EDITORIAL Cry for death penalty moratorium meets
resistance
Bishop Joseph A. Fiorenza, president
of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, asked President Clinton in a
Dec. 5 letter to commute the sentences of 31 people now awaiting the death
penalty in federal prisons. The first execution of a federal prisoner since
1963 was scheduled to take place Dec. 12.
The Fiorenza letter was one more element in a growing movement
among religious groups to cut the number of executions in the United States. At
the state level, the numbers keep climbing.
Seventy religious leaders, including Fiorenza, Los Angeles
Cardinal Roger Mahony and Bishop James C. Timlin of Scranton, Pa., signed
another letter to Clinton noting that the overwhelming majority of
communities of faith are united in their opposition to the death
penalty.
Religious groups increasingly are opposed to state executions and
are pressing for at least a moratorium on the death penalty until the
punishment can be more fully studied.
Any progress in that direction will run squarely into the growing
practice of state as executioner. Nowhere does the state take on this grim task
with such apparent enthusiasm as it does in Texas, under the leadership of
presidential hopeful George W. Bush, who could be president by the time this
paper reaches you. As of this writing, Texas has executed 38 people this year
-- a record for the state and the country. At least one more execution was
scheduled in Texas for this year, and seven are already scheduled for the
coming year.
Bushs dalliance with pro-life themes clearly stops at the
death-house door.
He is not alone, of course. Clinton and Al Gore, too, have chosen
to ignore the mounting evidence of the gross inequities in the administration
of the death penalty; of the clear mistakes that are regularly made in
convictions; and of the slipshod legal representation, another category in
which Texas is notable, that often befalls poor defendants of color.
The Clinton administration would not consider a moratorium while
more data is gathered and studied, even as its own justice department recently
catalogued the embarrassing disparities in application of the ultimate
penalty.
The good news is that the debate over the severity of punishment
throughout the justice system and use of the death penalty seems to be
spreading widely.
Cleveland Judge Daniel Gaul explained that it is easy for the
issue of crime and punishment to be exploited because public officials do not
want to be labeled soft on crime, according to the Death Penalty Information
Center.
But Im not going to be manipulated by anyone calling
me soft on crime, he said. The fact is, no one wants to stand up
for the rights of defendants until theyre in a jam themselves. No one
wants to speak on behalf of the poor and disadvantaged unless they know someone
whos poor and disadvantaged. I think thats an indictment of our
society.
On the matter of capital punishment, Gaul said he was not speaking
about releasing murderers. What were talking about is not having
the state engage in institutionalized violence. It sends the wrong message.
Its not restorative justice; its vengeance. Its not a
deterrent. So what is it? Its retribution.
National Catholic Reporter, December 15,
2000
|