EU Vs US: DEATH PENALTY DEBATE

Over the years, death penalty has been at the center of hot debate. The issue has created a
great rift between the United States and Europe. While the US continues to uphold capital
punishment, EU is vehemently against this form of doing away with offenders. EU’s stance on
this issue is so strong that the continent does not hold back its disappointment. It has formulated
moves that would see the US end the harsh penalty. Nevertheless, the question rumbles on: can
EU bring an end of capital punishment in the US? This paper explores this question in depth
endearing to examine the capacity of the EU to drive out death penalty in the US and stop the
argument surrounding this issue.

The State of Death Penalty

Although the US claims to be a democratic state, it is one of the developed worlds that
adores death penalty. Despite major concerns from continents and countries that significantly
trade with the US, the state has maintained its standpoint on exercising capital punishment.
Thirty-two states in the US abide by this punishment and have executed significant inmates over
the last five years(GIBSON, 2015). Unlike the other developed country, Japan, that conduct
execution through hanging, the US has been using lethal injection since 1976. It has been the
most preferred technique first implemented by the Oklahoma State 36 years ago. The execution
process is comprised of three distinct functions – sedation, anesthesia, and use of
hydromorphone. The functions foster deep sleep, prevent convulsions by paralysing the muscles,
and stop the operations of the heart respectively. The drug that initiates the process is
scientifically referred to as sodium thiopental. Lethal injections required this drug at the early
stages of the execution and its manufacture was thus within the legal framework.
On the other hand, EU remains to be the embodiment of anti-death penalty. In fact, the
EU aims at being the international ambassador of fighting for the end of capital punishment. It

EU Vs US: DEATH PENALTY DEBATE 3
requires a powerful state like the US to shift its gear and join the continent in the battlefield. The
US being an extemporary state to most countries in the world, its abolishment of the practice
would promote the replication of the same across the globe. EU perceives this act as a threat to
positive ethical implications. It cites the questions of innocence revolving around this issue
together with the inconsistencies in which the method is applied. Since the US can hardly accept
negotiations with the EU to discuss the banning of death penalty, EU employs strategies that
would compel the US to disband the practice(Africa News Service, 2005).
Slowing the Pace of Capital Punishment

EU can indeed end the murder of capital culprits. The case is so given that over the last
decade, EU has strategically slowed the pace of the act in the US. It leverages trade sanctions as
a mean of showing hostility to the cruelty and prompting a policy change. Death penaltyis a
breach of human rights. EU has increased awareness that the drugs combinations used in the
processes of execution are mostly untested, and that is why most states abiding by death penalty
revert to the traditional methods such as gas chambers or firing squads. The governments and
citizens of EU, both religious and secular, are united in opposition to this punishment. The push
and pull between the US and EU with respect to this matter founded its roots back in 2005.
Following revelations that European pharmaceutical firms manufacture sodium thiopental among
other drugs used in death penalty, the European Commission changed the trading policies
protecting the chemicals. The commission banned the export of the listed drugs to departments
correlated to the US in the said year – 2005. Since then, the EU guidelines stand to prohibit the
violation of human rights. According to the guidelines, the export of the chemicals is only
prohibited in cases where the chemicals are purposely meant for death penalty, torturing inmates
among other degrading or inhuman treatments. Leading by example, in all EU countries, death

