26 Aug Texas Governor Responds to EU’s Request for Death Penalty Moratorium
The European Union last week urged Texas to impose a moratorium on the death penalty. Here is the statement in full:
The European Union notes with great regret the upcoming execution in the State of Texas which would be the 400th since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976. Therefore, the European Union strongly urges Governor Rick Perry to exercise all powers vested in his office to halt all upcoming executions and to consider the introduction of a moratorium in the State of Texas.
The European Union is unreservedly opposed to the use of capital punishment under all circumstances and has consistently called for the universal abolition of this punishment. We believe that elimination of the death penalty is fundamental to the protection of human dignity, and to the progressive development of human rights. We further consider this punishment to be cruel and inhumane. There is no evidence to suggest that the use of the death penalty serves as a deterrent against violent crime and the irreversibility of the punishment means that miscarriages of justice – which are inevitable in all legal systems – cannot be redressed. Consequently, the death penalty has been abolished throughout the European Union.
In countries that maintain the use of capital punishment, the European Union seeks the progressive restriction of both its scope and the number of offences for which capital punishment may be employed, as defined in several human rights instruments.
In this regard, the European Union welcomes the United States Supreme Court rulings of June 2002 and March 2005 declaring the execution of persons with mental retardation and the execution of juveniles respectively, to be unconstitutional. The European Union urges the US authorities to extend these restrictions, in particular, to the execution of persons with severe mental illness. The European Union welcomes the US commitment to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR). However, the European Union regrets the US decision to withdraw from the Optional Protocol of the VCCR, which gives the ICJ jurisdiction over disputes arising from the convention.
The EU appreciates and values its co-operation with the US on a wide range of human rights concerns around the world. The European Union therefore takes this opportunity to renew its call for a moratorium to be placed on the application of the death penalty, by both the US federal and state authorities, in anticipation of its legal abolition.
The Candidate Countries Turkey, Croatia* and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia*, the Countries of the Stabilisation and Association Process and potential candidates Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia, and the EFTA countries Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, members of the European Economic Area, as well as Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Armenia and Azerbaijan align themselves with this declaration.
Texas Governor Rick Perry responded to the EU’s appeal for a death penalty moratorium:
“230 years ago, our forefathers fought a war to throw off the yoke of a European monarch and gain the freedom of self-determination. Texans long ago decided that the death penalty is a just and appropriate punishment for the most horrible crimes committed against our citizens. While we respect our friends in Europe, welcome their investment in our state and appreciate their interest in our laws, Texans are doing just fine governing Texas.”
This is cute, but regrettable. Governor Perry doesn’t seem to take the EU’s statement seriously. Of course, the EU is not suggesting that it wishes to “govern Texas.” It is simply engaging in public diplomacy about an issue of global concern. Recognizing Texas’s sovereignty over this issue, it is issuing a diplomatic request for Texas to consider a moratorium.
Rather than mock the European Union’s respectful diplomatic overture, I wish Governor Perry would take it seriously and address the EU’s concerns on the merits.
As a resident of Texas, I have no qualms about imposition of the death penalty for those properly, with emphasis upon properly, convicted of heinous crimes against society.
The concern of the European Union is nice and, of course, I have concerns about European Union member nations, such as France and Italy, engaging in economic activities with Iran, Libya, and Syria that might ultimately be detrimental to member nations as well as the United States by funding terrorist operations above and beyond those financed from within Saudi Arabia.
While this matter obviously degenerate into a tit for tat proposition, I think it appropriate that the European Union direct its attentions inward and consider appearances as seen from outside its borders.
Wjneill,
Great point. The United States should respectfully admonish European countries that engage in business with terrorist countries like Iran and Syria (Libya is much improved) and encourage them to rethink their business practices. And the EU should take those concerns seriously, unlike the flippant manner in which Texas is taking the EU’s concerns.
Another recent example of this sort of diplomatic initiative was the manner in which the United States took the lead on foreign corrupt practices. The United States has long had a statute, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, that addresses the problem. We encouraged an international treaty to address the problem, which eventually was signed by OECD countries.
The point is all of these concerns deserve respectful consideration, something that the Texas governor did not show in his response last week.
Roger Alford
I wonder how much of it is a tongue-in-cheek jab at the fact that most Europeans support the death penalty, but like the EU itself, European elites are forcing a policy choice down the throat of the people.
Well we say these days that being a governor is they key launching pad for the Presidency. I guess these are the high-powered diplomatic skills developed at that level.
Best,
Ben
This type of behavior only reinforces European stereotypes about Americans, the good folks living in Texas in particular. ‘We fought a war to throw off the European yoke’, good grief.
In response to a previous comment, most Europeans do NOT support the death penalty. Yes, you might find a poll here or there saying otherwise, yet the capital punishment was outlawed in some 47 European states democratically, by the people’s own elected representatives, not by ‘activist judges or what have you. If European citizens really wanted to reintroduce the death penalty, there would be no ‘elite’ capable of stopping them from doing so.
Redneck governor for a redneck state. Way to go.
Marko,
Speigel has a poll that showed vast support for the death penalty … what more do you want?
Also, I didn’t say activist judges, I just said that banning the death penalty in Europe is an elite project, do you really disagree with that?
