Pakistan has voiced opposition to a moratorium on executions at the UNGA With 127 votes in favor, the UN General Assembly unanimously passes a resolution calling for the abolition of the death penalty.
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s vote against the draught resolution calling for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty was unsuccessful, and a committee of the United Nations General Assembly went on to pass the resolution anyway on the grounds that the use of the death penalty violates fundamental human rights.
In 2008, Pakistan instituted a moratorium on the execution of anyone sentenced to death.
From 2009 to 2011, there were no executions carried out; in 2012, there was one, but in 2013, there were none.
The embargo was lifted after 149 individuals, including 132 pupils, sacrificed their lives in a terrorist attack at the Army Public School in Peshawar in December 2014. The victims included 149 schoolchildren.
In 2014, Pakistan carried out seven executions; in 2015, it carried out 326; in 2016, it carried out 87; in 2017, it carried out 65; and in 2018, it carried out 14.
The third committee of the 193-member UNGA, which deals with social, humanitarian, and cultural matters, gave the resolution draught the go-ahead by voting 126 in favour of it and 37 against it. The committee deals with issues related to social issues, humanitarian issues, and cultural issues. There were 24 people who chose not to vote.
The United Nations General Assembly would issue a call to action to all member states, urging them to “progressively restrict use of capital punishment, ensure that it is not applied on the basis of discriminatory laws, improve conditions in detention, and establish a moratorium on executions with the aim of abolishing the death penalty.”
In one month, the document will be presented to the UNGA for possible endorsement.
According to a statement that was released by the European Union, “Justice systems are operated by people and are thus prone to mistakes and are further exacerbated by societal stigmas and political pressure, particularly in countries that do not have an independent judiciary.”
“The death penalty predominantly affects people who are economically disadvantaged and those who belong to marginalized groups,” the statement continued.
It was adopted following the acceptance of an amendment, which bagged 103 votes in favor of it against the 68 members who opposed it. Some countries considered the draught faulty in an attempt to reinterpret existing human rights documents; yet, it was adopted following the approval of the amendment.
There were a total of 13 people who chose not to vote.
In accordance with their commitments under international law, the amendment reaffirmed “the sovereign right of all countries to build their own legal systems, including selecting appropriate legal punishments.”
The amendment received Pakistan’s support in the form of a vote. On the other hand, it cast a vote against the proposed resolution.
Although the amendment was passed, the Pakistani delegate who was there stated that Islamabad did not agree with the overall framework of the proposed resolution and so voted against it. This was due to the fact that Islamabad was present.
He stated that there was no general agreement either for or against the use of the death sentence and that each state had the unalienable freedom to determine its own legal system.
The Pakistani delegate was quick to point out that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights did not prohibit the use of the death penalty so long as it was carried out in accordance with the laws and procedures of the relevant state.
According to the statement made by the Pakistani delegate, “[the] death penalty does not infringe on any other human right when it is imposed in accordance with due process of law and judicial protections.”
“The right to life must be safeguarded for the victims of heinous and most serious crimes as well,” he added. “The right to life is a fundamental human right.”
The delegate came to the conclusion that Pakistan’s national legislation was in accordance with international human rights law, and that the death penalty is only applied after adhering to the full due process of law, in accordance with a final judgment rendered by a competent court, and with the right to seek pardon or appeal for commutation.
