ABSTRACT
Capital punishment in Afghanistan serves as an interesting microcosm of the rule of law, juxtaposing religious fervour, judicial system immaturity and political realities. Actual use of the death penalty is at a crossroads, with Afghanistan's de facto moratorium abruptly upset by a November 2012 rash of executions. Culturally, modern Afghanistan is more conservative than pre-civil war Afghanistan; young women and men are more conservative than their parents. Capital punishment in Afghanistan was not abolished after the fall of the Taliban, but it fell into disfavour given the frequency and brutality of Taliban-sponsored executions, concerns over shortcomings in the fledgling Afghan judicial system, and international norms rejecting capital punishment. Customary laws, implemented in communities where Islamic identity was paramount, were sometimes wholly inconsistent with Islamic principles, but nevertheless gained popularity. Retentionist countries, which retain death penalty laws and practices, generally rely on additional procedural guarantees in trial and sentencing, including a meaningful opportunity to confer with counsel and present a defence.