EU Vs US: DEATH PENALTY DEBATE 4
penalty is banned, and there are no conditions in which it can transpire(Legal Monitor
Worldwide, 2014). In fact, the EU’s goal is to be the largest donor and leading institutional
participant in the fight against capital punishment. It believes that this violation can end in all
regions across the globe if the US can give up the practice and join the fight.
The banning does not apply to chemicals associated with lethal injections only but also
other products related to other forms of capital punishment. The products include electric chairs,
gallows used for hanging, guillotines for decapitation, and airtight vaults for gas chambers.
However, the most targeted product was sodium thiopental, which is a sedative that has a rich
history of being used in the three functions of death penalty, collectively known as “cocktail”. It
took the US up to 2010 to start realising the effects following the ban of the drug in the previous
five years(Dobraszczyk, 2015). The first affected company was Hospira, a firm located in Italy.
The respective Italian bodies banned the production of sodium thiopental in this firm due to the
demand served by the Italian government that the drug should not be exported for execution.
Hospira was a US based company and the intervention of the drug’s production greatly affected
the state. The North California plant that served Hospira faced resistance in 2009 leading to a
breakdown of the production. The US did not give up. It made various attempts to continue with
the product but were significantly thwarted by the strict Italian government, which is under the
EU guidelines and regulations.
That was not all. Lundbeck Inc, a Danish-based company, came under attack for the
distribution of another drug, pentobarbital, commonly used in opposition to human rights. As a
result, the company placed tight controls on distribution to limit the usage of pentobarbital for
capital punishment. Britain also joined the bandwagon. It banned the export of pentobarbital
together with other two drugs to the US. At the end of 2010, the Britain also restricted the export

EU Vs US: DEATH PENALTY DEBATE 5
of sodium thiopental. Though the banning was contributed by the EU, the UK-based legal system
had a role to play as well. Reprieve, a legal action charity in the UK, endorsed the EU’s
abolishment of the drug export. Through the Reprieve’s executive director, the organisation
termed the move by the EU as positive and important in the run for human dignity(Sithole,
2016). Moreover, the organisations categorically stated that any institution that strives at
protecting its success and reputations should give up any connections or manufacturing practices
related to the chemicals used to killing or torturing prisoners.
Most recently, the death of Michael Jackson disclosed another drug worth limiting its
exportation. Propofol, a drug said to have been used in killing the pop celebrity stoked intense
controversy. As expected, blaming fingers started pointing a firm that was a large scale producer
of the chemical. Scientific sources affirm that propofal is critical in conducting anaesthesia. EU
threatened to limit the export of the company if it did not cut links with the US. The company
was then among the largest supplier of propofol to the US. The ultimatum of EU swiftly took its
course as it is evident that the company rejected its plans to use propofol to promote an execution
of an inmate conducted several months after the warning by the EU Commission(Sithole, 2016).
However, there is a German company that continued to supply the US largely with propofol. The
company seemingly replaced the firms that did withdraw from this business following immense
pressures from the EU.

Abolishment Vs Replacement

Apparently, EU had successfully slowed the implementation of death penalty in the US
since 2005. EU is dedicated to this fight and is using every tool it has at its disposal to facilitate
the reversal of capital punishment policy in the powerful state. EU persistence to fight death
penalty couples with the US resistance to comply has led to the breed of abolishment and

EU Vs US: DEATH PENALTY DEBATE 6
replacement. The moment EU limits a certain drug export to the US, the US reacts by replacing
the limited chemical with another unlimited chemicals or methods. For instance, a portion of the
death penalty states such as Virginia, Wyoming and Missouri has counteracted the events of drug
shortage by retrogressing to the previous execution methods including electrocution, gas
chamber and firing squad. In 2010, before Lundebuck was restricted to export pentobarbital, the
US substituted the usage of sodium thiopental with pentobarbital due to the shortage of the
former. Pentobarbital injection serves as a stimulant of short-term insomnia hence promoting the
execution process. In fact, the drug was used in December 2010, during the murder of David
Duty – a murder culprit. Duty was the first inmate to be executed with pentobarbital injection.
Previously, the injection was used to inject animals; a fact that saw Duty made an appeal that
was later refuted by the US Supreme Court(ALPER, 2014). Nevertheless, the drug served its
purpose right.
After the effectiveness of the new drug, other states followed suit and replaced sodium
thiopental with pentobarbital. However, the replacement was short-lived. Pressure mounted on
Lundbeck among others firms supplying US prisons with the drug compelling the companies to
do away with the supply. Today, pharmaceutical firms, the likes of Lundbeck, have no interest in
supplying the drug to US prisons as a way of avoiding undermining publicity. The new
restrictions on the sale of the drug saw the US bounce back to the shortage and unavailability of
anesthesia chemicals. The US were out of options, and the outlook of execution took a new turn.
Unlike previous when it was making headlines in the media platforms for the intended reasons, it
started painting a bad and ugly picture of execution. Early last year, the execution of a capital
criminal, Clayton Lockett, was marred with unprecedented occurrences. The drug Oklahoma
state used for execution did not take it full effect as it is the norm. The execution of this prisoner