Anyway, my point is not to get into a debate about Euro-thought on the death penalty, my point was to give a little context to the Govenor’s comments.
In France, the death penalty was abolished by Mitterand in 1981, but he knew perfectly, and actually said so during the electoral campaign, that the majority of the French were against the abolition, and that it would not help him get elected. But he was, for other reasons, and then fulfiled his promise.
Also, it is provided by the European Convention on Human Rights that there cannot be a death penalty. So, the argument is now that whatever the people of Europe think, European countries cannot go back.
So, it was certainly an elite project in France, and probably still is.
NewStream Dream, Would you be so kind as to provide a link to the Spiegel poll? I remember vaguely one with the question going something like ‘do you support the death penalty for Saddam Hussein’, where the majority of people surveyed said yes. They could have gone with Hitler, and produced an even happier result. My point is that polls don’t matter as much as does the democratic legitimacy of the institutions which actually abolished capital punishment, and the actual behavior of European citizens. There is no serious civic initiative that I am aware of to reintroduce capital punishment. And frankly, I quite doubt it that the Governor of Texas had any of this in mind – he just wanted to show the finger, metaphorically speaking, to all these meddling Europeans. Gilles, It is incorrect that the ECHR provides that there cannot be a death penalty – it actually states quite the opposite in Art. 2. It’s the additional protocols 6 and 13 to the ECHR which do indeed abolish the death penalty, but only after undergoing separate ratification processes in each state party. And, for what it’s worth, if Europeans really wanted the death penalty, the ECHR (and consequently,… Read more »
Marko,
I take your point: it is article X, and not Y, which provides for the abolition of the death penalty.
Now, as you state, Europeans could denounce the ECHR. Would it be costless? Not at all, and it is part of the elite project. If, in Europe, you stand for the death penalty, you’re now looking like an awful anti human right guy, if not a Texan, and it is not, to say the least, politically correct. And nobody cares whether the majority is with you: how could they know, they are only voters, and know nothing about humain rights.
One last point. It is so obvious that no parlementary majority would ever want to go back that Chirac just amended the French Constitution last spring in order to make the ban constitutional… and make sure that no majority could easily bring the death penalty back. Just in case the wrong people would get elected…
Marko,
This cite won’t let me post the Speigel link, sorry. Anyway, I think Gov. Perry does invoke the thought that banning capital punishment is a European elite project. I think that’s why you see the references to self-determination and “Texas deciding,” as if to say in Europe Europeans have not decided this issue.
How would we respond to a respectful diplomatic overture from India to stop eating beef, or from orthodox jews begging us to stop eating meat and dairy products together? The EU is appealing to some kind of higher morality that is completely foreign and meaningless to most Texans.
I personally think Governor Perry was a little more polite than the situation merited.
Matthew,
Please explain. Would you also say that the United States has no business urging Europeans to stop doing business with terrorist countries? And what about China? Must the United States make no diplomatic attempts to stop China from engaging in practices we perceive to be major human rights or intellectual property violations?
Roger Alford
Of course, Roger is right that diplomatically serious and respectful responses make for better diplomatic relations. And the U.S. (yes, including Texas) often pontificates on the sovereign affairs of other nations and should be willing to listen and respond seriously in turn. But please don’t tell me anyone in the EU was surprised by Gov. Perry’s response. It brings to mind the undiplomatic response of Ohioans in 2004 to Brits who sent them letters advocating voting for Kerry. Just google “Dear Limey” to find the choice headline which resulted from that project in the Guardian newspaper. (The top five google results apply, but the Guardian result is the most direct.) Those were private citizens, not a governor, but, significanty, they were voters. Gov Perry is elected by Texans, and the phrasing of his response is certainly targeted not only to Europeans but also to Texas voters. Frankly, his retort probably will benefit him politically in Texas. Also, the reponse is flippant but not merely flippant. It harkens to the Gettysburg Address and the Declaration of Independence, summarizes the rationale for the death penalty, attempts to convey some degree of respect—and avoid a boycott—while also conveying a legitimate assertion of sovereignty.… Read more »
Please explain. Would you also say that the United States has no business urging Europeans to stop doing business with terrorist countries? And what about China? Must the United States make no diplomatic attempts to stop China from engaging in practices we perceive to be major human rights or intellectual property violations?
Those are false analogies. The EU essentially brow-beat an unwilling populace, and then countries that wanted admittance, into approving an international “norm” that has no natural constituency.
They then deign to wag their finger at us and lean upon our sovereignty. This is the modern day equivalent of gunboat diplomacy… rather than sail a vessel of war up to our coastline, they send a thinly veiled threat regarding international prosecution:
However, the European Union regrets the US decision to withdraw from the Optional Protocol of the VCCR, which gives the ICJ jurisdiction over disputes arising from the convention.
Touching. I often send my friends letters regretting I can’t prosecute them, as well.
We (European Nations) are just trying to work together on a range of issues. It is difficult to criticize China or North Korea while democratic states have the same position towards death penalty. I do not think that the response of governor was particularly shoking and I understand it. French governement doesn’t like to be critized by the European Court of Human rights on other subjects. It proves that the protection of Human Rights should not be a question of sovereignty. Moreover Human rights protection is sometimes in tension with democracy principles, as judicial review is. But nobody regrets Marbury v. Madison.