In an act that can only be characterised as the grossest populism the congress voted overwhelmingly in favour of a resolution to end an effective moratorium on the use of the death penalty in Guatemala. The measure was brought forward by the Partido Popular, the losing party in the elections, whose election slogan was "Mano Dura, Cabeza y Corazon". A hard line on crime was a key component of their campaign, and they see use of the death penalty as consistent with the "mano dura". The death penalty has a great deal of popular support in Guatemala, and I have often been shocked by some of those who speak in favour of it, the sort of people who from whose experience you would expect to take a different line. Given the current problems with crime and delinquency, which made it the number one issue of concern to the Guatemalan in the street, it will doubtless be a very popular measure. However, given that impunity even for the most horrific murders is the norm - the National Civilian Police reported on 26 January that there had been 5781 murders in 2007 to which the Archbishop's Human Rights Office added the coda that only 6 had been resolved - actually catching a few criminals in the first place and putting them on trial might be a more effective deterrent.

The use of the death penalty in Guatemala shows yet again its tendency to swim against the tide and to ignore at its convenience international law instruments it has signed up to. Notoriously, on the eve of the pope's first ever visit to Guatemala in 1983 General Efraín Rios Montt ordered six executions to go ahead despite pleas of clemency from the pope himself and from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. These executions were imposed by special military tribunals, which Rios Montt had created by presidential decree, and were empowered to pass the death penalty against those accused of   “political and politically-related” offences, without the right to a defence nor any right of appeal. This contravened its international law obligations on several counts.

International outrage followed the executions and the special military tribunals were abolished when Rios Montt lost power in a coup in 1983. However, following increasing disquiet about criminality they began again in 1996. The execution of two men by firing squad was filmed and the images of the men being shot and then having to be given a coup de grace since they were not killed outright by the volley were repeatedly shown on television.

Following this it was decreed that executions should be carried out by the more "modern" method of lethal injection. However, again, prurient interest ensured that the first use of the "modern" method was televised, which was again badly botched. The paramedics were unable to find a vein to inject the chemicals, thus leading to him bleeding heavily and the family of the executed man could be heard weeping in the background. Once again, a request for
precautionary measures from the Interamerican Commision of Human Rights, due to some doubt as to the guilt of the accused, was ignored.

The current effective moratorium on executions came about in 2000. Congress at the time abolished the law providing for executive clemency, exercised by the president. This contravened Guatemala's obligations under both the American Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, though this wouldn't be the first time that these had been contravened in respect of capital punishment. Both these provide that the death penalty may not be extended to crimes for which it was not previously been applicable, but extra crimes such as kidnapping were added anyway in 1995. However, the Constititional Court then struck down five death penalty convictions on the grounds that international law had precedence over domestic law and under this rule the penalty could not stand.

The law just passed reinstates the final right of appeal, so that executions can now be carried out again. However, President Colom has said that he will deny all appeals, which to me arguably amounts to not having a right of appeal at all, bringing us back to square one. The last thing we need now in solving Guatemala's endemic crime problems is a dangerous gestures like this - what we really need is a hardline on impunity.

[A useful summary of the recent history of the use of capital punishment in Guatemala can be found in the following report from Amnesty International.]