Corporal Punishment Used in Other Countries - Assignment Example

Topic Write a paper on Corporal punishment used in other countries. Do you believe that beheading, stoning, cutting off limbs, etc. should be abolished? Why or why not? Corporal punishment is a centuries old way of penalizing not only at home but state level too. Some ways of corporal punishment like beheading, stoning and cutting off limbs are still prevalent in Muslim countries ruled by religious scriptures. Currently, global scenario is not affected as only a selected number of Muslim states are practicing such barbaric methods of punishing the culprits. In ancient times, crucifixion and mutilation were prevalent in Muslim religion, which had their base in the Quran – the unchangeable and omniscient word of Allah, taken from Sura 5:33 as ordained by Mohammad (Arlandson, 2005). It is not that such similar practices of corporal punishment were not prevalent in other religions of the world but they have been banned and new substitutes have taken their place. Capital punishment is still there in many countries but it is awarded in rarest of the rare cases. The word ‘capital’ comes straight from the Latin word capitalis, “of the head”. It is not awarded in open full public view. Reasons of change in the methods of execution are based on human consideration, which otherwise is a different issue. Barbaric methods of awarding corporal punishment are still being practiced, particularly in states lacking in democratic values. In Saudi Arabia, Sandy Mitchell, a Scotsman, faced crucifixion. He was beaten and tortured until he agreed that he had committed the crime, which he didn’t in 2003. Beheading in public is a common thing in Saudi Arabia but crucifixion is awarded rarely but the saddest part of the story is that it is awarded under the Islamic law for petty crimes like highway robbery. There is no justification for awarding such a severe punishment to robbers. It is, otherwise, a general practice to cut either of a hand or foot for committing robbery. According to Amnesty International reports, 2000, in Saudi Arabia, they award the punishment of cutting off one hand or foot for ordinary crimes and ‘cross’ or alternate cutting for harsher crimes (Arlandson, 2005). Corporal punishment was awarded in ancient Greece, ancient Israel and early Rome in many forms including beheading and stoning among a number of other ways of punishing early crime. In Rome, arsonists were burned to death but in modern times, such practices are not prevalent in these nations. Capital punishment is still awarded in the rest of the world but common approved methods have been electrocution, poison gas, hanging and firing squad but beheading was, and still in some Muslim nations, is common way of awarding capital punishment (Arlandson, 2005). The issue of awarding corporal punishment has become a human rights issue. The United Nations in 2008 adopted a resolution, second in line, inviting moratorium on the issuance of death penalty in the General Assembly on November 20, earlier resolutions notwithstanding. Outside UN, the European Convention on Human Rights has abolished capital punishment in their protocols. As we are not to talk about the Americas, a number of international organizations have made abolition of capital punishment a condition of membership, particularly the European Union. Other than that, a number of international treaties don’t need a separate prohibition of capital punishment as an optional protocol exists, for mention sake, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, for encouraging total prohibition on death penalty. Practically, there is no death penalty awarded in Europe. Non-government organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have formed a World Coalition against death penalty (International Organizations, 2009). Religious leaders of different faiths have supported moratorium. His Holiness, Tenzin Gyatso, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama’s message on supporting the moratorium on the Death Penalty, has remarked that death penalty is just not a precautionary step; it is a sort of revenge. Its severity touches the inner feeling of human heart because it takes to the final destination. With the end of life, opportunity for repentance is lost. Before executing a criminal, it is crucial to know whether such criminals are hardcore and won’t show any sign of improvement in themselves or they can be changed intrinsically. If they can be reformed, they should be given a chance and not executed (Gyatso, 1999). Capital punishment is still prevalent in some Islamic and non-Islamic countries as well but what is questionable is the practice of beheading, stoning, and cutting off limbs; it should be abolished. We are living in a civilized era where human considerations are of paramount importance. Most of the countries, where such practices exist, are dictatorships. Until voice of protests is raised from the community and soil where they are practiced, we cannot expect positive results. One such voice is Tariq Ramadan, raised for instant moratorium on corporal punishment, stoning, and death penalty in Islamic world. Ramadan (2005) has tried to create consciousness among the community that in the name of Islam, men and women are being inhumanly treated because of no clear-cut and judicious opinion on these issues. There is need for an open discussion among intellectuals, leaders and the masses whether an immediate moratorium should be placed on stoning, beheading, and cutting off limbs. Ulamâ should take the responsibility of telling outsiders and not allowing Islam to become a tool in the hands of religious fanatics for committing atrocities in the name of infidelity. Education of Muslim populations can bring the people out of the illusion of fake and formal. Inhibitive explanation of Islamic teachings won’t promote social justice and create respect of human beings. Strict punishments should not be the rule but exception. It is important to be faithful to yourself and listen to what others are saying about your religion; it is the demand of the reformatory movement. You cannot be oblivion to the happenings of outside world. Hudûd’s (Islamic laws stating the limits ordered by Allah and including the deterrent punishments for serious crimes) application should be stopped to start a debate in the Muslim world so that masses don’t remain silent spectators of partnering wrong practices in the name of religion. Religious teachings should not become legal recourses to establish law. Important issues at stake are justice, education, and religious tolerance; equality of all, irrespective of whether one is rich or poor. Men or women all are equal by law needs to be guaranteed. Need of the hour is a democratic movement (Ramadan 2005). Beheading, stoning and cutting off limbs should be completely abolished from the civil society. It is a curse on the face of humanity. All forms of capital punishment should be banned because: 1. It is inhuman to punish a criminal the wrong way you consider wrong. You become a perpetrator of the same crime by punishing the criminal uncivil way. 2. There is no tangible proof that by awarding capital punishment, you can help in the prohibition of crime. 3. You cannot revoke once the death penalty has been applied. As a result, one cannot repair the circumstances in which the criminal justice system selects the innocent person. Statistics reveal that more than 100 innocent persons waiting death penalty were freed as proved innocent in trials later in America since 1970s. Had they been executed although being innocent, their lives could not be compensated. Although the judicial system asks for greater and tangible proofs before convicting a culprit for death penalty, it is the duty of law protecting agencies to ensure truth is fully established. Benefit of doubt must go with the guilty as happened in the Illinois case, where thirteen innocent were imprisoned for death penalty as there was a doubt of mistake. The then Governor George Ryan declared moratorium on executions in 2000 and later in 2003 changed their death sentences. This incident generated a reformative movement by the legislature. A new thought process started doubting the process of persecution. A comparison between the sentence of death and life imprisonment compelled the study commission to find the role played by arbitrariness and discrimination while awarding death penalties. From time to time, judiciary has also raised such issues. 4. Application of capital punishment doesn’t match with retributive theories of punishment. 5. There is no proportionate measure of the wrong committed against which death penalty has been imposed. Mostly, it has been seen that the poor men get death sentence more often than rich and although there is no such proof of racial discrimination in awarding death penalty but it is more often awarded to blacks who victimize whites. 6. It has been noticed that murder convicts on parole are less prone to indulging again in crimes. So, there is no evidence to prove that death sentence is a better hinderer than life imprisonment. Murder convicts behind bars are more prone to commit similar crimes in jail than those sentenced to life imprisonment. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, in The Common Law (1881) has stated, “The first requirement of a sound body of law is that it should correspond with the actual feelings and demands of the community, whether right or wrong” [1938 ed., p. 41]. The role of community comes out clear when asked to choose between death sentence and life imprisonment without parole. Same is the opinion of jury. People supporting death penalty (74 percent) came to 54 percent when a choice between death sentence and life imprisonment without parole was given for criminals. Further, the process of law doesn’t allow any experimentation to measure the effects of death penalty versus less harsh punishment (Carter & Koosed, 2009) ‘Actual feelings and demands of the community’ as stated by Justice Holmes, can give a new direction to the issues faced by Islamic world, as discussed by Ramadan (2005). His call for at once global moratorium on corporal punishment, stoning and death penalty in all Muslim nations invokes the masses to share their feelings and demands. Nowhere in hudûd, there is a unanimous provocation of such severe penalties as a great number of scholars have after reading the text have found and one should keep in mind the political systems where there is no freedom to speak your feelings and demands. Muslim societies are not justice loving; law differentiates individuals. All justice loving Muslims should come forward to work as their moral duty and social concern against the application of hudûd, which has been wrongly practiced as “Islamic sharî’a”. These questions need to be answered not by masses only but all Islamic religious organizations (sunnî or shî’î), their philosophy (hanâfî, mâlikî, ja’farî, etc.) or their inclinations (literalist, salafî, reformist, etc.) whatever: We need to know the exact words and we need to measure their originality that relates corporal punishment, stoning and death penalty in such scriptures called hudûd. We also need to find the limits of how far their meanings take away and points of delineation from the Islamic law as well as from the current time period (Ramadan, 2005). Masses have the right to ask the intellectuals of hudûd, the limitations prescribed for the penalties by them or consensus or Islamic law history. Where are the delineations on the limitations and excusable circumstances ever detailed by religious powers of the time or within the different philosophies of Islam? Islamic intellectuals have always given thought to socio-political context, assumptions for the application of hudûd. It is very critical and significant to get an answer from the specialists of the subject on socio-political conditions affecting the application of hudûd. It is important to know the context of the application of hudûd. What are the necessary requirements of political systems and law making? What does the Islamic law say on freedom of speech, equality, education, and poverty? An open discussion on these issues will clear the fog on what scriptures say and what law dictates. If there is a disagreement between the Islamic law and scriptures, it needs to be stashed. If there is a transition from the Islamic scriptures and law as the society has evolved, it must be recognized. The debate may go on; until then there should no application of such severe penalties as beheading, stoning and cutting of limbs. The moratorium will conclude the discussion into a positive realization on Islam. Until then, a jerking break to corporal punishment is mandatory (Ramadan, 2005). References: Arlandson, James. (2005, June 19) An analysis of Quran 5:33. Crucifixion and mutilation in early Islam. Retrieved April 15, 2009, from http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/06/crucifixion_and_mutilation_in.html Carter & Koosed. (2009) US Supreme Court: Capital punishment. Retrieved April 15, 2009, from http://www.answers.com/topic/capital-punishment Gyatso, Tenzin. (1999) His Holiness, Tenzin Gyatso, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama: Message supporting the moratorium on the death penalty. Religious organizing against the death penalty. Retrieved April 15, 2009, from http://www.deathpenaltyreligious.org/education/perspectives/dalailama.html International Organizations. (2009) Capital Punishment. Retrieved April 15, 2009, from http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Capital_punishment Ramadan, Tariq. (2005, April 5) An international call for moratorium on corporal punishment, stoning and the death penalty in the Islamic World. Retrieved April 15, 2009, from http://www.tariqramadan.com/spip.php?article=264?lang=en Read More