EU Vs US: DEATH PENALTY DEBATE 7
had to be stopped 20 minutes after initiation due to the rupturing of one of his veins(Blythe,
2015). The rupturing was the main contributor of the drug used not taking it effect if full swing.
However, despite stopping the execution, Clayton died about 30 minutes later of what the
responsible officials said was a heart attack.
The story is a solid evidence exhibiting the US struggle in finding an alternative drug.
The US Correctional Department is fervently trying to get hands-on an appropriate chemical
without tangible success. The tightening of the EU’s policies to ban the death penalty drugs is
deeply embedded in the way of the US acquiring even new chemicals. The story of Clayton
frustrated the US Correctional Department as the media picked up the story for all the wrong
reasons and EU proved the point of abandoning capital punishment. In spite of the frantic efforts
to fight the killing of prisoners in the US, the state of execution is no better. The number of
people executed per year may have reduced, but the US remains to be a democratic state that
executes more inmates annually than any other democratic state(DRILLING, 2014).

Europe Can End Death Penalty in the US

Research has shown that although the decline of the annual execution numbers took its
course in 1999, it rapidly gained momentum since 2005. This means a lot in as far as the face-off
between EU and US is concerned. EU just realised that its drugs were increasingly being used to
conduct execution by the US in 2005. However, for just ten years, it is bringing the US
Correctional Department under stupendous attack. The department is having a difficult time
finding an alternative drug and making sure that the upcoming executions will not bear
undesirable results(Malik, 2015). EU, on the other end, is readily waiting for the next substitute
of the banned drugs before it pounce on its production or/and distribution. Therefore, it is likely

EU Vs US: DEATH PENALTY DEBATE 8
that the EU can stop capital punishment in the US. EU is giving the US too much trouble in
upholding executions, and chances are that the US may give in and save its economy the trouble.
The desperation of the US to maintain the execution is so strong that it implements the
process at all cost. For instance, the execution of David Duty was against the US constitution.
Duty was killed by a drug that was not even tested. In other words, Clayton was used as the
experimental subject. The US constitution denies such a practice, but the execution went as
planned(Smith, 2015). More so, regardless of the Duty’s lawyer filing an appeal citing this move
as a breach of the constitution, the Supreme Court of US swiftly rejected the appeal causing the
practitioner to escape with impunity. It is evident that the US is losing itself in the fight to protect
capital punishment. Another important aspect is that the figure of the US citizens supporting
death penalty has decreased since the intervention of EU Commission. Mid last year,
examinations revealed that the figure of the US citizens stood at 60%( Shirley & Gelman, 2015).
This is the lowest figure attained since the US Supreme Court reinstated death penalty almost
four decades ago. Though this is a powerful figure, it is bound to reduction because of the
pressures revolving around capital punishment globally.
The US being a social and economic giant across the globe, it is likely that it can give up
capital punishment, but it does not want the situation to look like EU has power over it. Usual,
leaders have the quest to express dominance. Even in extreme cases, a leader would rather
struggle to thrive than to give in to its counterpart and progress peacefully. Such a case is
characterising the US in line with the matter of death penalty. The US Correctional Department
is receiving incessant challenges but giving up is probably the last option for this state. However,
the power lies with its citizens. If EU Commission made a milestone in banning the chemicals, it
can also fuel the discussion of capital punishment in the media. EU has the capacity to heighten

