April, 01 2015, 08:45am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7413 5566,After hours: +44 7778 472 126,Email:,press@amnesty.org
Death Penalty 2014: Alarming Rise in Death Sentences as Governments Resorted to Capital Punishment to Combat Crime and Terrorism
States used the death penalty in a flawed attempt to tackle crime, terrorism and internal instabilitySharp spike in death sentences largely due to Egypt and Nigeria - at least 2,466 imposed globally, up 28% on 2013607 executions recorded, down almost 22% on 2013 (excluding those carried out in China, which executed more than the rest of the world put together)22 countries known to have executed, the same number as 2013
WASHINGTON
An alarming number of countries used the death penalty to tackle real or perceived threats to state security linked to terrorism, crime or internal instability in 2014, Amnesty International found in its annual review of the death penalty worldwide.
The number of death sentences recorded in 2014 jumped by almost 500 compared to 2013, mainly because of sharp spikes in Egypt and Nigeria, including mass sentencing in both countries in the context of internal conflict and political instability.
"Governments using the death penalty to tackle crime are deluding themselves. There is no evidence that shows the threat of execution is more of a deterrent to crime than any other punishment," said Salil Shetty, Amnesty International's Secretary General.
"The dark trend of governments using the death penalty in a futile attempt to tackle real or imaginary threats to state security and public safety was stark last year. It is shameful that so many states around the world are essentially playing with people's lives - putting people to death for 'terrorism' or to quell internal instability on the ill-conceived premise of deterrence."
But there was also good news to be found in 2014 - fewer executions were recorded compared to the year before and several countries took positive steps towards abolition of the death penalty.
Top executioners
China again carried out more executions than the rest of the world put together. Amnesty International believes thousands are executed and sentenced to death there every year, but with numbers kept a state secret the true figure is impossible to determine.
The other countries making up the world's top five executioners in 2014 were Iran (289 officially announced and at least 454 more that were not acknowledged by the authorities), Saudi Arabia (at least 90), Iraq (at least 61) and the USA (35).
Excluding China, at least 607 executions were known to have been carried out in 2014, compared to 778 in 2013, a drop of more than 20 per cent.
Executions were recorded in 22 countries in 2014, the same number as the year before. This is a significant decrease from 20 years ago in 1995, when Amnesty International recorded executions in 42 countries, highlighting the clear global trend of states moving away from the death penalty.
"The numbers speak for themselves - the death penalty is becoming a thing of the past. The few countries that still execute need to take a serious look in the mirror and ask themselves if they want to continue to violate the right to life, or join the vast majority of countries that have abandoned this ultimate cruel and inhuman punishment," said Salil Shetty.
State security
The disturbing trend of states using the death penalty to combat threats against state security was visible around the world, with China, Pakistan, Iran and Iraq all executing people accused of "terrorism".
Pakistan resumed executions in the wake of the horrific Taliban attack on a Peshawar school. Seven people were executed in December, and the government has said it will put hundreds more convicted on "terrorism"-related charges to death. Executions continued at a high rate in 2015.
In China authorities made use of the death penalty as a punitive tool in the "Strike Hard" campaign against unrest in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region. Authorities executed at least 21 people during the year related to separate attacks, while three people were condemned to death in a mass sentencing rally conducted in a stadium in front of thousands of spectators.
"In a year when abhorrent summary executions by armed groups were branded on the global consciousness like never before, it is appalling that governments are themselves resorting to more executions in a knee-jerk reaction to combat terrorism and crime," said Salil Shetty.
In countries including North Korea, Iran and Saudi Arabia, governments continued to use the death penalty as a tool to suppress political dissent.
Other states made use of executions in similarly flawed attempts to tackle crimes rates. Jordan ended an eight-year moratorium in December, putting eleven murder convicts to death, with the government saying it was a move to end a surge in violent crime. In Indonesia, the government announced plans to execute mainly drug traffickers to tackle a public safety "national emergency" - promises it made good on in 2015.
Spike in death sentences
There was a dramatic rise in the number of death sentences recorded in 2014 compared to the previous year - at least 2,466 compared to 1,925 - a jump of more than a quarter. This was largely due to developments in Nigeria and Egypt, where hundreds of people were sentenced to death.
