We don't need the full list here; that's why we have List of methods of capital punishment. |
m Reviewed and support previous edits (but 2 history sections need merging) |
||
Line 266: | Line 266: | ||
===Buddhist views of the death penalty=== |
===Buddhist views of the death penalty=== |
||
*[http://www.deathpenaltyreligious.org/education/perspectives/dalailama.html The Dalai Lama] - Message Supporting the Moratorium on the Death Penalty |
*[http://www.deathpenaltyreligious.org/education/perspectives/dalailama.html The Dalai Lama] - Message Supporting the Moratorium on the Death Penalty |
||
* [http://www.engaged-zen.org/articles/Damien_P_Horigan-Buddhism_Capital_Punishment.html Buddhism & Capital Punishment] from The Engaged Zen Society |
* [http://www.engaged-zen.org/articles/Damien_P_Horigan-Buddhism_Capital_Punishment.html Buddhism & Capital Punishment] from The Engaged Zen Society |
||
===Jewish views of the death penalty=== |
===Jewish views of the death penalty=== |
||
* [http://www.ou.org/torah/savannah/5760/behaalotcha60.htm Orthodox Union website: Rabbi Yosef Edelstein: Parshat Beha'alotcha: A Few Reflections on Capital Punishment] |
* [http://www.ou.org/torah/savannah/5760/behaalotcha60.htm Orthodox Union website: Rabbi Yosef Edelstein: Parshat Beha'alotcha: A Few Reflections on Capital Punishment] |
||
* [http://www.jewishjournal.com/old/deathpenalty2.3.10.0.htm Jews and the Death Penalty - by Naomi Pfefferman (Jewish Journal)] |
* [http://www.jewishjournal.com/old/deathpenalty2.3.10.0.htm Jews and the Death Penalty - by Naomi Pfefferman (Jewish Journal)] |
||
Revision as of 07:55, 1 February 2006
Capital punishment, also called the death penalty, is the execution of a convicted felon as a punishment for a crime (often called a capital offence or a capital crime). Historically the judicial execution of criminals and political opponents was a phenomenon of nearly all societies and it was often also used as a means to suppress political dissent. Countries around the world, particularly in Europe and Latin America, have abolished capital punishment. The United States is unique amongst wealthy western nations in retaining it. However, many of the countries in Asia (including China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, the Republic of China (Taiwan) and Thailand) continue to apply the penalty for certain crimes and it is also common in many Middle Eastern and African countries.
The death penalty is sometimes seen as an effective deterrent to crime, but some studies show that life in prison is just as effective.
In most countries that practice captial punishment today, the death penalty is reserved as a punishment for planned murders. In some majority-Muslim countries, certain sexual crimes, including adultery and sodomy, carry the dealth penalty. In militaries around the world, courts-martial have sentenced capital punishments also for cowardice, desertion, insubordination and mutiny.
Terminology
The term "capital" derives from the Latin caput, literally meaning "head".[1] Thus, capital punishment is the penalty for a crime so severe that it deserves death, either by decapitation or otherwise.
Prisoners who have been sentenced to death are usually kept segregated from prisoners who have not been sentenced to death in a part of the prison known as "death row" pending their execution.
Methods of execution
The use of capital punishment extends back beyond the dawn of recorded history, and during this large span of time has been carried out by almost all imaginable forms of killing as legal methods of execution. Many of the oldest methods of execution were intentionally brutal, as this suffering was seen to serve a religious or instructive purpose; although, the entertainment value of suffering was valued in many cultures, as seen in Roman executions. Public executions were the norm until recently, whether atop an Aztec pyramid or on a gallows in the town square. Public executions still occured in Europe and the United States in the first half of the 20th century and continue to occur in other countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, although officials and victims or their family members are often present at private executions in other countries.
