more resilient.   First, public safety policies must be data-driven, evidence-based and problem-oriented. Remarkably, less than 6% of public security and justice measures across Latin America and the Caribbean have any concrete evidence of success. But there is growing awareness that strategies that are based on reliable and real-time information, and draw on scientifically robust practice – focused deterrence, cognitive behavioural therapy, childhood interventions – are essential to successfully improving safety.   Second, police and social services should focus their energy on high-risk places, people and behaviour. In many cities across Latin America, more than half of all homicides occur in less than 2% of street addresses. Just a small number of people are responsible for a disproportionate share of perpetration and victimisation. If crime prevention in the city is the goal, broad development activities are the wrong way to go. Rather, targeted hotspot policing together with social prevention is the order of the day.   Third, city authorities must begin exploring ways to regulate drugs. Regulation is not the same as legalisation – it is not a free-for-all. There are a wide array of options between prohibition and legalisation. City mayors across Latin America and the Caribbean are experimenting with decriminalising the use of marijuana for recreational use, harm-reduction strategies, strict market regulation and even commercial promotion. The goal is to put governments, not organised criminals in control.   Fourth, it is essential to advance both control measures as well as efforts to strengthen social cohesion and improve conditions in marginalised areas. The forging of a sense of shared responsibility in the city is the most important way to restore safety and security. This must be coupled with tangible investment in public goods, urban renewal and linkages between wealthier and poor parts of the city. This often includes predictable public transport options, the restoration of neighbourhood parks and the provision of quality services.   At the centre of city revival is leadership, especially by the mayor, business community and not-for profit sector. Where there is a clear plan, agreed metrics of success and resources, it is truly astonishing how much cities can accomplish. Visit the related web page
	View more stories