How Should International Criminal Justice Approach the Issue of Capital Punishment - Assignment Example

Lecturer Justice Question How should international criminal justice approach the issue of capital punishment? Capital punishment refers to a legal process in which a convicted criminal is put to death by the state. In other words, it is the actual enforcement of a death penalty which is given to the convicts who have been found guilty of committing offenses such as murder, robbery with violence and others. Although there are lots of legal and moral issues revolving around this practice, it has persisted in several countries for a very long time. His is done based on the constitutions and laws governing each and every country. However, there still exist different ways in which this law is exercised by the states in the United States of America (USA). I would like to point out that the issue capital punishment has been sparking a very hot debate to the different sections of the society. To the human rights and pro-life activists, it is an immoral action which has no good value to add to the life of human beings. It is not justified to punish an offence with death since the dead can not learn from their mistakes. Because of this, there is need for the international community to have a lot of considerations before enforcing the laws governing this type of punishment (Bakken 317). A lot of people have lost their lives as a result of death sentences which might have been given to them as a result of committing certain acts of offenses. However, I would like to suggest that the international judicial system should not put much emphasis on the death penalty. I believe that there may be a better means of punishing wrong doing. For instance, in USA, nearly 20 states have dropped the capital punishment laws. Meaning, even when it is a case of robbery or murder, a person can be given a long jail term preferably life sentence. In my point of view, this is reasonable, ethical and should be encouraged (Stuart 74). Efforts should be made to harmonize the issue of capital punishment amongst the international community. Question 2: Compared to executive offices in other nations, the American presidency is distinctive. What feature of the American presidency make it unusual, and what are the main consequences of the unusual design of this office? Unlike most of the other countries, USA has adopted a presidential system of government. This differs from the parliamentary system adopted in many other countries in South America, Africa, Asia and Europe. A presidential system simply means that the nation is headed by a president. For a president to rise to power, they must first be nominated by a popular party before waiting for the elections by the general public. This coupled with other features makes the US presidency quite distinct from other nations. First, the president is elected along side their chosen running mate who ends up becoming their vise in case they win the elections. This is quite different from other countries in which during elections, the president contests alone without having to be voted together with their running mates. Meaning, after winning the elections, the president might officially appoint their vice. Such arrangements are practiced in France, Germany, Britain and others. Because of such a system in USA, the president does not need to appoint their vice for they are elected during elections. Together with is vise, it is the president who is the only elected executive in the nation. This actually makes the American presidency distinct from many countries (Taranto, and William 179). Besides, the other feature which makes the US presidency stand out to be distinct from that of the rest of the world is that the president does not work alone. They are not all powerful. Meaning, they have limited power which is only restricted to the arms forces and executive. In other words, it is the Congress which heads the legislature, judiciary and other powerful organs such as the Supreme Court which plays a very significant role in the country. This is a clear indication that the president works in cooperation with others since he is not the government himself. Question 3: What major changes did Republicans make in the structure of the House when they took it over in 1995? How do the Republicans reforms reflect the “tug of war between centralizing and decentralizing forces” in Congress? The 1994 elections marked the end of the Democratic regime which had dominated the country for a long time. However, after winning the elections, the Republicans formed a very strong government which introduced a lot of changes in governance. These were in areas such as the Senate and Congress. Of interest was the number of reforms made in the Congress. Since the organization of business by the Democrats in the house had become so unpopular because of its corruption, partisanship and inefficiencies, the Republicans were forced to introduce new rules that would make the operations of the house more organized and appealing to the electorates. First, reforms were made to reduce the bureaucracies in the operations of the house. This was done by making voting and budget procedures to be fairer and open than they were before. Besides, the new rules banned proxy voting and instead advocated for the streamlining of the activities of the committees and made them much efficient. This was done by reducing the number of committee members and emphasizing on the transparency of their activities through the inclusion of the press during their meetings to disseminate information to the general public (Amer). Moreover, these new regulations enabled the Congress to be an improved house. By limiting the tenure of the house speaker, the congress became so responsive and accountable to all the Americans. These actually demonstrated that there had been an antagonism between the Democrats and the Republicans. Thus, by gaining dominance in the house, a lot of changes had to be introduced so as to make the house improve its reputation. Works Cited Amer, Mildred. "Freshmen in the House of Representatives and Senate by Political Party: 1913-2005" CRS Report for Congress. The Library of Congress): 2007. 1–6. Bakken, Gordon Morris, (ed). Invitation to an Execution: A History of the Death Penalty in the United States. University of New Mexico Press; 2010. Print. Taranto, Leonard and William J. Bennett. Presidential Leadership: Rating the Best and the Worst in the White House. Simon and Schuster, 2004. Print. Stuart, Banner. The Death Penalty: An American History. Harvard University Press, 2004. Print. Read More