EU Vs US: DEATH PENALTY DEBATE 9
the moral questions surrounding death penalty and compel a significant figure of the 60%
majority to back away from supporting the killing of prisoners. Changing the mind and
perception of the 60% will see the US abandoning the practice. That way, the majority of US
citizens will vote out this form of extreme punishment. The case is so given that the US is still
floundering in the search of an alternative chemical. It means that chances of realizing botched
executions in the state are high. The compromised executions have the power to sway the
opinion of the US public due to the disturbing reports and images of botched
executions(GIBSON, 2015).
Pharmaceutical companies are also relenting from taking part in executions. They are
significantly limiting their production and distribution to escape from linkages with capital
punishment(Malik, 2015). Naturally, companies avoid any participation with the potential of
denting its reputation and threatening its prosperity. Given that capital punishment has attracted
discussion internationally, it is an area worth avoiding due to the polarised opinions. Again, the
trying of new drugs is dangerous. It means that there is a chance of the oncoming executions to
be varyingly cruel and unusual. Such frustrating results will not only undermine the
responsibility of the US Correctional Department but also cultivate the need for an investigation.
EU can use this chance to create a discussion of investigating the executions endearing to
unmask the procedures executed in details. That way, the courts and US citizens would be
instilled with the desire to learn about the execution happenings. A result like that of rupturing
veins can force citizens and courts to raise arms against this procedure. Consequently, these will
even further the disinterests of firms to get associated with the mechanics of execution.

Conclusion

EU Vs US: DEATH PENALTY DEBATE 10
As seen, the US has great trouble in maintaining capital punishment. The case is even
worse given that the probability of EU giving up on this matter is almost nil. It has been in this
fight for a decade now, and there are no signs of the EU Commission abolishing this issue in a
time when the US is evidently struggling to keep up the practice. It is ironic that EU is
preventing unusual and brutal punishment while the US is committed to scaling greater heights,
heights that have seen it even escalate the brutality of this punishment. Time is ripe for the US to
abandon capital punishment altogether. It is easier and cheaper to renounce this practice than
struggle while uphold it and prove EU wrong.

EU Vs US: DEATH PENALTY DEBATE 11

References

(2015). EU, Council of Europe Oppose Death Penalty. Africa News Service.
(2014). In Europe and U.S., Divergent Attitudes Toward Capital Punishment. Legal Monitor
Worldwide.
ALPER, T. (2014). The United States Execution Drug Shortage: A Consequence of Our Values.
Brown Journal Of World Affairs, 21(1), 27-39.
Blythe, H. (2015). “LABORATORIES OF DEMOCRACY” OR “MACHINERY OF DEATH”? THE STORY
OF LETHAL INJECTION SECRECY AND A CALL TO THE SUPREME COURT FOR
INTERVENTION. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 65(4), 1269-1289.
DRILLING, A. (2014). Capital Punishment: The Global Trend toward Abolition and Its Implications
for the United States. Ohio Northern University Law Review, 40847.
Dobraszczyk, C. (2015). Cruel and unusual punishment. Bar News: The Journal Of The NSW Bar
Association, (No.), 26.
GIBSON, J. (2015). Death Penalty Drugs and the International Moral Marketplace. Georgetown
Law Journal, 1031215.
Malik, S. C. (2015). LETHAL INJECTION, POLITICS, AND THE FUTURE OF THE DEATH PENALTY:
ALLEN CHAIR ISSUE 2015: A SURVEY OF THE HISTORY OF THE DEATH PENALTY IN THE
UNITED STATES. University Of Richmond Law Review, 49693
Quigley, J. (2001). Pressure from Abroad Against Use of Capital Punishment in the United States.
ILSA Journal Of International & Comparative Law, 8169.
Smith, S. F. (2015). LETHAL INJECTION, POLITICS, AND THE FUTURE OF THE DEATH PENALTY: THE
SHIFTING POLITICS OF THE DEATH PENALTY: HAS THE ‘MACHINERY OF DEATH’ BECOME
A CLUNKER?. University Of Richmond Law Review, 49845.

EU Vs US: DEATH PENALTY DEBATE 12
Shirley, K. E., & Gelman, A. (2015). Hierarchical models for estimating state and demographic
trends in US death penalty public opinion. Journal Of The Royal Statistical Society: Series
A (Statistics In Society), 178(1), 1-28. doi:10.1111/rssa.12052
Sithole, K. (2016). NGO-IGO Relations: Amnesty International, Council of Europe, and Abolition
of the Death Penalty. Global Governance, 22(1), 79-97.