Preserving Death Penalty - Research Paper Example

of (DD MM YYYY) Capital punishment: A review of research According to Kronentwetter, capital punishment is the process through which a convicted criminal is put to death, for committing a certain crime (2). What crimes - if any at all - can lead to capital punishment and how, depends on the laws and legal systems of different places. This paper looks at capital punishment in detail, reviewing existing literature on the subject to highlight its origins and evolution, as well as the support for and opposition to it. The origins of capital punishment date back to ancient times, where it was used to punish and deter crime; and as a political tool, to suppress rebellion and dissent among the masses (Aiken 207). One of the most famous examples of capital punishment is the death of the philosopher Socrates, who was required to drink poison for heresy (Schabas, “The Death Penalty” 164). Seventh century Athens, meanwhile, decreed capital punishment for any and all proven crimes (Murrie, Anumba and Keesler 125). Regio cites that ancient Babylon also decreed capital punishment for certain crimes - though it is surprising that murder was not among these. Research also highlights the role of religion in the origin of capital punishment - Islam, for example, commanded capital punishment for offenses such as treason and rape; while Mosaic Law did the same for other crimes (Regio). By the eighteenth century, British colonies were enforcing the capital punishment for over two hundred different crimes (Murrie, Anumba and Keesler 125). This shows a varied and liberal use of the death penalty; it is possible to infer from this kind of use that the barriers to putting someone to death for crime till the nineteenth century, were anything but great. Reviewing literature on capital punishment highlights two striking features of capital punishment in ancient and medieval times: the lack of due legal process preceding it, and the brutality characterizing it. Burns demonstrates how the witch hunts of Europe are a classic example of both these features - between the thirteenth and seventeenth centuries, thousands were tortured and burned alive for practicing witchcraft, often after trials by ordeal - in a large number of cases, guilt was decided by submerging the accused in a body of water, and seeing whether the accused sank or floated (95). Jewish traditions included execution through stoning, crucifixion and sawing through convicts (Regio). The absence of an objective legal process is also seen in the norm of torturing people who would not confess to their crimes; and executing criminals by boiling them - some for several hours - until they died (Regio). Researchers have argued that it is important to see all of this in context - olden times were different from the modern era, their societal laws and values built in an environment of fear, hardness and suspicion that had resulted from uncontrolled and rampant disease and death, as well as the difficulty of finding practical evidence (Schabas, “The Abolition of Death Penalty,” Burns 94) - but, whatever the debate on why capital punishment was so executed may be, what all researchers can agree on is a general lack of regulation and fairness in capital punishment before the modern era. With humankind’s progress towards civilization, both of these things have changed. Schabas believes this is because the advance towards civilization has changed the nature of human motivation - the author argues that the socialization and interdependence that characterize the modern era, also lead to a legal system where the promotion of ethics - and not harsh deterrence - becomes the core function of criminal law (“The Abolition of the Death Penalty”). Over the centuries, then, societies around the globe have moved towards a legal system which regulates the nature of capital punishment, and the reasons and processes for awarding it (Schabas, “The Death Penalty” 159). One of the first steps towards this was made in the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which outlawed capital punishment for minors and pregnant women. The Covenant also regulated the procedures for capital punishment, making humiliating or inhumane punishments illegal. In 1984, the UN Economic and Social Council laid down rules that outlawed capital punishment in the absence of clear and total evidence; granted all convicts the right to appeal to a higher court; and forbade execution when an appeal was pending1. Since the mid twentieth century, regulatory bodies have also sought to restrict the list of offenses for which convicts can be put to death (Schabas, “The Abolition of the Death Penalty”). According to Schabas, different countries have also sought to regulate the manner in which convicted capital offenders are executed - a fair number have outlawed such methods as firing squads, gas chambers and electrocution; and all outlaw cruel and unique punishments. All of this has been accompanied by an abolitionist movement, with more and more countries and human rights bodies desiring a total elimination of the capital punishment system (Schabas, “The Abolition of the Death Penalty” 5). In general, reviewing existing research tells us that the process of awarding and executing capital punishment has not just become restricted and transparent, the evolution of civilization has in fact resulted in massive opposition to it. Of course, the existence of capital punishment in a wide range of countries and systems means that there must be some continuing support for it. Existing literature on the matter tells us that this is indeed the case - just last year, Californian voters rejected the abolition of the death penalty in their state (Almendrala). Reviewing literature tells us that the reasons for capital punishment support cater to a wide range of aspects, including social, cultural, financial, logical, emotional and religious dimensions (Bedau; Landau; Schabas, “The Death Penalty,” “The Abolition of the Death Penalty”). To begin with, Bedau (95) cites deterrence as the most common reason proponents support capital punishment; this means that proponents believe in the power of strong aversive stimuli in mitigating heinous crimes. However, a research conducted by Ellsworth and Ross shows that proponents of capital punishment would prefer it to life imprisonment, even if it were proven that the latter were as effective as the former in preventing crime (qtd. in Bedau 96). This shows that one of the underlying reasons for capital punishment support is wanting retribution. Other researchers have backed this idea, with literature showing that most supporters of capital punishment believe in ‘eye to eye’ justice - from their point of view, the punishment should equal the crime, making capital punishment a fair and just form of retribution in such cases as murder (Bedau). Supporters also oppose the idea of life imprisonment as a replacement for capital punishment on the basis that prisons are meant to rehabilitate convicts who will leave - since criminals incarcerated for life will never be freed, prison does not serve as a means to an end for them (Phil B). There is also support for capital punishment, in several religious groups and faiths. According to Walker, there are Christian groups which believe the Bible indicates that capital punishment is justified for certain offenses (43); in the same way, Judaism also decrees capital punishment for certain crimes (44). Landau mentions that Islam also directs execution for certain criminal offenses, including specific politics offenses (101). Such literature shows us that followers of certain religious beliefs form a key part of those who advocate the continued use of the death penalty. This, in turn, provides a lens to look at the way public opinion and policymaking regarding the role of capital punishment in the legal system, has been influenced by religion and group advocates. In general, however, support for capital punishment has dwindled over the years and continues to fall. Public opinion polls conducted over the past two decades show that the general public is losing confidence in capital punishment - a 2006 poll shows that the majority of respondents would prefer criminals be awarded life without parole, in place of execution; while a 2012 Gallup poll demonstrates that the percentage of people who oppose capital punishment in the US has increased from 28% to 25% in a period of four years, while the percentage of people who support it has fallen from 64% to 60% in as much time (DIPC, “National Polls and Studies”). The result of such opposition has been evident in policymaking, with a large number of states and countries having either abolished capital punishment altogether, or minimized it, with a view to eliminating it altogether in the near future (Schabas, “The Abolition of Death Penalty”). The question then is not whether there is growing opposition to capital punishment, but why. Research over the past few decades has come up with a large number of reasons capital punishment no longer has the public support it once did. To begin with, opponents cite the chances of executing wrongly-convicted men and women. In the US alone, over 120 people have had their convictions overturned since 1973 (Dieter). This shows a worrying potential for error in the legal system, which can lead to the execution of innocent people. According to Dieter, there have also been a fair number of cases where convicted criminals were exonerated after the advent of DNA testing - such cases can be used to argue that replacing capital punishment with life imprisonment provides for new evidence and technological advances that have the potential to free people from death row. Linked to this is the argument that the procedures that result in capital punishment are based on discrimination. Opponents argue that the legal system is biased against African-Americans, and the uneducated and poor. Research has proven some truth to these statements. Where racial discrimination is concerned, research has found that people accused of killing whites are likelier to be sentenced of capital punishment, than those accused of killing blacks (DIPC, “Race and the Death Penalty”); while Bedau shows that African-Americans constitute a disproportionate percentage of death row inmates (447). Literature also shows an agreement in thinking on the opinion that it is harder for the poor to acquire legal counsel and help in cases of capital offense, leading to a greater number of convictions among financially weak defendants (Bedau 447). Opponents also argue that the manner in which capital punishments are awarded is capricious and fruitless. Over the years, murderers have been able to avoid execution by coming forward as state witnesses or providing help with criminal investigations; others have been able to get away with lighter sentences (Meehan). This has led Meehan to ask if the results of capital cases “would be much different if we decided for life or death by rolling dice.” Overall, research has been able to denounce the idea that capital punishment is an effective deterrent to crime (Erb; Schabas, “The Abolition of the Death Penalty” 369). This provides policymakers with an all-new perspective, when approaching the topic of capital punishment. Finally, opponents argue that the cost of life imprisonment is much lower than that of capital punishment. In its article “Costs of the Death Penalty,” the DIPC shows that capital punishment cases consume six times as many days as life-without-parole cases - in numbers, this means an average of 148 days compared to an average of 25! Capital punishment cases also cost more in terms of trial and death row processes - according to an estimate by the California Commission, the costs of the capital punishment system exceed those of a life-without-parole system by over 100 million US dollars per annum (DIPC, “Costs of the Death Penalty”). In short, many opponents see spending on capital punishment as excessive and unneeded - one point to think about that this aspect of research leaves us with, is the other activities spending on capital punishment could be redirected towards, such as setting up correctional facilities, and researching crime prevention. Summarizing the discussion in this paper, it would not be untrue to say that research in the field of capital punishment has been many-dimensional and extensive. Reviewing literature gives us insight into what capital punishment is, the thinking that led to its origins, and how it has changed over the centuries, from unregulated and inhumane towards controlled and just. The available literature also gives us excellent insight into the role of changing societal trends and opinions in altering and reforming the capital punishment system, outlining the support for and opposition to it. This holds implications for a wide range of stakeholders in the sociolegal system - including policymakers, academic experts, religious leaders and, above all, the common man and woman. WORKS CITED Aiken, Lewis R. Dying, Death, and Bereavement. London: Taylor & Francis. 2011. Print. Almendrala, Anna. “Prop 34 Defeated: California Voters Preserve Death Penalty.” Huffington Post. 11 July 2012. Web. 11 Nov. 2013. Bedau, Hugo A. The Death Penalty in America: Current Controversies. Ed. Oxford: Oxford University Pdess. 1998. Print. Burns, William E. Witch Hunts in Europe and America: An Encyclopedia. London: Greenwood Publishing Group. 2003. Web. Dieter, Richard C. A Crisis of Confidence: Americans’ Doubts About the Death Penalty. Death Penalty Information Center. June 2007. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. DIPC. Costs of the Death Penalty. Death Penalty Information Center. n. d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. DIPC. National Polls and Studies. Death Penalty Information Center. n. d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. DIPC. Race and the Death Penalty. Death Penalty Information Center. n. d. Web. 12 Nov. 2013. Erb, Kelly P. Death and Taxes: The Real Cost of the Death Penalty. Forbes. 22 Sept. 2011. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. Kronenwetter, Michael. Capital Punishment: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. 2001. Print. Meehan, Mary. Ten Reasons To Oppose the Death Penalty. America Magazine. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. Murrie, Daniel C, Anumba, Natalie M, & Keesler, Michael E. Forensic Mental Health Assessments in Death Penalty Cases. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2011. Web. Phil, B. The Pros and Cons of Capital Punishment. Phil for Humanity. n. d. Web. 11 Nov. 2013. Regio, Michael H. History of the Death Penalty. The Execution. Frontline. n. d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. Schabas, William. The Death Penalty as Cruel Treatment and Torture: Capital Punishment Challenged in the World's Courts. Lebanon, New Hampshire: UPNE. 1996. Print. Schabas, William. The Abolition of the Death Penalty in International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2002. Print. Walker, Ida. The Death Penalty. Minneapolis, MN: ABDO. 2008. Web. Read More