In Nigeria, 659 death sentences were recorded in 2014, a jump of more than 500 compared with the 2013 figure of 141. Military courts handed down mass death sentences against some 70 soldiers during the year in separate trials. They were convicted of mutiny in the context of the armed conflict with Boko Haram.
In Egypt, courts handed down at least 509 death sentences during 2014, 400 more than recorded during the previous year. This included mass death sentences against 37 people in April and 183 people in June following unfair mass trials.
Methods and crimes
Methods of executions in 2014 included beheading, hanging, lethal injection and shooting. Public executions were carried out in Iran and Saudi Arabia.
People faced the death penalty for a range of non-lethal crimes including robbery, drug-related crimes and economic offences. People were even sentenced to death for acts such as "adultery", "blasphemy" or "sorcery", which should not be considered crimes at all. Many countries used vaguely worded political "crimes" to put real or perceived dissidents to death.
Regional breakdown
THE AMERICAS
The USA continued to be the only country to put people to death in the region, although executions dropped from 39 in 2013 to 35 in 2014 - reflecting a steady decline in the use of the death penalty in the country over the past years. Only seven states executed in 2014 (down from nine in 2013) with four - Texas, Missouri, Florida and Oklahoma -responsible for 89 per cent of all executions. The state of Washington imposed a moratorium on executions in February. The overall number of death sentences decreased from 95 in 2013 to 77 in 2014.
ASIA PACIFIC
The Asia Pacific region saw a mixed bag of death penalty developments in 2014. Executions were recorded in nine countries, one fewer than the year before. Pakistan lifted a moratorium on execution of civilians. Thirty-two executions were recorded in the region, although these numbers do not include China or North Korea, where it was impossible to confirm numbers. Indonesia announced plans to resume executions mainly of drug traffickers in 2015.
The Pacific continued to be the world's only virtually death penalty free zone, although the governments of both Papua New Guinea and Kiribati took steps to resume executions or introduce the death penalty.
SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA
Sub-Saharan Africa saw particular progress in 2014. Fourty-six executions were recorded in three countries compared to 64 executions in five countries in 2013 - a drop of 28 per cent. Only three countries - Equatorial Guinea, Somalia and Sudan - were known to have carried out executions.
Madagascar took a progressive step towards abolition when the country's National Assembly adopted a bill abolishing the death penalty on 10 December, although the bill has to be signed by the country's president before becoming law.
EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA
Belarus - the only country in the region that executes - put at least three people to death during the year, ending a 24-month hiatus on executions. The executions were marked by secrecy, with family members and lawyers only being informed after the fact.
MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA
The widespread use of the death penalty in the Middle East and North Africa continued to be extremely troubling. Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia accounted for 90 per cent of all recorded executions in the region, and 72 per cent of all recorded executions globally (excluding China).
In 2014 executions were recorded in eight countries, two more than in 2013. Sixteen countries imposed death sentences - a large majority of countries in the region.
The overall number of executions recorded in the MENA region dropped from 638 in 2013 to 491 last year. These figures do not include hundreds of executions that are known to have occurred in Iran but which were not officially announced. In 2014 the Iranian authorities acknowledged 289 executions, however reliable sources reported another 454 executions - bringing the total to 743.
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
LATEST NEWS
'There Will Come a Day When He Faces Prosecution': Trump Condemned After US Murders Two More at Sea
"The summary execution of two more in an alleged drug boat brings the number of murders ordered by Trump to more than 210," noted one human rights defender.
Jun 22, 2026
Two people were killed, and six others survived, a strike on Sunday that the US military claimed—without providing evidence—targeted a boat full of "narco-terrorists," but that human rights defenders called another summary execution worthy of prosecution.
"On June 21, at the direction of the commander of US Southern Command, Gen. Francis L. Donovan, Joint Task Force Southern Spear conducted a lethal kinetic strike on a vessel operated by Designated Terrorist Organizations," USSOUTHCOM said in a statement. "Intelligence confirmed the vessel was transiting along known narco-trafficking routes in the Caribbean and was engaged in narco-trafficking operations."
"Two male narco-terrorists were killed during this action, and there were six male survivors," the statement added. "Following the engagement, USSOUTHCOM immediately notified US Coast Guard to activate the Search and Rescue system for the survivors."