In some countries, methods of execution were chosen so that the extent of suffering during execution was related to the perceived seriousness of the crime or the class and status of the criminal. High-ranking British nobles were beheaded for treason (a relatively painless death) while lower class individuals were drawn and quartered (a slow, painful death) for the same crime. Roman citizens might be allowed to commit suicide while low class persons might be crucified. In many areas of Europe, murder or rape would earn an execution by hanging, but witchcraft or heresy could require death by burning at the stake.
Trends in most of the world have long been to move to less painful, or more "humane", executions. France developed the guillotine for this reason in the final years of the 18th century while Britain banned drawing and quartering in the early 19th century. "Hanging by the neck until dead", which causes death by suffocation was replaced by "hanging" where the subject is dropped to dislocate the neck and sever the spinal cord. In the U.S., electrocution and the gas chamber, which were introduced as more humane alternatives to hanging, have been almost entirely superceded by lethal injection, which in turn has been criticised as being too painful. Nevertheless, some countries still employ slow hanging methods, beheading by sword and even stoning, although stoning is rarely employed.
Scope of use
Some jurisdictions still practicing capital punishment restrict its use to a small number of criminal offences, principally murder, treason and equated mortal sins such as apostasy. Historically—and still today under certain systems of law—the death penalty was applied to a wider range of offences, including robbery or theft and kidnapping. It has also been frequently used by the military for crimes including looting, insubordination, and mutiny. Armies based on conscription have used death penalty as means of motivation (see coercion) and keeping discipline.
History
Traditionally capital punishment has been a method to deliver human sacrifices to deities. An example is the judicial hanging that was originally a sacrificial rite to Odin. Scandinavian religions demanded human sacrifices not only by hanging, but also by drowning the convict in a marsh (see Kalevala which contains a chapter where Väinämöinen sentences the fatherless Son of Marjatta to be drowned into marsh.) The purpose of capital punishment can also be seen as means to placate wrathful deities and divert their anger and hatred away from the people and towards the victim. Some societies, such as the Aztec, used mass executions of prisoners of war as a religious rite.
In medieval Europe, the method of execution often depended on the social class of the condemned. The nobility were usually executed in as painless and honorable a method as possible, generally with either sword or an axe (which occasionally failed gruesomely). Those in the working class, serfs, peasants, and possibly the bourgeoisie were usually executed publicly, by a more gruesome and painful method, typically by hanging or the wheel. In Scandinavia, the noblemen were beheaded with sword and commoners with axe. Specific crimes sometimes warranted specific methods of execution: suspected witchcraft, religious heresy, atheism, or homosexuality were typically punished by burning at the stake. Unsuccessful regicides generally merited a horrible death. A wide range of offences could be punished by death, including robbery and theft, even if nobody was physically harmed in the action.
Such methods of execution continued into the modern era. In 1757 in France, Robert-François Damiens suffered a horrible but customary execution for his attempted regicide against King Louis XV. His hand, holding the weapon used in the regicide attempt, was burnt, and his body was wounded in several places. Then, molten lead and other hot liquids were poured on the wounds. He was then drawn and quartered, and what remained of his body was burnt at the stake. Inhumane methods of execution and class inequalities were abolished in France during the French Revolution, which imposed the guillotine, seen as a painless and instantaneous method of execution, for all. However, during The Terror, other forms of execution, such as massed cannon fire and mass drownings, were also used.
In early New England, public executions were a very solemn and sorrowful occasion, sometimes attended by large crowds, who also listened to a gospel message[2] and remarks by local preachers[3] and politicians. The Connecticut Courant records one such public execution on December 1, 1803, saying, "The assembly conducted through the whole in a very orderly and solemn manner, so much so, as to occasion an observing gentleman acquainted with other countries as well as this, to say that such an assembly, so decent and solemn, could not be collected anywhere but in New England."[4]
Although the death penalty was briefly banned in China between 747 and 759, the first country in the world to officially and permanently abolish the death penalty was the then-independent Granducato di Toscana (Tuscany). The Grand Duke Leopold II of Habsburg, famous enlightened monarch and future Emperor of Austria, was strongly influenced by the book of the Italian Cesare Beccaria Dei Delitti e Delle Pene ("On Crimes and Punishments"), published in 1764. In this book Beccaria aimed to demonstrate not only the injustice, but even the futility from the point of view of social welfare, of torture and the death penalty. On 30 November 1786, after having de facto blocked capital executions (the last was in 1769), Leopold promulgated the Reform of the penal code that abolished the death penalty and ordered to destroy all the instruments for capital execution in his land. In 2000 Tuscany's regional authorities instituted an annual holiday on 30 November to commemorate the event.
Portugal abolished the death penalty in 1867; the last execution had taken place in 1846. In 1949, Federal Republic of Germany and Costa Rica became the first countries to ban the capital punishment in their constitutions.
In the United States, the state of Michigan was the first state to abolish the death penalty, on March 1, 1847. The 150-year ban on capital punishment has never been repealed, and as such the state is considered to be the first democracy in recorded history to have eliminated capital punishment. Currently, 12 states and the District of Columbia ban capital punishment.
Military
Military organizations have sometimes employed capital punishment. In the past, cowardice, absence without leave, desertion, insubordination, looting, shirking under enemy fire and disobeying orders were often crimes punishable by death. The method of execution since firearms came into common use has almost invariably been firing squad. Today most armies no longer utilize capital punishment, and those armies which still retain the death penalty apply it only to the most serious crimes, such as treason or murder.
Juvenile capital punishment
Only six countries practice the death penalty for juveniles, that is, criminals aged under 18 years at the time of their crime. In the 1980s and 1990s, most executions for juvenile crime took place in the United States, although, due to the slow process of appeals, no one under age 19 has been executed in recent years. [5] [6] In 2005, the US Supreme Court ruled in Roper v. Simmons that the death penalty cannot be applied to persons who were under age 18 at the time of commission of the crime. That decision resulted in 72 convicted murderers being taken off death row. In the US and ancestor bodies politic since 1642, an estimated 364 juvenile offenders have been executed by states and the federal government. Although the People's Republic of China accounts for the vast majority of executions in the world, it does not allow for the executions of those under 18. [7] Execution of those aged under age 18 has occurred in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Pakistan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, and Iran since 1990. [8]
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which among other things forbids capital punishment for juveniles, has been signed and ratified by all countries except the USA and Somalia (Somalia at the present time is unable to ratify).[9]
International organizations
A number of international conventions prohibit the death penalty, most notably the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Sixth Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. However, such conventions bind only those that are party to them; customary international law does not prohibit the death penalty.
Several international organizations have made the abolition of the death penalty a requirement of membership, most notably the European Union (EU) and the Council of Europe. The EU and the Council of Europe are willing to accept a moratorium as an interim measure. Thus, while Russia is a member of the Council of Europe, and practices the death penalty in law, it has not made use of it since becoming a member of the Council. Another example is Latvia which entered a moratorium in 1996. Latvia retains the death penalty in extraordinary circumstances (as does non-EU-member Albania), and is the only EU member not to have ratified the 13th Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights (which prohibits the death penalty in all circumstances). Latvia's parliament has, however, signed the 13th Protocol. As a EU member Latvia has pledged to abolish the death penalty.
Turkey has recently, as a move towards EU membership, undergone a reform of its legal system. Previously there was a de facto moratorium on death penalty in Turkey as the last execution took place in 1984. The death penalty was removed from peacetime law as in August 2002, and in May 2004 Turkey amended its constitution in order to remove capital punishment in all circumstances. As a result, Europe is a continent free of the death penalty in practice (all states having ratified the Sixth Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights), with the sole exception of Belarus, which is not a member of the Council of Europe. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has been lobbying for Council of Europe observer states who practice the death penalty, namely the US and Japan, to abolish it or lose their observer status.
See also
- Use of death penalty worldwide
- Capital punishment in Belarus
- Capital punishment in Canada
- Capital punishment in the People's Republic of China
- Capital punishment in Denmark
- Capital punishment in France
- Capital punishment in Germany
- Capital punishment in India
- Capital punishment in New Zealand
- Capital punishment in Singapore
- Capital punishment in the United Kingdom
- Capital punishment in the United States
- Capital punishment in Japan
Views and opinions concerning the death penalty
Support for the death penalty varies widely, and it can be a highly contentious political issue, particularly in democracies that use it. A decreasing majority of adults in the United States appear to support its continuance (though like most political issues, the numbers vary widely depending on the phrasing of the question asked), but a highly vocal, organised minority of people in that country do not, and non-governmental organisations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch lobby against it globally. In many parts of Asia where it is maintained including Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia the death penalty appears to have large amounts of public support, and there is little public movement to abolish it.
In countries where it has been abolished, debate is sometimes revived by particularly brutal murders, though few countries have brought it back after abolition. However, some opinion polls in Europe and Canada suggest that the death penalty has similar support there to the United States. Others show that the support of the death penalty dropped significantly in the years after the abolition in Western European countries while in most former communist countries there is still a majority for the reintroduction. A recent poll in Italy showed only 23% of respondents in favour of the death penalty.[10] In many countries that have abolished it, it is a matter of policy that the government will oppose its use in any country. This is generally based on the idea that the capital punishment is inherently wrong and can never be justified, which is frequently the reason given for maintaining an abolishment of capital punishment. However, controversially, on some specific occasions a government may choose to ignore this policy; for example the Australian government has refused to condemn, and in fact has on occasion even seemed to offer tacit support of, the use of capital punishment against those involved in the Bali bombing.
There is an ongoing debate as to whether capital punishment reduces crime rates; ideally, potential offenders would be too scared of the punishment to commit the crime. The counterargument is that it doesn't affect the crime rate, because potential criminals think that they won't be caught, so they do not care about punishment until it is too late.
There are even studies that have concluded that the death penalty appears to encourage murder. However, like many questions in the social sciences, actual research data on this question can be (and is) interpreted very differently by people with differing predispositions towards capital punishment. In any event, the actual effectiveness (or lack thereof) is largely irrelevant to many who feel strongly about the debate, as their views are based on other factors.
Secular arguments for and against the death penalty
You must add a |reason=
parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|December 2005|reason=<Fill reason here>}}
, or remove the Cleanup template.
There are two major debates on the death penalty. Utilitarian arguments are about the cost and the benefit of the death penalty to society. The Justice argument is concerned with the question about whether retribution (vengeance) can be regarded as just.
The "Utilitarian" Argument
- Prevention and deterrence
- It can be argued that a killing is justified if such an act could save another life. In the pre-modern period, authorities had neither the resources nor the inclination to detain someone indefinitely. For this reason, the death penalty was usually the only means to prevent a violent criminal from re-offending. Moreover, where there were no standing police forces, the rate of detection for some crimes, such as banditry, were low. In these instances, it was considered necessary to make examples of a few to discourage the rest. After the institution of modern penal systems where criminals could be detained for the rest of their lives, the argument of deterrence versus prevention has become more heated. Some studies have shown a negative correlation between the death penalty and murder rates: [11]. This statistical "correlation" means that either the death penalty increase murder rates (for example, by brutalising the society) or higher murder rates cause the state to retain or reintroduce the death penalty. It is not possible for statistical research on murder rate to prove or disprove that capital punishment deters potential murderers or terrorists because such studies would only demonstrate correlation not causation.
