EU Statement - HRC58 - Biennial high-level panel discussion on the question of the death penalty: Contribution of the judiciary to the advancement of human rights and the question of the death penalty
United Nations Human Rights Council
58th Session
Biennial high-level panel discussion on the question of the death penalty
Theme: Contribution of the judiciary to the advancement of human rights and the question of the death penalty
25 February 2025
EU Statement
Mr. President, High Commissioner, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is an honour to address this distinguished panel on behalf of the EU.
The EU’s position on the death penalty is clear and unwavering: we oppose it in all circumstances and all cases, without exception. That’s also why following Madrid in 2013, Brussels in 2019 and Berlin in 2022, Paris will host the next World congress against the death penalty in June 2026.
There is no justice in taking a life in response to a crime, no matter how heinous. The death penalty exacerbates cycles of violence and is often abused as a political tool to instil fear, repress opposition, and quash the exercise of fundamental freedoms. We note with deep concern that the death penalty continues to be applied even for crimes that do not meet the threshold of “most serious crimes”, including drug offences. The discrimination and bias in application of the death has been widely documented.
Research suggests that deterrence depends on the likelihood of detection and punishment rather than on the severity of the punishment itself. Moreover, rehabilitation as an objective of modern criminal law is rendered impossible by the application of capital punishment.
No justice system is perfect. Every wrongful conviction is a personal tragedy and a miscarriage of justice that affects the very fabric of our society. In the case of the capital punishment the harm is irrevocable.
The independent and impartial judiciary, as the guardian of human rights and the rule of law, plays an essential role in shaping a more humane and just society. In many countries, steps towards abolition have begun with reforms that reduce the scope of capital punishment, limit the offenses for which it can be applied, or replace it with alternative sentencing measures. Judges have demonstrated extraordinary leadership in strengthening safeguards and steering the application of legal frameworks away from capital punishment and towards humanity and justice.
Distinguished panellists,
How do we ensure that legal review of death penalty cases is guided by international human rights standards rather than populist political considerations and public perception?
Furthermore, how does the progressive elimination of the mandatory capital punishment in several countries impact the judiciary?
Thank you.