This piece was reprinted by OpEd News with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.
"In the case of juvenile persons, the procedure shall be such as will take account of their age and the desirability of promoting their rehabilitation."
In 2006, the UN Human Rights Committee said sentencing children to life without parole violates ICCPR provisions. It called on America to end the practice. It also said continuing it "could constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment."
Moreover, each year since 2009, the General Assembly callied for abolishing "life imprisonment without possibility of release for those under the age of 18 years at the time of the commission of the offense."
International law doesn't distinguish between lethal and non-lethal crimes resulting in JLWOP. It unequivocally prohibits it.
Nonetheless, America and virtually all 50 states have mandatory sentencing laws. They require judges and juries to impose certain ones, including life without parole. Mitigating factors are precluded, including age, history of abuse, trauma, degree of criminal involvement, mental health status, or amenability to treatment or rehabilitation.
In Graham, the Supreme Court called JLWOP for non-homocidal offenders unconstitutional, saying "the precept of justice (mandates) that punishment for crime should be graduated and proportioned to (the) offense."
For now, however, Graham's as far as the Court's likely to go. It's for Congress and states to act boldly enough to mitigate or eliminate the practice altogether. It's long past time they did it.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at Email address removed .
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
