The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area
standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society”. This principle, it
said, requires that the use of the death penalty be “reserved for the worst of crimes and
limited in its instances of application”. The Court went on to state that the “[d]ifficulties in administering the penalty to ensure against its arbitrary and capricious application require adherence to a rule reserving its use, at this stage of evolving standards
and in cases of crimes against individuals, for crimes that take the life of the victim”.87
While no individual has been executed in the United States for a non-death-related
offense since the death penalty’s reinstatement in 1976, several jurisdictions still retain capital punishment for such crimes: Arkansas (treason); California (sabotage,
treason); Colorado (treason, aggravated kidnapping); Florida (capital drug trafficking, capital sexual battery); Georgia (aircraft hijacking, treason); Idaho (aggravated
kidnapping); Kentucky (kidnapping with aggravating factors); Louisiana (treason);
Mississippi (aircraft piracy, treason); Missouri (treason, aggravated kidnapping, drug
trafficking, aircraft hijacking, placing a bomb near a bus terminal); Montana (aggravated sexual intercourse without consent, aggravated kidnapping); Washington (treason); Federal (espionage, treason, drug trafficking, attempting to kill an officer, juror
or witness in a continuing criminal investigation). There are 14 offenses for which a
military service member may receive the death penalty, many of which must occur
during wartime.88
The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to
the Constitution bar the execution of offenders who were under 18 years of age when
the crime was committed.89 It has also prohibited, under the Eighth Amendment,
the execution of death row inmates who are considered to be “insane” or “mentally
retarded”.90
The United States’ response to ODIHR’s questionnaire stated that the Federal Government maintains a system for carefully examining each potential federal death penalty case, without consideration of the defendant’s “race”, to ensure that the federal
death penalty is sought in a fair, uniform and non-discriminatory manner nationwide. The law provides for “the appointment of highly qualified counsel to represent federal capital defendants at all stages of a capital prosecution, from indictment
87
Emphasis added.
88 Response to the ODIHR questionnaire on the death penalty from the Permanent Delegation of the United States of
America to the OSCE, 24 August 2012, (U.S. Response).
89 Roper v Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), as cited by, Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute,
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-633.ZS.html>.
90 Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (1986), as cited by, Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute, <http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0477_0399_ZS.html>; Atkins v Virginia, 536 U.S.
304 (2002), as cited by, Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute, < http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/
html/00-8452.ZS.html>.
18
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents