Day: November 17, 2024

Arms sales and the revolving door


New report from the Campaign Against the Arms Trade reveals extent of this activity

November 2024

[ADDED: 16 December] If you want to see ministers squirm in front of a select committee when discussing arms sales to Israel (via USA) watch this YouTube video. Usual claims of ignorance and unable to answer basic questions. Even though the RAF is regularly flying over Gaza, it seems they are unaware of the destruction as the purpose they say is to look for hostages.

The question of arms sales has risen up the political agenda partly because of the question of whether we should continue to sell weapons to Israel. It also cropped up with the decision recently to award a GCVO to the King of Bahrain presented by King Charles. It was also an issue during the war in Yemen where British weapons and personnel were involved in helping Saudi in their ferocious bombing campaign in that country. All these and other examples revealed an industry with considerable political influence. They result in a distortion of our political process and an almost complete disregard for the effects of the arms on people at the end of them. The destruction being carried on in Gaza is facilitated by the continuing sale of F-35 aircraft elements of which are made in the UK. An ‘ethical dimension’ to our policy seems to be a thing of the past. There is little sign that arms sales are restricted to states which ignore human rights or International Humanitarian Law.

Not so much a revolving door as an ‘open plan office’

Campaign Against the Arms Trade CAAT has campaigned on these issues for many years and their current magazine, Issue 270, Autumn 2024 contains a number of articles on the topic of arms. One concerns what has been known as the ‘revolving door’. In an article ‘Government and Arms Industry Joined at the Hip’, they explore the deeply compromising nature of this relationship. They have published a report From Revolving Door to Open Plan Office: the Ever Closer Union Between the UK Government and the Arms Industry. They argue that the arms industry has become so deeply embedded in the government that the boundary has almost disappeared. It is now not so much a revolving door as an ‘open plan office’. 40% of top military staff and civilian personnel leaving the MOD hold positions in the arms and security industries. Transparency International research shows that one company, BAE, had more meetings with ministers and with Prime Ministers than any other company.

Private Eye carried out an extensive survey in 2016. This went into great detail and named names.

Why does it matter?

It matters for three main reasons:

  • Firstly, arms cause great misery for millions of people. The harrowing images on news programmes of property destruction, dead bodies, lines of people on the move or rows of tents housing displaced people are the result of the activities of this trade,
  • The lobbying power is such that government ministers seem to fall into line almost as soon as they assume power. Grand statements by Sir Keir Starmer and David Lammy for example are quickly forgotten as the next trade deal is signed. The arms trade seems to wield enormous power and influence over government policy,
  • Thirdly, the ‘open plan office’ means senior staff in the Civil Service and in the MOD and armed services are keeping an eye on prospects as they approach retirement. Lucrative board appointments and ‘consultancy’ contracts await them. Are they going to ask uncomfortable questions or raise difficulties with an arms contract and jeopardise these prospects?

As CAAT put it:

‘When these ‘revolvers’ leave public service for the arms trade, they take with them extensive contacts and privileged access. As current government decision-makers are willing to meet and listen to former Defence Ministers and ex-Generals, particularly if they used to work with them, this increases the arms trade’s already excessive influence over our government’s actions.

‘On top of this, there is the risk that government decision-makers will be reluctant to displease arms companies as this could ruin their chances of landing a lucrative arms industry job in the future. Beyond individual decisions, the traffic from government to the private sector, and vice versa, is part of a process where the public interest becoming conflated with corporate interest, so that it becomes normal to unquestioningly meet, collaborate and decide policy with the arms industry, then take work with it.’

0

Urgent action: Oklahoma


We attach an urgent action concerning the death penalty in Oklahoma

November 2024

DEATH PENALTY ACTION FOR NOVEMBER, 2024

This  action is part of our continuing campaign calling on the Governor of Oklahoma to issue a moratorium on all executions, and ultimately to move towards the permanent abolition of the death penalty in the state.  Letters (preferably) or emails should be sent to Governor Stitt, focusing in particular on the history of racial discrimination within the State and how this has impacted on Oklahoma’s application of the death penalty.

Contact details:

The Honorable J Kevin Stitt

Governor of the State of Oklahoma

Oklahoma State Capitol

2300 N. Lincoln Blvd; Suite212

Oklahoma City

OK 73105

USA.

