fitri-handayani
The Pentagon has confirmed that Nidal Malik Hasan, the former US Army major responsible for the 2009 mass shooting at Fort Hood, will be put to death by firing squad. The announcement, made on Monday, marks the first military execution using this method since the conclusion of World War Two, a milestone that underscores the rarity of capital punishment within the US armed forces.
According to Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell, the decision was recommended by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and subsequently approved by President Donald Trump. In a social media post, Parnell declared that "judgement day for Hasan has finally come," adding that the Secretary of the Army will determine the specific timing and location of the execution. The approval follows a lengthy legal and administrative process required for military death sentences.
Hasan, a psychiatrist from Virginia, opened fire inside a crowded medical building at the Fort Hood base in Texas on 5 November 2009. At the time, soldiers were undergoing routine check-ups and vaccinations ahead of deployments. The attack left 13 unarmed US service members dead and another 32 wounded, making it the deadliest non-combat assault ever carried out on an American military installation.
During his 2013 court-martial, Hasan admitted to being the gunman and offered an apology for what he described as "any mistakes." He further stated that he believed his actions were protecting Muslims and the Taliban in Afghanistan. A panel of 13 military officers convicted him on 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted murder, unanimously recommending the death penalty.
Military executions in the United States are carried out under a distinct legal framework that separates them from state-level capital punishment. Under military law, a death sentence requires explicit approval from the US president, alongside an appellate review and a final judgment confirming the legality of the punishment. These layers of oversight reflect the gravity and procedural caution attached to executing a member of the armed forces.
The history of the military death penalty in the US has been far from straightforward. In 1983, the US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces ruled the military death penalty unconstitutional. However, the following year, an executive order issued by then-President Ronald Reagan reinstated it. Since that reinstatement, executions at the military level have been exceedingly rare, with the last firing squad execution dating back to the World War Two era.
Hasan is currently one of only four inmates held on the US military's death row, a small population that highlights how seldom such sentences are carried out. The method chosen for his execution—death by firing squad—is itself uncommon across the country. While capital punishment remains legally available in 27 states, as well as under the military and federal systems, firing squads are permitted in only a handful of jurisdictions, including Idaho, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Utah.
The last firing squad execution in the US took place in South Carolina last year, marking both a first for that state and the first use of the method nationwide in 15 years. That event renewed public debate over whether firing squads constitute a more humane or more barbaric alternative to lethal injection, a method that has faced scrutiny over botched procedures and drug shortages. Legal experts remain divided on the issue, with some arguing that firing squads offer a swift and certain death, while others contend that the visual and violent nature of the method raises serious ethical concerns.
The timing of the Pentagon's announcement also reflects the broader political landscape surrounding capital punishment in the United States. President Trump has been a vocal supporter of the federal death penalty and moved to reinstate it through an executive order on his first day in office in January 2025. That order described capital punishment as "an essential tool for deterring and punishing those who would commit the most heinous crimes and acts of lethal violence against American citizens."
By contrast, the previous administration under former President Joe Biden had adopted a different stance. The Justice Department under Biden issued a moratorium on the federal use of the death penalty, effectively pausing executions at the federal level. The shift between the two administrations illustrates how capital punishment policy in the US can swing sharply depending on the occupant of the White House, creating an unpredictable landscape for those on death row.
For the victims' families and survivors of the Fort Hood attack, the announcement may bring a long-awaited sense of closure, though reactions are likely to be mixed. Some may view the execution as a just consequence for a premeditated act of terror, while others may oppose the death penalty on moral or religious grounds. The case has also drawn attention to the challenges of addressing radicalisation and mental health within the military, as Hasan's own history as an Army psychiatrist raised questions about how warning signs were handled before the shooting.
Legal observers note that further appeals or procedural challenges could still delay the execution, despite the presidential approval. Military death sentences are subject to extensive review, and any successful challenge could push the timeline back by months or even years. Nevertheless, the Pentagon's announcement signals a clear intent to proceed, setting the stage for a rare and closely watched event in American military justice.
The execution, whenever it takes place, will be a somber moment in US military history. It will mark the first time in more than six decades that the armed forces have carried out a death sentence by firing squad, reviving a method that had largely faded from use. As the nation debates the future of capital punishment, the case of Nidal Hasan serves as a stark reminder of the most violent attack ever committed on a domestic US military base—and of the long, complex path from crime to consequence.
Comments (0)