National Architects’ Association Amends Ethics Rules to Prohibit Design of Execution Chambers

The American Institute of Architects (AIA) has amend­ed its pro­fes­sion­al code of ethics to pro­hib­it mem­bers from design­ing exe­cu­tion cham­bers or spaces to be used for tor­ture, includ­ing long-term solitary confinement. 

“We are com­mit­ted to pro­mot­ing the design of a more equi­table and just built world that dis­man­tles racial injus­tice and upholds human rights,” said AIA 2020 President Jane Frederick. ​“AIA mem­bers are required to uphold the health, safe­ty and wel­fare of the pub­lic. Spaces for exe­cu­tion, tor­ture and pro­longed soli­tary con­fine­ment con­tra­dict those val­ues. This deci­sion empha­sizes AIA’s com­mit­ment to mak­ing a dif­fer­ence on this issue and uphold­ing human rights for our society.” 

The new ethics rules, adopt­ed on December 10, 2020, con­tin­ue a trend among busi­ness­es and pro­fes­sion­al asso­ci­a­tions to dis­tance them­selves from cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment. ​“The mar­ket is increas­ing­ly opt­ing out of the death penal­ty,” said Death Penalty Information Center Executive Director Robert Dunham. ​“Whether it is phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal man­u­fac­tur­ers or nitro­gen pro­duc­ers refus­ing to sell their prod­ucts to state pris­ons or doc­tors, nurs­es, phar­ma­cists, and now archi­tects say­ing it is uneth­i­cal to assist in the exe­cu­tion process, more and more seg­ments of soci­ety are say­ing they will not par­tic­i­pate as a cog in the machin­ery of the death penalty.”

As recent­ly as 2019, AIA had said design­ing exe­cu­tion cham­bers was accept­able in juris­dic­tions that autho­rized cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment. The new rule, which is manda­to­ry for all mem­bers, explains, ​“Designing spaces intend­ed to end human life is incon­sis­tent with the ide­al of uphold­ing human rights. What is law­ful and what is eth­i­cal are two sep­a­rate inquiries; act­ing law­ful­ly may not equate to acting ethically.” 

Like many orga­ni­za­tions, AIA began more deeply exam­in­ing the impact of its poli­cies on racial jus­tice in light of the police killing of George Floyd and the ensu­ing nation­wide protests. In June, Michael Kimmelman, the archi­tec­ture crit­ic at The New York Times, urged the orga­ni­za­tion to recon­sid­er the pol­i­cy, writ­ing, ​“Architects should not con­tribute their exper­tise to the most egre­gious aspects of a sys­tem that com­mits excep­tion­al vio­lence against African-Americans and other minorities.” 

Raphael Sperry of Architects/​Designers/​Planners for Social Responsibility had pushed for the change. ​“Architecture has his­tor­i­cal­ly been a white, male dom­i­nat­ed pro­fes­sion that has par­tic­i­pat­ed in sys­tems of oppres­sion and injus­tice includ­ing seg­re­ga­tion and mass incar­cer­a­tion,” he said. ​“This code change is a sign that things can change and that they are changing.”

The ban on design­ing spaces for tor­ture also could affect the design of death-row facil­i­ties. AIA pro­hibits the design of a space intend­ed for ​“indef­i­nite or pro­longed soli­tary con­fine­ment of pris­on­ers for 22 hours or more per day with­out mean­ing­ful human con­tact, for more than 15 con­sec­u­tive days.” Such con­di­tions have been the norm for those incar­cer­at­ed on death row for decades, though states are increas­ing­ly mov­ing away from manda­to­ry soli­tary con­fine­ment for death-row prisoners.

AIA also adopt­ed a state­ment of posi­tion call­ing for its mem­bers to pro­mote crim­i­nal jus­tice reform and reha­bil­i­ta­tion and ​“strive to ensure that the phys­i­cal needs, health, dig­ni­ty and human poten­tial of all those who come in con­tact with the jus­tice sys­tem are respect­ed and giv­en the oppor­tu­ni­ty to flourish.”