This chapter explains how life-without-parole sentences were designed to be a humane alternative to the death penalty, but this resulted in more than 50,000 prisoners being sentences to a “hopeless” life sentence. We argue that these prisoners will be the most likely to develop terminal illnesses that will make them eligible for medical assistance in dying in states where those practices are available to the non-incarcerated population.

This chapter examines the political and policy dynamics that unfold when the Supreme Court issues rulings that are deeply unpopular with the public. It argues that a significant gap between Court decisions and public opinion creates powerful electoral incentives for elected officials to act. These officials typically respond in two ways: first, with sharp political criticism that questions the Court’s legitimacy, and second, with countervailing policy measures designed to limit or reverse the Court’s impact. This framework is illustrated through two major historical case studies: the widespread Southern resistance to school desegregation after Brown v. Board of Education and the successful legislative push to reinstate capital punishment following the Court’s 1972 moratorium in Furman v. Georgia. In both instances, public opposition fueled a political backlash where the Court became a useful foil for politicians, ultimately leading to the entrenchment of policies the Court sought to change. The chapter also highlights a pattern of judicial backtracking, where the Court, facing sustained resistance, eventually moderated or reversed its initial stance. Ultimately, the analysis demonstrates that when the Court strays too far from public opinion, it risks not only its institutional standing but also the long-term success of its own policy objectives.

In this chapter I trace the problem of killing in Christian thought. I then raise the question of whether any intentional killing can be justified; in the remainder of the book I argue that the answer to this question is “no”.

The Introduction outlines the book’s central concern with the practice and abolition of the death penalty in British colonies from the 1960s to the 1990s. It traces the development of the royal prerogative of mercy during the first half of the twentieth century and explains factors that influenced the colonial clemency process prior to abolition of the death penalty in Britain in 1965. It also introduces the competing pressures imposed on British death penalty policy by decolonisation and the development of capital punishment as a global human rights concern in the late twentieth century. Finally, it discusses the primary sources on which the study is based, explains the scope of the research and summarises each chapter.

This chapter examines influential legislative remedies: the 1907 creation of the Court of Criminal Appeal, the 1995 creation of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) and the 2024 legislation to annul and compensate miscarriages of justice caused by the Post Office’s faulty computer system. The Court of Appeal’s restrictive approach to overturning convictions and admitting new evidence is critiqued. The role of wrongful convictions in abolishing the death penalty is examined. The CCRC’s performance, including some of its failures and underfunding, is assessed. The migration of similar institutions to Scotland, Norway, New Zealand and Canada is also examined. Failed attempts in 2006 to limit appeals to innocence and successful attempts in 2014 to require it for compensation are critically assessed. The tension between the Innocence Network of the United Kingdom’s (INUK) focus on innocence and the legal system’s focus on the safety of convictions is analysed in light of INUK’s demise and future evolution of innocence organisations. Finally, the Post Office Scandal and the implications of enacting legislation to depart from ordinary methods of correcting and compensating miscarriages of justice are assessed.

Starting with the pioneering work of Edwin Borchard, the American focus has been on proven factual innocence. This concept has a populist appeal and fits with America’s moralistic and highly punitive approach to crime. Proven innocence has inspired both legislative reforms and executive grants of clemency. It has had somewhat less success with American courts. American Federal courts require proven innocence for some defaulted habeas corpus claims but have not recognized free-standing innocence claims. Death row exonerations have played a role in executive moratoriums and legislative abolition of the death penalty in some states but have not resulted in judicial abolition. Mass exonerations related to policing and forensic science scandals have received far less attention than the UK’s post office scandal even though they reveal much about false guilty pleas and systemic discrimination. Generous systems of legislative compensation and civil rights litigation are related to the popular appeal of proven innocence and successful civil right litigation. Finally, some possible future directions for American innocence projects and movements in light of Trump’s first presidency and his re-election in 2024 are assessed.

As in China, many of India’s remedied wrongful convictions involved police-induced false confessions. They likely reveal only a small “tip of the iceberg,” given the many missing remedied wrongful convictions found in other jurisdictions. Indian appellate courts are not reluctant to overturn convictions in part because of the absence of jury trials. India’s record of remedied wrongful convictions supports the abolition of the death penalty, with no exception for terrorism cases. Criminal laws enacted by the Modi government at the end of 2023 have increased the risk of wrongful convictions by, for example, increasing police custody, forensic investigations and restricting executive clemency. The 2023 laws did not implement the 2018 Law Commission recommendations to provide compensation for both the wrongfully detained and the wrongfully convicted, even though three-quarters of prisoners in India are awaiting trial.. Finally, possible futures for innocence projects and innocence movements in India are explored, with attention to the need to be sensitive to local conditions.

The right to life is the preeminent human right - without it, all other rights are nugatory. Yet, the scope of the protection afforded by the right is contested, particularly the extent to which States are obligated to protect life. This chapter examines the protection which the common law and the ECHR affords to the right to life, noting that under the common law, the courts have tended towards a recognition of the value or sanctity of life, as distinct from a right to life. In contrast, Article 2 ECHR very clearly enshrines a right to life and imposes obligations on States to ensure its protection. There is a considerable corpus of case law concerning the scope of the right in Article 2 including a number of cases from UK courts which centre on the jurisdictional reach of the right and its enforceability under the Human Rights Act 1998. This chapter considers the protective potential of the right to life in specific contexts including in response to climate change and domestic abuse. A separate chapter examines specific issues surrounding STATE regulation of the beginning and end of life.

Freedom from torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (’ill-treatment’) is one of the most fundamental rights. Underpinning the prohibition is a recognition of the centrality of bodily integrity and dignity to the human condition and as necessary preconditions for the enjoyment of other rights. This chapter considers the absolute prohibition on ill-treatment as provided for under the common law and in Article 3 ECHR. Noting the potential limitations in the scope of protection afforded by the common law, the focus of the chapter is Article 3 which, despite its succinctness, has been the source of a considerable body of jurisprudence. Of particular note is the ECtHR’s characterisation of torture as carrying a ’special stigma’ and the potential for this gloss to operate as a shield for States. The chapter examines the various State obligations imposed by Article 3, noting the scope of the procedural obligation to investigate and its application in domestic law via the HRA. Specific issues including extraordinary rendition, whole life sentences and domestic abuse are examined to illuminate the limitations and protective potential of the right to freedom from ill-treatment.

This chapter, by incarcerated writer John J. Lennon, explores the history of prison journalism through the careers of two writers, Wilbert Rideau and Dannie M. Martin. While both became journalists in prison, their writing careers took different forms. Rideau, serving a life sentence for murder in Louisiana, wrote in the typical, detached style of print journalists and helmed one of the most successful prison newspapers of all time, The Angolite, which was nominated for seven National Magazine Awards during his tenure as editor. Martin, serving a thirty-three-year sentence for bank robbery in federal prison, published voice-driven columns and freelanced for the San Francisco Chronicle. Both exposed pressing, overlooked crises behind bars and both risked reprisals from fellow prisoners and the staff responsible for their safety. Their stories of “committing journalism” contain timely lessons for incarcerated writers and prison administrators as the current renaissance of prison journalism continues to grow.

In the Feyerabend lecture Kant already presents his claim that the principle of right is a principle of coercion, that is, that the state is authorized to use coercion to counteract an unauthorized violation of universal freedom. Such state use of force is a hinderance of a hinderance to freedom. But how is this coercive power specified in particular circumstances? I examine three extreme cases in which a state might be authorized to use its coercive power against its own citizens to cause their deaths: capital punishment, eminent right in emergencies, and war. This paper will show that Kant offered specific explanations of particular limits to legitimate state power, rejecting different limits offered by Beccaria (capital punishment), Achenwall (eminent right and war), and Vattel (war). These assessments reveal that Kant was of several minds regarding whether in any social contract a citizen could rationally consent to these uses of coercion and whether actual or only hypothetical consent was required. I suggest that only later in the published Doctrine of Right did Kant work out his position consistently.

Over 60 years have passed since the initiation of the 1961 UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. It is widely accepted among drug policy experts that the global war on illicit drugs has failed, with devastating consequences for individuals and societies around the world. Various countries have moved away from a drug policy based on criminal punishment to a harm reduction approach - but others continue to pursue a punitive drug policy, including the use of the death penalty for drug-related activities. Despite the UN Human Rights Committee taking the position that the death penalty is only permissible for the ‘most serious crimes’, defined as intentional killing, 34 countries retain the death penalty for a range of drug offences. This chapter outlines the change in drug policy at the UN level as well as developments at the country level.

National narcotics agencies are a feature of law enforcement for drug crimes worldwide. They exist in most Southeast Asian nations that retain the death penalty for drug offences, including in Indonesia (Badan Narkotika Nasional); Singapore (Central Narcotics Board); Thailand (Narcotics Control Board); and Malaysia (Agensi Antidadah Kebangsaan). This chapter undertakes a comparative study of national narcotics agencies in Southeast Asia. Each of the aforementioned four agencies plays an outsize role in shaping both public opinion and government policy on the death penalty for drugs and on punitive responses to non-capital drug crimes more generally. Previous NGO reports and academic studies on Southeast Asian drug policy have failed to consider the institutional dimensions of drug control: this chapter aims to rectify this particular gap in the literature. Comparing relevant institutions across the region, this chapter accounts for organisational similarities and differences, explores the relationship between anti-drugs and other state institutions, and suggests modest policy recommendations.

Since 2007, reform-minded judges have sought to curb the over-zealous use of the death penalty in China. This includes strengthening central control over judicial decision-making and enhancing due process in both pre-trial and trial proceedings. In terms of drug-related crimes, Chinese courts have gradually raised the threshold quantity of drugs trafficked, narrowed the scope of criminals who would attract the death penalty, and imposed a heavier burden of proof on the prosecution. These measures have significantly reduced the execution rate for drug crimes. Although remaining relatively weak in China’s political structure, Chinese courts have played an essential role in restricting the use of the death penalty for drug-related crimes. As the Party-state needs to rely on the rule of law for political legitimacy, promote economic development, and improve social governance, Chinese courts have been allowed a degree of institutional autonomy and professionalism. They can be expected to further reform China’s death penalty system and restrict the use of the death penalty. The Chinese courts may be the best hope for an ‘execution-rare’ China in the longer-term future.

Although there is a substantial body of research addressing the economic motivations for drug crime, fewer studies have also considered the social influences that shape individuals’ involvement in the illicit drug economy. This chapter will draw on interviews conducted in prisons in Indonesia with people convicted of drug offences. Analysis suggests that many offenders do have economic motivations for entry into the drug trade. However, personal and relational motivations for drug use and drug trading must not be ignored, given that most of our participants were not in absolute poverty when they decided to offend. Moreover, in making decisions about participation in the drug trade, they were clearly influenced by trusted peer groups. The chapter presents this empirical data within the context of increasingly punitive penalties for drug offences in Southeast Asia, including the judicial execution of drug traffickers.