“Professor Schachtschneider pointed out that it also reintroduces the death penalty in Europe, which I think is very important, in light of the fact that, especially Italy was trying to abandon the death penalty through the United Nations, forever. And this is not in the treaty, but in a footnote, because with the European Union reform treaty, we accept also the European Union Charter, which says that there is no death penalty, and then it has a footnote, which says, “except in the case of war, riots, upheaval”—then the death penalty is possible. Schachtschneider points to the fact that this is an outrage, because they put it in a footnote of a footnote, and you have to read it, like really like a super-expert to find out!”
Is this for real? 
Not sure.
Nick Clegg, Leader of the Liberal Democrats, banned my message from his Facebook twice when I said it. Despite other messages being there!
There was obviously a reason behind his action… 
I do remember talk about reinstating the death penalty here, but it was only talk, well, until now that is - it’s the sneakiness-factor that’s getting me, and not the actual reinstatement of it, for those who are moral have nothing to fear from it…
It says:
What does upheaval mean? who defines a riot? That is the worst part. Everyone who demonstrates is at risk. Morals are determined by the rulers.
I reckon this is probably one of those cases where existing nation states with particular laws on a particular issue have requested a clause to be added and that it has been forced into a jargonese that doesn’t really sit well. The argument, I’m guessing, would be the typical governmental “we’d never actually interpret it in X or Y manner”, but obviously the precedent it sets is disturbing and what it says about the ability of the EU to influence its various member states is interesting.
This might offer some insight: