|
The
Question Of Clemency
By:
Anthony Ross & Steve Champion
“The heart of clemency… is to grant clemency as a matter of grace,
thus allowing the executive to consider a wide range of factors not
comprehended by earlier judicial proceedings and sentencing
determinations.”
These are the words of the late Chief Justice Williams Rehnquist. In the
state of
California
it has been nearly four decades since Ronald Reagan granted clemency to
a death row inmate. Every governor since then has steadfastly refused to
show an act of grace to condemned men and women. In early January of
2005 Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was faced with his first requests
for clemency. He denied them both: Kevin Cooper for whom he did not even
grant a clemency hearing, and Donald Beardslee, who’s model behavior
in prison the Governor claimed was not a reason for clemency.
Historically clemency has not focused on guilt or innocence, nor the
merits of capital punishment, nor errors in law, so what does clemency
focuses on? Unfortunately this has been a gray area and usually
governors merely cite the list of crimes for which the condemned inmate
was sentenced to die for. But even to an untrained eye the clemency
process is primarily about political posturing. The last thing any
politician wants is to be labeled soft on crime, and with
Arnold
’s “Terminator” image he has to play hardball. Yet, if the
executive power of commutation were to truly evoke the spirit of the
words of Chief Justice Rehnquist then it would focus on grace, mercy,
and redemption. With the scheduled December 13th execution of
Stanley Tookie Williams Governor Schwarzenegger has within his grasp the
power to make those words reality, for once again he is faced with the
question – Who deserves clemency? It is a question that goes to the
very core of redemption, and a question that subjects the process of
clemency to critical examination.
Since the state of California has no litmus test, no real criteria, no
template in determining who could receive clemency, the entire process
is nothing more then a subjective decision and am arbitrary exercise in
political pandering and revenge. Yes, clemency is a difficult and thorny
issue, but conventional wisdom holds that it should, at the very least,
be fair and honest. That each death row inmate can expect a meaningful
review of his/her clemency petition without it being summarily dismissed.
Yet this is precisely what is lacking, and governors have demonstrated a
remarkable reluctance to set some kind of attainable standard for
clemency. Governor Schwarzenegger has the profound opportunity to change
that not by sacrificing principles to politics, and by emulating George
Ryan, the former republican governor of
Illinois
, who found the system of the death penalty so egregious he commuted the
death sentence of virtually all condemned inmates before leaving office
in 2003. This rare and humane action displayed the very heart of
clemency, grace.
Though Schwarzenegger has never articulated exactly what reasons could
persuade him to grant clemency, if the numerous accomplishments and
extraordinary transformation of Stanley Tookie Williams does not make
him a exemplar candidate, then clemency is a complete sham. It is a
utter waste of time and resources and should be discarded. At present
none of the nearly 700
California
death row inmates can realistically hope for nor expect clemency. If
this is true then why all of the pretext? Why not just be politically
blunt and tell death row inmates that they have a greater chance of
excreting through a straw then receiving clemency. It will most
certainly extinguish any shred of hope, but they won’t be deluded.
Governor Schwarzenegger put the word “rehabilitation” back into the
language of the penal system because he believes in second chances, but
in doing that he also injected hope into thousands of prisoners. Now all
he has to do is give them a tangible example: Stanley Tookie Williams.
Visit Anthony's profile
/ writings
Back
to Home
|