UNCHRBangladesh08


 * Country: **  Bangladesh
 * Topic:** Capital Punishment
 * Committee:** UNCHR- Human Rights
 * Name:** Lizzbeth M.
 * Period:** 0

Capital Punishment, or the death penalty, is the execution of a criminal convicted of a capital offense. A capital offense is one that is so malicious that it can be punished by the death sentence. Examples include murder to the first degree and rape with other bodily harms. Capital punishment is an ethical issue which is viewed differently by everyone. Many consider it wrong due to the fact that the death penalty declines someone the right to life and takes away their rights as humans. However, others, due to the change in techniques used in the death sentence, have begun to think that it is becoming more humane and therefore acceptable. Out of 197 countries only sixty-two are retentionist, meaning that they have not abolished capital punishment and the rest have approved UN Declarations and Conventions to make the death penalty illegal.
 * Background:**

The UN Commission on Human rights has developed many solutions for stopping the use of capital punishment. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was the first attempt to abolish the death penalty. It was developed after World War II in December 1948 to prevent further unnecessary deaths. In 1966, the UN made another attempt and created the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights(ICCPR) however this one did not call for the complete abolition of the death sentence. It kept the death sentence in act for major crimes only. Additionally, the General Assembly adopted the Second Optional Protocol to the Covenant in 1989 however it entered into force in 1991. It made the death penalty reasonable only in wartime and called for a reason if the country was going to execute someone before they did execute them. In the same year the UN also proposed and adopted the Convention on the Rights of the Child which made executing a child under the age of 18 illegal.
 * UN Involvement:**

Bangladesh is disassociated with the UN decision to abolish the death penalty. We believe that the right of a convicted prisoner to life cannot outweigh the rights of the victims and the community affected. Peace and security for our communities, most importantly our whole country is more important. In addition we think that each country should carefully study the death penalty to determine whether they retain or abolish it. Moreover, it is inappropriate to make a universal decision to ban the death penalty on an international level or make a proposal to such action. Islamic Philosophy states that a harsh punishment serves well to someone who committed a serious crime that harms individual victims and the community. "...If anyone kills a person-unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land- it would be as if he killed all people..." (Qur'an 5:32) Two crimes punishable by death are intentional murder and spreading mischief in the land. Spreading Mischief refers to acts of terrorism, treason, and rape. In 2007, Bangladesh hung six people for these acts.
 * Country Policy and Involvement:**

We believe that capital punishment should not be abolished, therefore we propose solutions that are pro- making your own choice. MYOC(Make your own choice) Agreement is an agreement that makes anti-capital punishment declarations the only type of document the UN can use for the topic of capital punishment due to the fact that it is a non-binding treaty. Furthermore, CPENT (Capital Punishment Evolvement and New Techniques) is an organization that would meet annually to discuss the topic of capital punishments and new ways we can develop more humane way of execution. In addition, UN Commission on Human Rights should not only think of abolishing capital punishment but also think about and develop plans that help the prisoners that are on death row.
 * Solutions:**

http://islam.about.com/cs/law/a/c_punishment.htm?p=1 http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/overview.html http://www.un.org/esa/documents/ecosoc/docs/1999/e1999-113.htm http://capitalpunishment.eu/ http://www.un.org/Pubs/chronicle/2004/issue4/0404p29.html**
 * Works Cited:**


 * Committee:** Human Rights
 * Topic:** Rights of POWs

POWs, or prisoners of war, are men and women who have fallen into the hands of the enemy. The people entitled to the POW status are those who are captured during armed conflict even if they don't participate (aren't members of an armed force), those who carry arms openly, and some journalists can be entitled to the protections but they usually aren't considered POWs. Although the UN has created treaties and declarations to prevent the ill-treatment of POWs, they are still not treated fairly and some countries try to find "loop-holes" to make their actions reasonable. In 2006, for example, Australian soldiers captured some Afghanistan people who they believe do not qualify as prisoners of war, therefore the detainees do not need to have a fair trial or be released at the end of the hostility. "DETAINEES captured by Australian soldiers in Afghanistan are not being given prisoner of war status under the Geneva Conventions, because the Federal Government says there has been no declaration of war and it is not an armed conflict between nation states" (Banham, smh.com.au) These men can be treated with aggression and brutality that no person deserves and due to that small technicality the country can get away with it.
 * Background:**

The most important policies the UN has established are the four Geneva Conventions. They are composed of the First Geneva Convention in 1864, the Second Geneva Convention in 1899, the Third Geneva Convention, and the Fourth Geneva Convention which all took effect in August of 1949. The first convention was based primarily on helping wounded and sick soldiers during the time of war. The second was meant to extend the effects of the first convention to wounded, sick, and shipwrecked members of armed forces in the Navies. The third convention is the most relevant to the topic of POWs because it outlines procedure necessary during the capture, for example the interrogation of the prisoner. Moreover, it outlines the qualities, or aspects a person must have to qualify as a prisoner of war. The fourth convention is relative to the treatment of civilians during the time of war.
 * UN Involvement:**

As a member of the international community, Bangladesh believes that prisoners of war should have fair and humane treatment. Bangladesh in April of 1972 ratified the four Geneva Conventions, although we did not sign them when they were created. According to Muslim law, a prisoner cannot be killed. This does not apply if a prisoner is sentenced to death through a fair trial. We also believe that they need to be properly fed and well treated. "They are not to be charged for their food, the cost which is borne by the capturing Muslim state...we feed you, for the sake of God only, we wish for no reward not thanks from you." We try to do away with discomforts our prisoners have and we provide extra clothing if necessary. Family is not to be separated and the dignity of prisoners is to be determined by their position. Although we try to prevent mistreatment of POWs if they are tried and found guilty we punish them accordingly. Prisoners can be beheaded, enslaved, released on ransom, and exchanged for our soldiers captured, and/or released without conditions.
 * Country Policy:**

Bangladesh wants to put into action the ICTP Declaration, which is meant to improve the living conditions and treatment of POWs. Although we already have the Geneva Conventions, the ICTP Declaration will be more forceful in order to make the conditions actually improve. This declaration would be binding because instead of being a policy, it would be an international law. People who go against the law would be punished in ways thought fit by a fair trial. While the ICTP is being accepted or neglected, Bangladesh also proposes MTP, or Moderate the Treatment of POWS. This organization would try to get volunteers that will investigate the treatment of POWs and the sanitation of where they are incarcerated. It will get fund from donations to help improve the conditions of where POWs are kept and provide them with clothing and other necessities if the country is unwilling to provide it. It would also bring back information that would help us determine whether POWs are treated fairly and respectfully, like it is meant to be.
 * Solutions:**

Works Cited: http://www.aiipowmia.com/iraq/quranpwrights.html http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/afghan-pows-denied-rights-because-its-not-a-war/2006/06/15/1149964675820.html http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/375?OpenDocument http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/03/pow032403.htm http://hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/pow-bck.htm