More lawless killing in the Trump administration’s boat bombing campaign.Real killing in a phony armed conflict with “narco-terrorists.”This strike reportedly left 6 survivors.US record for rescuing survivors alive is…not great.
[image or embed]
— Brian Finucane (@bcfinucane.bsky.social) June 21, 2026 at 11:28 PM
According to The Intercept's Nick Turse, who has tracked all of the reported US boat bombings in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean, there have now been 66 such strikes, which have killed 215 people and left 12 survivors, based on USSOUTHCOM data.
The fate of previous boat strike survivors is not completely clear. After one April bombing, the US Coast Guard told UPI that search-and-rescue operations were called off after no signs of survivors were found. Last October, President Donald Trump said two strike survivors were repatriated to their home countries of Ecuador and Colombia, where they faced prosecution.
Survivors of some of the strikes have accused US forces of torturing them.
Relatives of people killed in previous US boat bombings, as well as officials in Venezuela and Colombia, have said that numerous victims were fishers who were not involved in the illicit drug trade.
In January, relatives of two Trinidadian fishers killed in the strikes filed a federal wrongful death lawsuit in Massachusetts.
"The summary execution of two more in an alleged drug boat brings the number of murders ordered by Trump to more than 210," former Human Rights Watch executive director Kenneth Roth said on social media. "There will come a day when he faces prosecution for these crimes."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Judge Finds Trump DOJ Abused Subpoenas in Attempt to ‘Coerce’ Minnesota Leaders
"I will never stop exercising my constitutional rights to stand up for Minnesotans and the American freedoms we hold dear," Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz said after the ruling.
Jun 22, 2026
A federal judge on Monday quashed multiple grand jury subpoenas issued by the US Department of Justice aimed at political leaders in Minnesota, including Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey.
In his ruling, Judge Patrick Schiltz of the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota found there was "no doubt" that the DOJ had initiated "a criminal investigation in order to harass political opponents or to coerce them into taking official action," which he described as "a blatantly unlawful and unethical use of the grand-jury process."
Finding that "the evidence that the challenged subpoenas were issued for unlawful reasons is overwhelming," Schiltz, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, cited multiple instances of Trump administration officials "threatening and attempting to punish states and localities that have adopted 'sanctuary' policies."
The judge then quoted several social media posts by President Donald Trump in which he warned that "retribution" was coming for Minnesota officials, as well as statements from Trump DOJ officials linking grand jury subpoenas to the state's lack of cooperation with federal immigration enforcement operations.
Schiltz also said it was "risible" for the DOJ to justify the subpoenas on the grounds that it is investigating officials' refusal to devote state and local resources to assisting federal law enforcement, which he described as "constitutionally protected conduct."
"A grand-jury subpoena cannot be issued for an improper purpose," Schiltz emphasized. "The fact that connections between the information sought in the subpoenas and any possible criminal violation range from extremely weak to nonexistent only adds to the overwhelming evidence that these subpoenas were not issued to investigate, but to harass, coerce, and retaliate."
In a statement released after Schiltz's ruling, Walz hailed the decision as "a victory for the rule of law and our democracy," depicting the DOJ probe as yet another example of the department "pursuing criminal investigations into the president's political opponents."
"I will never stop exercising my constitutional rights to stand up for Minnesotans and the American freedoms we hold dear," Walz added.
Frey also released a statement after the ruling, accusing the DOJ of "subpoenaing political opponents because they spoke out on behalf of their constituents."
"My job is not to stay silent when Minneapolis residents are killed, families are torn apart, and businesses are closed," Frey said. "My job is to stand up for the people I represent, the families who call our city home, and the thousands of people who showed up and spoke out."
Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.) celebrated the ruling, which she said "confirms what we knew all along—that this was nothing but a baseless political attack on Minnesota’s leaders."
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, noted in a social media post just how far off the rails the Trump DOJ has gone.
"The Trump administration’s efforts to use the criminal grand jury process to retaliate against Minnesota and Minneapolis has floundered badly," he wrote. "It's a sign of how they are willing to toss aside basic rules to get at their enemies, and how the courts have largely smacked them down when they tried."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The World Is Watching': Top Economist Rips Newsom for Working to Tank Billionaire Wealth Tax
"You have chosen to protect California's billionaires at the expense of Californians' health," said Gabriel Zucman.