Emails can be tried at:   https://oklahoma.gov/governor/contact/general-information/contact-the-governor.html which gives access to a form.

Please take this action before the end of November.

Racial Discrimination/Bias in the Application of the Death Penalty in the State of Oklahoma

In 2017 the Death Penalty Review Commission concluded the system in Oklahoma was ‘broken’ and unanimously recommended a moratorium on executions ‘until significant reforms were accomplished’.  They also questioned ‘whether the death penalty could be administered in a way that ensured no innocent person was put to death.  They made 47 recommendations but it is understood – over 6 years later – none have been implemented.

In 2022 the report Deeply Rooted: How Racial History informs Oklahoma’s Death Penalty’ by Dr Crutcher, Founder and Executive Director of the Terence Crutcher Foundation, was issued – and updated in  September 2024.

The report places Oklahoma’s death penalty in its historical context of lynchings and mass violence against Black Oklahomans and the forced migration of Native Americans. It documents the historical role that race has played in the State’s death penalty and details the pervasive impact that racial discrimination continues to have in the administration of capital punishment.

The report ties Oklahoma’s use of the death penalty to its troubled history of racial violence and segregation. It observed that Oklahoma was at an inflection point in its administration of the death penalty and argued that, if the State was to establish a fair and humane system of justice, it was crucial to acknowledge and redress the effects of the Jim Crow laws and racial violence that persist into the present day.

Racial discrimination, especially the race of the victim, continues to infect all aspects of the death penalty in Oklahoma.  A study of homicides in the state between 1990 and 2012 found that the odds a person charged with killing a white female victim would be sentenced to death were 10 times greater than if the victim was a minority male. Of the 25 executions scheduled between August 2022 and December 2024, 68% involve white victims. Data throughout the report suggest that valuing white victims more than others has resulted in disproportionate punishment for Black defendants who murder white people.

An examination of the age and race of the men scheduled for execution reflects the bias that Black youth are perceived as older and less innocent than white youth. Seven of the 10 Black men set for execution were 25 years old or younger at the time of the crime. By contrast, only one of the 13 white men set for execution was 25 or younger at the time of his crime. Three of the Black men were 20 or younger and one of them, Alfred Mitchell, was only two weeks past his 18th birthday.

Of the 142 people in the U.S. who have been removed from death row because of intellectual disability (following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that their executions are barred), the majority (83%) have been people of colour. This suggests that people of colour, especially Black people, with intellectual disability are at a greater risk of being subjected to capital punishment. Oklahoma has limited the ability for people on death row to seek relief based on intellectual disability. As the report notes, Michael Smith, a Black man, had a documented, lifelong intellectual disability[i]. Despite his medical diagnosis, Oklahoma denied Mr. Smith a hearing on his intellectual disability.

At least five cases of those scheduled for execution in Oklahoma may have involved official misconduct, including Clarence Goode, a Black and Muscogee man set to be executed on August 8, 2024, (but see below) who was convicted after the testimony of a detective who later served time in federal prison for misconduct in other cases. Nationwide, nearly 80% of wrongful capital convictions of Black people involve official misconduct by police, prosecutors, or other government officials.

Native American Sovereignty

The report states that Oklahoma has a history of defying U.S. Supreme Court decisions that would provide some measure of racial justice. For example, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals refused to apply McGirt v. Oklahoma (holding that the State lacked jurisdiction to prosecute crimes committed by or against Native American people on tribal lands)

In 2020 the US Supreme Court recognised that Oklahoma has continually prosecuted criminal cases in violation of long-standing treaties with Native American tribes.  At least 3 Native Americans have been executed in violation of tribal sovereignty, and at least 4 people remain on death row despite these violations.

Thirty-seven Native American men and women have been sentenced to death in Oklahoma, more than in any other state. Two people currently scheduled for execution –  Clarence Goode, Jr[ii]  and Alfred Mitchell[iii] are Native American.

Sources:  Death Penalty Information Centre

[i] my update: executed on 4th April 2024 – despite a 4 to 1 recommendation for clemency from the Pardon and Parole Board

[ii] my update: execution stayed 8th August 2024 pending new date

[iii] my Update: execution stayed 3rd October 2024 pending new date

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