# data[].attributes.body
Reasons why there is a growing movement against the death penalty.

# data[].attributes.body
Talks about international death penalty, says human life should be preserved.

# data[].attributes.body
Unjust sentence, says everyone should have a fair trial.

# data[].attributes.body
World views on the effectiveness of the Death penalty and the reasons why more countries are abolishing capital punishment from their justice system.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In December, the United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly for a global moratorium on the death penalty. This fourth such vote in five years was supported by a record 111 nations.

Yet in the first month of 2013, Saudi Arabia beheaded nine people. In recent weeks, Yemen has sentenced a juvenile offender to death, fueling hunger strikes by scores of imprisoned children. Iran has reportedly begun imposing death sentences for petty criminals accused of robbery.

Elsewhere, a court in Indonesia, where there have been no state executions since 2008, sentenced a British grandmother to death for drug trafficking - reportedly to gasps of disbelief in the courtroom. Zimbabwe has hired a hangman after seven years of searching, while Sri Lanka, which has not carried out an execution since 1976, has reportedly recruited two executioners who are undergoing special training.

In the United States, the trend is toward fewer executions and death sentences, with more states repealing the death penalty. Nevertheless, in 2012 there were 43 executions and 77 death sentences.

Such developments make for grim reading. However, we at the International Commission against the Death Penalty - an independent body opposed to capital punishment in all cases - remain hopeful. It is clear that the world is becoming an increasingly lonely place for states that practice executions.

The United Nations call for a moratorium on executions is underpinned by a global trend toward abolition that has dramatically gathered pace in recent years. One hundred and five countries have repealed capital punishment in their laws and others no longer carry out executions.

According to the United Nations, over 150 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice. All across humanity's diverse and sprawling community - encompassing all major cultures, religions and regions - there is growing understanding that this abhorrent practice has no place in modern justice systems.

Quite simply, the death penalty does much harm and no good. It is inherently cruel, risks execution of the innocent, and is ineffective at deterring violent crime. States that have abolished capital punishment often have lower murder rates than those that have yet to do so.

Much remains to be done, not least because a handful of states remain willing to risk international outrage, controversy and isolation by persisting with this cruel, inhuman and degrading practice. Iran, Saudi Arabia and Yemen - all in the global spotlight in recent weeks - are accompanied by China, Iraq, North Korea and the United States as the world's most prolific executioners year on year.

As the United Nation's Human Rights Council meets in Geneva on Monday, we are bringing together high-level government representatives to assess why and how the death penalty should be abolished. Our guests will include foreign ministers and senior officials from Argentina, Norway, Spain, Switzerland and other nations. We will also hear from Kyung-wha Kang, the U.N. deputy high commissioner for human rights, and the U.N. secretary general, Ban Ki-moon.

Ultimately, experience from all over the world demonstrates that the death penalty is not just cruel, irrevocable and a violation of the right to life. It is a toxic and destructive punishment that damages society by endorsing violence and by causing injustice and suffering.

As more countries conclude that the only place for capital punishment is in the history books, the shrinking group of executing states looks set to become ever more isolated. The challenge for their leaders is to show political courage and foresight, and to bring their laws into the modern age by immediately suspending use of the death penalty, as a first step toward full abolition.
Mohammed Bedjaoui is a former foreign minister of Algeria and a former judge at the International Court of Justice. Ruth Dreifuss is a former president of the Swiss Confederation. Federico Mayor is a former director general of Unesco and a former minister of education and science of Spain. The writers are members of the International Commission against the Death Penalty.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | Stepping Back From Capital Punishment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In December, the United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly for a global moratorium on the death penalty. This fourth such vote in five years was supported by a record 111 nations. Yet in the first month of 2013, Saudi Arabia beheaded nine people.

# data[].attributes.body
Capital punishment throughout years, mortality and emotion, Radical bias, cruel punishment.

# data[].attributes.body
Anti death penalty source that addresses both sides.

# data[].attributes.body
The deterrent effect of the death penalty.

# data[].attributes.body
The cost of the death penalty is draining to the economy and not beneficial to the legal system.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
To the many excellent reasons to abolish the death penalty - it's immoral, does not deter murder and affects minorities disproportionately - we can add one more. It's an economic drain on governments with already badly depleted budgets.

It is far from a national trend, but some legislators have begun to have second thoughts about the high cost of death row. Others would do well to consider evidence gathered by the Death Penalty Information Center, a research organization that opposes capital punishment.

States waste millions of dollars on winning death penalty verdicts, which require an expensive second trial, new witnesses and long jury selections. Death rows require extra security and maintenance costs.

There is also a 15-to-20-year appeals process, but simply getting rid of it would be undemocratic and would increase the number of innocent people put to death. Besides, the majority of costs are in the pretrial and trial.

According to the organization, keeping inmates on death row in Florida costs taxpayers $51 million a year more than holding them for life without parole. North Carolina has put 43 people to death since 1976 at $2.16 million per execution. The eventual cost to taxpayers in Maryland for pursuing capital cases between 1978 and 1999 is estimated to be $186 million for five executions.

Perhaps the most extreme example is California, whose death row costs taxpayers $114 million a year beyond the cost of imprisoning convicts for life. The state has executed 13 people since 1976 for a total of about $250 million per execution. This is a state whose prisons are filled to bursting (unconstitutionally so, the courts say) and whose government has imposed doomsday-level cuts to social services, health care, schools and parks.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
To the many excellent reasons to abolish the death penalty - it's immoral, does not deter murder and affects minorities disproportionately - we can add one more. It's an economic drain on governments with already badly depleted budgets. It is far from a national trend, but some legislators have begun to have second thoughts about the high cost of death row.

# data[].attributes.body
States are routinely trying to convict people and keep them on death row without accurate evidence.