Capital Punishment: Abandonment of Execution - Research Paper Example

Capital Punishment: Abandonment of Execution Introduction The argument for capital punishment has continued for a long time. There has been a rising view against this practice in many states. Some of them are seriously considering of abandonment of execution (Dezhbakhsh, Shepherd, n.d.). Long ago capital punishment was carried out by the Romans in amphitheatres where criminals had to face wild animals without any kind of weapons (Brooklyn College Classics Department, n.d.). It is hard to justify this act in the modern world of today. The capital punishment or death penalty is the violation of human rights. It is nothing less than a cold-blooded murder of a human being carried out by the state in the veil of justice. It is the violation of fundamental rights of human being. The capital punishment denies an individual ‘the right to live.’ All over the world there has been a growing opposition to this cruel and inhuman treatment meted out to the offender. Many international bodies are working towards the abolition of this barbaric act (Amnesty International, n.d.). Discussion The death penalty is strongly opposed by the people who are against it on the ground of irreversibility and severity of the punishment. If by mistake an innocent person is executed, it is an unacceptable act of injustice. There have been cases when people in death row were released after evidences proving their innocence were found later. Studies have shown that the states without capital punishment have marginally lower murder rates. Like in the case of US, research has revealed a lower murder rate in states which do not allow execution. A life imprisonment not only deters a person from any wrongdoing but also provides a scope foe reversal in case he is found innocent in due course of time. The countries practicing execution have not shown any substantial decline in the murder rates. This goes to show the inefficacy of the punishment. The people who support the practice are of the view that capital punishment will deter a person from any wrongdoing in the future and will serve as an example to the society. However, the research conducted by international bodies has found this reason to be baseless (Diemer, 1984). In some countries including Canada death penalty does not exist. The most stringent punishment for a murder is life imprisonment without any parole. This has led to a gradual drop in the homicide rate in the country. The same has been found in various countries that have abandoned execution. Barring a few developed countries like US, Japan and South Korea all other developed countries do not conduct execution. There are countries like Italy and Canada which refuse to extradite murderers to US for the fear of execution. The majority of the people who are executed are from poor financial background. They are thus unable to defend themselves in the court of law. Most of them cannot even afford a lawyer and are forced to depend on a lawyer appointed by the court. This means that if they can get proper legal assistance the punishment can be limited to something less severe than the death penalty. So, the execution resulting from the inability of the offender to seek legal assistance is a grave wrong (Religious Tolerance.org, n.d.). The advocates of capital, punishment argue that it has deterrent affects. There are others who are of the view that even if capital punishment does not have a deterrent affect it incapacitates the offender from committing any such crime in the future. They feel that given the criminal background, if such serious offenders are released in the society they will kill more people and will become a social menace (Sunstein, Vermeule, 2006). However, these advocates of execution fail to understand that this kind of treatment can embitter an individual to an extent that he starts looking at the society as machinery to carry out brutality. The bitter experience in the jail can provoke him to take revenge against the society. The death penalty has a brutalizing effect on the society as it sends across the message that killing a person can be justified, given the circumstances. But it is difficult to justify this gruesome act on the pretext of justice. It goes to show that merely killing is the solution for a problem. Such a planned mechanism of paying the hangmen, priests, judges and electricians for carrying out the execution is an act of gruesome cruelty. This cannot be accepted under any circumstances especially when there are a number of alternatives available to deal with the situation. The methods of execution like beheading, hanging, stoning etc. are barbaric. It is hard to justify this kind of a torture as it is a form of mental blow on a person. In some countries it acts as a tool to repress the society (Amnesty International, n.d.). The proponents of capital punishment try to justify it on grounds of deterrence. They feel that such criminals are a threat to the society and their execution will save many innocent lives. But a number of other ways are available such as life imprisonment in high security which can protect the society from such convicts. But it is morally wrong to treat a person with this cruelty just to protect the rest of the society. It is questionable as to how the death of a person can do any good to others. The process of harming one to save the rest is like treating an individual as an object without any rights. The strongest argument in favor of the punishment is that a person who intentionally kills another deserves to be executed. But here again, the question which comes up is whether it is right in empowering the government to decide about the life or death of a person. It is doubtful if the prevailing laws and procedures are reliable enough to be entrusted with the life of individuals. The proponents of death penalty feel that if the convicts are sentenced to life imprisonment the society will have to pay for their cost of survival. They overlook the considerable cost of death penalty such as selection of jury and the cost of conducting the trial. Also, the prisoners currently work at very menial wages. If sufficient measures are adopted for the betterment of the prison conditions, it will not only improve the living conditions of the inmates but will also lower the cost of prisons. It has often been found that the persons guilty of a crime suffer from psychological problems. So, it becomes the duty of the society to cure their illness and enable them to become socially responsible individuals. A wrongful execution by the judiciary is irrevocable. If a person is imprisoned by mistake he can be compensated but there is nothing that the judiciary can do bring back a person who has been mistakenly executed (Hoekema, 1979). Conclusion The opponents of capital punishment are of the view that the risk of punishing an innocent person outweighs the risk of execution as life once lost cannot be compensated (America.gov, 2008). Many research reports reveal that deterrence cannot be the sole reason in support of carrying out capital punishments. The majority of the people are of the opinion that higher number of executions does not produce any deterrent effects (GOCCP, n.d.). One must also take into account the mental agony of the family of convicted murderers before deciding for any punishment. The loss of one member in the family may deprive the others especially if that member is the sole earner in the family. So, before awarding the death sentence to an individual all the factors should be properly weighed because once an accused is executed all the doors for any amendments get closed. Table of Contents Discussion 1 Conclusion 5 References 6 References Amnesty International. (No Date). Facts on the death penalty. Myths and Facts. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty/myths-facts/facts Amnesty International. (No Date). Death penalty in 2008 The Journey towards abolition continues. Abolish the death penalty. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty America.gov. (2008). Capital punishment in United States continues to be debated. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://www.america.gov/st/usgenglish/2008/April/20070103125318lhmnietsua0.7334558.html Brooklyn College Classics Department. (No Date). Capital Punishment. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://depthome.brooklyn.cuny.edu/classics/gladiatr/cappunsh.htm Dezhbakhsh, H. Shepherd, P. (No Date). Does Capital Punishment Have a Deterrent Effect?. The University of Hawaii System. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Does_Capital_Punishment_Have_a_Deterrent_Effect_New.pdf Diemer, U. (1984). The Capital Punishment Debate. Connexions Library. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://www.connexions.org/CxLibrary/Docs/CX5284-CapitalPunishmentDebate.htm GOCCP. No Date. Maryland Commission on Capital Punishment deterrence resources. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://www.goccp.maryland.gov/capital-punishment/documents/cap-pun-deterrence-resources.doc Hoekema, D. (1979). Capital punishment:The question of justification. . Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1218 Religious Tolerance.org. (No Date). Capital Punishment. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://www.religioustolerance.org/execut3.htm Sunstein, C. Vermeule, A. (2006). Is Capital punishment morally required?. Stanford law review. . Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol58/issue3/sunstein1.pdf Read More