Texas should over­haul its exec­u­tive clemen­cy process to ensure a fair and equi­table jus­tice sys­tem, accord­ing to a new report by Texas Appleseed and the Texas Innocence Network. The report, ​“The Quality of Mercy — Safeguarding Justice in Texas Through Clemency Reform,” offers a series of rec­om­men­da­tions intend­ed to improve the process, includ­ing hold­ing pub­lic hear­ings in clemen­cy cas­es, estab­lish­ing stan­dards and objec­tive cri­te­ria that can be used to guide clemen­cy deci­sions, grant­i­ng mem­bers of the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles greater inde­pen­dence, and elim­i­nat­ing a Board pro­vi­sion that requires tri­al offi­cials to agree to a grant of clemen­cy.

In com­ment­ing about the report, Jared Tyler, Deputy Director of the Texas Innocence Network, not­ed, ​“The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles was estab­lished by the Texas Constitution, in part, as a bul­wark against pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al and judi­cial injus­tice. But through its self-adopt­ed reg­u­la­tions and prac­tice, it has almost entire­ly sub­or­di­nat­ed itself to the views of pros­e­cu­tors, judges, and law enforce­ment, the very enti­ties it is sup­posed to check. The Board has relin­quished respon­si­bil­i­ty for inde­pen­dent­ly eval­u­at­ing evi­dence of inno­cence, plac­ing an unjus­ti­fi­able and need­less bur­den on those who have been wrong­ly con­vict­ed.” (Press Release, Texas Appleseed and Texas Innocence Network, February 18, 2005). Read the Full Report (PDF Format). See also, Clemency.

Citation Guide