Jun 22, 2026
A world-renowned economist and expert on wealth inequality castigated California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday for working to kill a proposed tax on billionaire fortunes in the Golden State, warning that the Democratic leader and likely 2028 candidate appears bent on handing President Donald Trump "an unexpected ideological and political victory."
Gabriel Zucman, a research professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley, pointed to a recent Bloomberg story detailing Newsom's "last-ditch pressure campaign" to prevent a healthcare union-led initiative from appearing on California voters' ballots in November. Last week, organizers announced that they had collected the number of signatures required to get the initiative—a one-time, 5% tax on the wealth of California billionaires—on the ballot ahead of the June 25 deadline.
In a lengthy thread posted to X on Monday, Zucman wrote that he is "shocked" by Newsom's "efforts to defend Peter Thiel and Mark Zuckerberg at the expense of Californians' health," referring to two of the state's most prominent billionaires. Thiel has donated millions to an industry group looking to defeat the ballot initiative, which would use revenue from the wealth tax to offset the impacts of federal Medicaid cuts approved last year by Trump and congressional Republicans.
"Yet you are now devoting all your energy to preventing this ballot initiative from taking place and denying Californians the opportunity to express their democratic will this November," Zucman wrote. "You have chosen to protect California's billionaires at the expense of Californians' health."
By stridently opposing the proposed billionaire tax in California, the economist warned, Newsom is lending credence to "familiar conservative arguments against taxing great fortunes: the threat of capital flight, tax avoidance, harm to growth, etc."
"Instead of reinforcing these arguments, you could have chosen to challenge them. Take the risk of tax flight, a classic objection. It is effectively nonexistent," Zucman wrote. "Beyond the ideological victory you risk handing Trump, you may also be giving him a political victory."
Politically, Zucman warned Newsom that his opposition to the proposed wealth tax—which has proven extremely popular among likely Democratic voters—risks giving Trump and his right-wing allies a political victory by blunting momentum for a wealth tax not only in California, but beyond as well.
"If the 'Yes' prevails, California's tax could quickly inspire similar efforts in other states," Zucman argued. "Ultimately, that process could pave the way for a federal tax on extreme wealth. This is precisely what happened more than a century ago with the progressive income tax."
"The world is watching," the economist added. "In the struggle between democracy and oligarchy, one must choose a side. I hope you will choose ours."
Zucman has been outspoken in support of the proposed wealth tax in California, writing in The New York Times' op-ed pages last month alongside fellow economist Emmanuel Saez that the proposed levy would "be tiny relative to billionaires’ recent wealth gains."
"In the past three years alone, the total wealth of California’s billionaires grew by a staggering 144%, to over $2 trillion," the economists wrote. "Critics of the ballot measure have voiced concerns that even a small number of billionaires leaving the state would lead to lower state tax revenues overall. Their math doesn’t add up. California’s billionaires currently pay such a low tax rate that even if all of them left the state, it would take 25 years for the loss of their tax payments under the current set of rules to surpass the amount the state would raise if the one-time tax succeeds this fall."
"Defending 200 billionaires at the expense of the millions of Californians who will lose healthcare absent the passage of a billionaire tax is not a tenable position for the governor or the state of California."
Last week, organizers of the wealth tax initiative offered to withdraw its proposal if Newsom threw his support behind legislation imposing a 2% tax on California's billionaires—a compromise plan that the governor swiftly rejected.
"The governor supports making the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share, but this poorly designed state-only measure will defund teachers, schools, clinics, and public safety," said Newsom spokesperson Tara Gallegos. "Changing the tax rate doesn't change this measure's fundamental flaws that harm working Californians."
Suzanne Jimenez, chief of staff for the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West—the union leading the ballot initiative—hit back, accusing Newsom's office of "engaging in Trump-like misinformation tactics, which is sad and indefensible."
"The billionaire tax explicitly funds clinics, hospitals, schools, teachers, and food assistance to the tune of billions," Jimenez said in an emailed statement. "All objective reports have shown that the wealth tax raises billions to fund healthcare, education, and food assistance—and the revenue that will be raised far surpasses any potential income tax erosion—in no small part because billionaires pay very little relative income tax."
"Defending 200 billionaires at the expense of the millions of Californians who will lose healthcare absent the passage of a billionaire tax is not a tenable position for the governor or the state of California," Jimenez added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


