dw.com
Global Executions Surge to Decade High in 2024
Amnesty International's 2024 report reveals over 1,500 executions globally, the highest in a decade, with Iran (at least 972), Saudi Arabia (at least 345), and Iraq (63) leading, driven by political repression and drug-related offenses, despite positive shifts in some African nations and Malaysia.
- How do political crackdowns and drug-related offenses contribute to the rise in executions in specific countries?
- The increase in executions is linked to crackdowns on political dissent, particularly in Saudi Arabia where the death penalty was used to suppress protests despite modernization efforts. In Iran, at least two executions were related to the 2022 protests following Jina Mahsa Amini's death. Over 40% of executions were for drug-related offenses, highlighting the disproportionate impact on vulnerable populations.
- What are the key findings of Amnesty International's 2024 report on global executions, and what are their immediate implications for human rights?
- In 2024, over 1,500 executions were recorded globally, the highest number in a decade, with Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq accounting for 90% of these. Iran executed at least 972 people, exceeding the 853 reported in 2023, while Saudi Arabia saw executions double to at least 345 and Iraq's increased almost fourfold to 63.
- What are the significant long-term trends and potential impacts of the global death penalty situation, considering both positive and negative developments?
- While 145 countries have abolished the death penalty, a concerning trend is the resurgence of executions in some US states and the use of methods like nitrogen hypoxia, which raises human rights concerns. Positive developments include Malaysia's moratorium on almost 1,000 death sentences and several African nations abolishing capital punishment, showcasing a global shift despite the overall increase.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The report frames the increase in executions as a negative development, highlighting human rights violations and the use of the death penalty to suppress dissent. The use of strong emotional language, like "brutal", "cruel", and "inhuman", shapes the reader's perception.
Language Bias
The report uses strong, emotive language such as "brutal", "cruel", and "inhuman" to describe the death penalty. While accurate in conveying the organization's stance, it risks undermining neutrality. More neutral alternatives might include 'severe', 'harsh', and 'controversial'. The framing consistently emphasizes the negative aspects of capital punishment.
Bias by Omission
The report focuses heavily on Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq, mentioning China's high execution numbers but acknowledging data limitations. Other countries practicing capital punishment, like North Korea and Vietnam, are mentioned but lack detailed analysis due to data scarcity. This omission might lead readers to underestimate the global extent of capital punishment.
False Dichotomy
The report doesn't present a false dichotomy, but it could be strengthened by exploring the complexities of the death penalty's impact on crime rates and public safety, acknowledging arguments both for and against it.
Sustainable Development Goals
The report highlights a significant increase in executions globally, primarily in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq. This indicates a failure to uphold the right to life and due process, undermining justice systems and peace. The use of the death penalty to suppress dissent, as seen in Saudi Arabia and Iran, further demonstrates a lack of strong institutions that protect human rights and uphold the rule of law. The high number of executions for drug-related offenses also points to a flawed justice system that prioritizes punishment over rehabilitation and harm reduction.