Joint Statement for the General Debate on Items 2 and 3 at the 30th Session of the Human Rights Council, 17 September 2015

Mr President

     I have the honour to deliver this statement on the report of the Secretary- General on the question of the death penalty (A/HRC/30/18). The statement is delivered on behalf of a group of 26 countries.

     The death penalty remains an important component of the criminal justice system for many countries. It is an important deterrent against what they rightly regard as the most serious crimes for their respective societies.

     Some arguments against the death penalty tend to one-sidedly focus on the rights of the offender. But the rights of the offender must always be weighed against the rights of the victims, their families and the broader rights of their community to live in peace and security. The State has a responsibility to protect the lives of innocent citizens while ensuring that justice is rendered to victims and their families. The death penalty is only applied after adhering to the full due process of law, pursuant to a final judgment rendered by a competent court, and with the right to seek pardon or appeal for commutation.

     There is no international consensus for or against the death penalty imposed according to the due process of the law. The divergence of views has been repeatedly affirmed by the votes on past UNGA resolutions on the death penalty, most recently in the 69th session. Key international instruments that apply to countries with wide divergence in cultures and values also do not prohibit the use of the death penalty. The death penalty remains lawful in 97 countries and territories.

     The UN Charter clearly stipulates that nothing in its Charter shall authorize the UN to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any State. In this regard, in line with the UN Charter, no State shall intervene on such matters in other States.

     Every State has the sovereign right to choose its legal and criminal justice systems, without interference by other States. Accordingly, the question of whether to retain or abolish the death penalty and the types of crimes for which the death penalty is applied should be determined by each State and the people they protect, taking into account their unique circumstances and threats to their societies.

Thank you Mr President.

.    .    .    .     .

List of co-sponsors

1.         Kingdom of Bahrain

2.         People’s Republic of Bangladesh

3.         Barbados

4.         Brunei Darussalam

5.         People’s Republic of China

6.         Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

7.         Arab Republic of Egypt

8.         Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia

9.         India

10.       Republic of Indonesia

11.       Islamic Republic of Iran

12.       State of Kuwait

13.       Lao People’s Democratic Republic

14.       Malaysia

15.       Republic of the Union of Myanmar

16.       Sultanate of Oman

17.       Islamic Republic of Pakistan

18.       State of Qatar

19.       Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

20.       Republic of Singapore

21.       Republic of the Sudan

22.       Syrian Arab Republic

23.       Republic of Uganda

24.       United Arab Emirates

25.       Socialist Republic of Viet Nam

26.       Republic of Yemen