This article does not come from Tehran, or the Kremlin, or any source that could be construed as hostile to the United States of America.
Here
Are All The Countries Where Children Are Sentenced To Die In Prison
20
September, 2013
There
are about 2,500 youth offenders serving life sentences without the
possibility of parole in prisons worldwide. We've come up with a map
showing all of the countries where they are incarcerated.
That's
right: The United States is the only country in the world that
condemns people to spend their lives behind bars for crimes they
committed before they turned 18.
A
new
report from the Sentencing Project,
a group that advocates for prison reforms, highlights this fact.
Ashley
Nellis, one of the authors of the report, argued that the United
States has a “very strange perception of justice and of youth who
misbehave.”
“Unlike
other countries, we fail to acknowledge their youthfulness and often
other factors that contribute to their crimes,” like poverty
and childhood abuse,
she said.
According
to the report, life sentences for all offenders are
on the rise across the country,
and the population of people serving life without the possibility of
parole is growing especially fast, with an increase from 40,174 in
2008 to 49,081 to 2012.
The
concept of a life sentence without parole originated in the United
Kingdom
in the 1950s
and continues to be practiced almost exclusively by former British
colonies, according to Alison Parker, the U.S. director for the
advocacy group Human
Rights Watch.
In the U.S., it became popular in the 1980s and 1990s, as politicians
vied to portray themselves as “tough on crime.”
“Many
Latin American countries, countries in Eastern Europe and in Asia
don’t have the sentence as a possibility in any part of their penal
code,” said Parker. “They may have death sentences, but they
don’t have the sentence that you can die in prison.”
Among
those former British colonies that do sentence people to life without
parole, the U.S. stands apart.
The
U.S. employs the practice far more commonly than any other country,
and the U.S. has declined to ratify the 1989 U.N. Convention
on the Rights of the Child,
which bans life without parole for children. Somalia is the only
other country that has failed to sign that treaty.
The
Sentencing Project report cites the case of Sara
Kruzan,
who was forced into prostitution at the age of 13 and killed her pimp
three years later, in 1994. Although the California Youth Authority
recommended that the state try Kruzan as a juvenile, the prosecutor
and judge maintained that she was competent to stand trial in adult
court. Kruzan was sentenced to life without parole in 1995.
In
2011, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) commuted
her sentence
to 25 years to life. This past June, after a further reduction
in her sentence
and 19 years in prison, she was released.
This
week, Schwarzenegger’s successor, Gov. Jerry Brown (D), signed a
bill that seeks to expand parole opportunities for all state
prisoners convicted of crimes as children.
The
California legislation, SB
260,
is among a growing number of indications that America’s attitude
toward juvenile crimes may be changing.
In
recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has issued two decisions
limiting the use of life sentences without parole for those whose
crimes were committed before age 18.
In
Graham v. Florida in 2010, the court ruled that juveniles could no
longer be given life without parole unless they had committed
homicide. Last year, in Miller v. Alabama, the court ruled that
states could no longer imprison juveniles under laws that impose life
without parole as a mandatory penalty for homicide. About 2,000
prisoners who are currently serving life without parole for crimes
before age 18 were sentenced under those statutes.
Experts
say the Supreme Court may soon hear a case about whether Miller
applies retroactively -- that is, not just to people who commit
crimes in the future, but also to those who are already in prison.
“The
court is making it very difficult for the states to impose this
sentence on kids,” said Parker. “I think it’s the step in the
right direction in recognizing the profound differences between
children and adults.”
“Of
course, children are capable of committing very serious and violent
offenses that can cause tremendous suffering,” she continued. “But
children are also uniquely capable of growth and change, and a
sentence that gives them no opportunity to show their capacity to
change is a sentence that denies the differences between children and
adults.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.