Introduction
We are grateful to Carol V. Rose and Wilson Adam Schooley, Human Rights editorial board members, for their dedicated work as special editors on this issue. We also extend a special thanks to Virginia E. Sloan, IRR council member, and Ronald J. Tabak, IRR council member and co-chair, IRR Death Penalty Committee, for their invaluable assistance on this issue.
By George H. Ryan
As a member of the Illinois General Assembly, I vividly remember voting in favor of the death penalty. During the debate, an opponent of the death penalty asked if any of us who supported it would be willing to "throw the switch." It was a sobering question, and I wish now that I could swallow the words of unqualified support for the death penalty that I offered.
The fact is now, as governor, the responsibility to "throw the switch" is mine. It is the toughest part of being governor. I've been in elective office for more than thirty years. During that time, as a county board member, legislator, and executive office holder, I was a staunch death penalty supporter. Like many other elected officials, I believed there are crimes that are so heinous that the death sentence is the only proper societal response.
However, since those days as a legislator, a lot has happened to shake my faith in the death penalty system. I know a lot more about the administration of the death penalty in Illinois, and the more I have learned, the more troubled I've become.
In 1999, the Chicago Tribune conducted an in-depth investigation of death penalty cases in Illinois that uncovered some startling information. Half of the nearly 300 capital cases in Illinois were reversed for a new trial or sentencing hearing. Thirty-three of the inmates on death row were represented at trial by lawyers who had later been disbarred or at some point suspended from practicing law. Thirty-five African American death row inmates were convicted or condemned by all-white juries. In fact, two out of three of our 160 Illinois death row inmates are African American. Prosecutors used jailhouse informants to convict or condemn forty-six death row inmates.
In January 2000, the thirteenth death row inmate was found wrongfully convicted of the murder for which he had been sentenced to die. At that point, I could not ignore our shameful scorecard. We had thirteen people exonerated of the crimes for which they had been sentenced to die-more than the twelve that had been convicted and executed since the death penalty was reinstated in the state. Thirteen people who lived the ultimate nightmare were sitting on death row, waiting to be killed by the state for crimes that they did not commit.
Until then, despite each remarkable, complex, and sometimes confusing development, I had resisted calls by some to declare a moratorium on executions. But then I had to ask myself, how could I go forward with so many unanswered questions about the fairness of the administration of the death penalty in Illinois.
It was clear to me that when it came to the death penalty system in Illinois, there was no justice. Thus, in January 2000, I announced to the citizens of Illinois that I was imposing a moratorium on executions in the state, because of grave concerns about our state's record of convicting innocent people and sentencing them to death row. I called for a public dialogue on the question of the fairness in the application of the death penalty. That, surely, has taken place since I announced my decision.
In March 2000, I empaneled a commission of fourteen concerned, intelligent, honorable people to investigate the convictions of the thirteen innocent people who had been wrongly sentenced to death. In charging the commission with its duty, I told the fourteen members that "until I can be sure that everyone sentenced to death in Illinois is truly guilty; until I can be sure with moral certainty that no innocent person is facing a lethal injection, no one will meet that fate."
People often tell me that it took courage to do what I did. I don't know that courage is the best word to describe it. I just call it doing the right thing. All I did was respond to the indisputable facts that the administration of the death penalty in Illinois simply was unfair and, in fact, our record was pretty shameful. I am comfortable knowing that I did the right thing.
With the support of people and groups from all over the country, especially the American Bar Association, a healthy public discussion on the administration of the death penalty has begun across the country. Martha Barnett has played a significant role in encouraging lawyers and others to take a close look at the administration of the death penalty. As she steps down from her position as president of the ABA, I would like to extend to her my personal gratitude for her commitment to justice and fairness. She has been a passionate leader, and I wish her great success in the future.
The Section of Individual Rights and Responsibilities has worked tirelessly for many years to bring to light the problems with the administration of the death penalty in this country. It was through the Section's initiative that the ABA ultimately approved a resolution calling for a national moratorium on executions. I am pleased that the Section has continued its advocacy in this area by drafting a set of "protocols" for use by other states in their evaluation of problems with their own death penalty laws.
This issue of Human Rights magazine provides an insightful examination of the death penalty from a variety of perspectives. We all need to engage in just this sort of thoughtful and thorough discussion. It is my hope that this issue of Human Rights will reach an audience that has the ability to make a difference and further the dialogue on this important topic.
George H. Ryan is governor of the State of Illinois.
