Birmingham lawyer Lisa Borden opposes the death penalty. One of her worst fears is the prospect that one day she will have to watch a client executed.

Borden, who oversees the pro bono programs at the firm of Baker Donelson, has been involved in the appeals of five death row inmates. She also has filed briefs on behalf of groups fighting against executions.

But recently she found another way to help condemned inmates - she asked other nations to bring pressure on the United States to make changes to death penalty policies.

Borden was among 12 representatives from The Advocates For Human Rights, a non-profit group from Minnesota, that traveled in late March to the U.N. offices in Geneva Switzerland to participate in the U.N.'s "Universal Periodic Review."

The U.N. created the 'Universal Periodic Review" in 2006 as a way to review the human rights records of all 193 member nations. Each nation's human rights records are reviewed every four years.

During the process other nations are allowed to recommend changes the nation under review should make. The United States' next review is May 11. The U.S. can accept, reject, or just note the recommendations made by other countries.

In preparation for the reviews, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), including The Advocates For Human Rights, are afforded an opportunity to submit reports and lobby the delegates of member nations on what recommendations they should make, in this case, to the United States.

Borden was the only one of the 12 with The Advocates for Human Rights to focus on the U.S. death penalty issues. Her firm had worked with the group on death penalty issues before. The others in the group focused on other issues.

Before the trip, Borden says, she had never thought before about ways to use international pressure to make changes to death penalty laws in the United States. "It sort of opened my eyes to a new avenue of maybe advancing the ball," she said.

During the week Borden said she would approach delegates from pre-identified target countries, hand them a one-page synopsis of proposed recommendations and ask if they would meet in the U.N.'s Serpentine Lounge. The meetings would usually last between five and 30 minutes, she said.

"It was awesome. It was a really amazing experience," Borden said.

Delegates she met with were from Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, France, the Netherlands, Morocco, the United Kingdom, Paraguay, Portugal, and the Holy See (Vatican). None of those nations have the death penalty.

"You're not going to get a recommendation if they have the death penalty themselves," Borden said. "We're focusing on the countries we expect to be supportive of our position and we hope will step out and make recommendations (to the U.S.)."

European countries are particularly opposed to the death penalty, Borden said. "They're frankly horrified by what goes on here," she said.

Responses from delegates ranged from "very enthusiastic to polite," Borden said.

Borden said the goal is to "advance the ball" as much as they can on several issues regarding the death penalty.

Issues/Recommendations

"Obviously, we welcome and encourage recommendations to abolish the death penalty or a moratorium," Borden said.

But while a nation may oppose the United States' use of the death penalty, they may not want to use their precious time at next month's meeting to make such a recommendation on the topic, Borden said. "The countries are looking for something the U.S. might actually listen to," she said.

Delegates from all the countries will have a total of three-and-a-half hours to stand up and make recommendations to the U.S. - giving each nation only a few minutes to address any human rights topics. "It has to be laser focused," she said.

One issue that that seemed to catch the interest of delegates is a proposed recommendation to have federal prosecutors stop seeking executions in states and territories where the death penalty has been abolished, Borden said.

For example, federal prosecutors are seeking the death penalty in the Boston Marathon bomber case. Massachusetts does not have the death penalty.

Federal prosecutors' use of the death penalty is no starker than in the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico where they seek the death penalty 3-1/2 times more often than in the rest of United States, Borden said. Puerto Rico abolished the death penalty in 1929.

Since Puerto Rico has an almost entirely Hispanic population "we think that's a significant concern," Borden said.

Halting federal executions in non-death penalty states would only require an executive order from the President of the United States, Borden said. Such an order shouldn't be a problem for those states that don't have the death penalty or those who are in favor of states' rights, she said.

"The federal government would simply be respecting that state's authority," Borden said.

Among the other possible recommendations Borden talked to delegates about included adoption of:

- Federal laws to ensure lethal injections are carried out via well-tested procedures that do not cause necessary pain, with full oversight and transparency of types and sources of drugs and using drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

- Procedures to provide full and fair representation for defendants and prevent or mitigate negative effects of inadequate DNA testing and eyewitness misidentifications.

- Compensation laws for exonerated inmates to provide at least $100,000 per year on death row, without taxation or legal fees.

- Laws providing exonerated death row inmates services, including housing, transportation, healthcare, employment, and education assistance.

Another recommendation delegates were asked to consider is asking the U.S. government to undertake studies to identify the root causes of ethnic and racial disparities with imposition of the death penalty.

Statistically, the most likely candidates for being sent to death row are African American defendants charged with killing white victims, Borden said. Another factor is being poor, she said.

Also, killers with money and good attorneys are less likely to be charged with a death penalty eligible offense, Borden said. "For me the issue is that the people who can't afford appropriate representation get railroaded onto death row," she said.

Borden says that early in her career she probably could have envisioned a scenario where the death penalty was appropriate for a convicted murderer. "But I can't say that now for two reasons," she said.

First, the reason most condemned inmates are sitting on death row is because they grew up in abject poverty and as children were victims of mental or sexual abuse with no treatment or support, Borden said. "Yet at the end of the day we say they are entirely responsible for what happened," she said.

Second, there are so many flaws in the judicial process that there are likely innocent people on death row awaiting execution, Borden said. "I don't see how we can put ourselves in the position that we have a process so reliable that we can kill people and feel confident about that," she said.

Homeless

While in Geneva, Borden also spoke on behalf another group, the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty, to delegates about issues regarding the criminalization of the homeless within the United States.

Criminalization of the homeless is defined as a law or laws that limit things like camping or food sharing - "where people are going to jail just because they are trying to live," Borden said.

Lobbying efforts within the U.S. have already paid off in that area, Borden said. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development will start counting points against local governments seeking community development grants if they have such homeless criminalization laws, she said.