- Economic
- Opponents of the death penalty point out that capital cases usually cost more than life imprisonment due to the extra costs of the courts such as appeals and extra supervisions [12]. Proponents counter this argument by stating that the severity and finality of death as punishment demands that the extra resources be expended. When some death row inmates are freed on appeal or their sentence is reduced, that is a demonstration that the system works thanks to the extra expense of the judicial appeal system. The opponents argue that such reversal is proof that the system doesn't work, especially at the initial trial. For example, in the U.S.A., the accused is allowed to plead guilty so as to avoid the death penalty. This plea requires the accused to forfeit any appeal arguing innocence on material or procedural grounds. Furthermore, by waiving the threat of the death penalty, individuals can be encouraged to plead guilty, accomplices can be encouraged to testify against other defendants, and criminals can be encouraged to lead investigators to the bodies of victims. Proponents of the death penalty, therefore, argue that the death penalty significantly reduces the cost of the judicial process and criminal investigation. However, the use of a plea bargain is banned in many countries because it can encourage the innocent to plead guilty and the guilty to testify against the innocent hence increasing the likelihood of a miscarriage of justice.
The "Justice" Argument
- Miscarriage of Justice
- It is not disputed that criminal proceedings are fallible. Some people facing the death penalty have been exonerated, sometimes only minutes before their scheduled execution. Others have been executed before evidence clearing them is discovered. This has been particularly relevant in cases where new forensic methods (such as DNA) have become available. Since 1973, 122 people in 25 US states have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence. In the US, over 95% of defendants cannot afford legal representation and end up being represented by court-appointed attorneys whose credentials are sometimes weak. Because of this it could be argued that the prosecution has an unfair advantage. Proponents of the death penalty point out that criminal trials not involving the death penalty can also involve mistakes. The opportunity to correct these mistakes exists only during the life of the accused and this window can be short - particularly if the defendant is old. Rarely would anyone accept long incarceration in prison in exchange of monetary compensation. If someone spent a life in jail for a crime he or she did not commit, it could be argued that this is more cruel than the death penalty. Obviously, few suggest that society should abolish prison such that no innocent could be wrongly incarcerated. Proponents of the death penalty argue that the fallibility of criminal proceedings only provides a justification for the improvement of such process whilst opponents believe that the abolition of the death penalty is an essential safeguard against serious miscarriages of justice. Some opponents to the death penalty indeed argue for the removal of punishment/retribution elements from the criminal justice system where the incarceration is only for the purpose of rehabilitation. In such a system, any rehabilitated criminal would be freed no matter how heinous the crime was and, theoretically, the condition of prison should be somewhat comparable to the outside civilian life because the incarceration is done not for the purpose of punishment. This principal is indeed applied in the case of juvenile criminals. This would somewhat remove the theoretical dilemma surrounding miscarriage of justice although no country has explicitly adopted this principle.
- Retribution and Vengeance
- For opponents of the death penalty, execution itself is a violation of human rights. It brutalizes society by sending out the message that killing people is the right thing to do in some circumstances and it denies the possibility of rehabilitation. In most Western nations, retribution, or any benefit to the victim, is not stated as a purpose of the criminal justice system. Similarly, proponents of the death penalty argue that people who have committed the most heinous crimes (typically murder) have no right to life and the abolition of the death penalty is a violation of the victim's rights. The death penalty shows the greatest respect for the ordinary man's, and especially the victim's, inviolable rights and it provides "closure" for victims' families. In modern democracies, most murderers are not executed. The court only imposes the death penalty in case of multiple homicides or unusually horrendous murder. In such cases, the proponents argue that it is the closest and arguably the only acceptable form of justice whilst the opponents argue that vengeance is not justice.
Because the death penalty debate, in the end, often boils down to death penalty being wrong or right with nothing in between, some suggest to leave the choice to the family of the victims or the individuals in the form of living will where people could indicate to the court if they wish to seek the death penalty in case he or she is murdered.
Arguments against
Some of the major arguments used by those opposed to the death penalty include:
- The death penalty is not a deterrent; those who are against the death penalty claim that recent studies in the US do not support the view that capital punishment acts as a deterrent. [13]. It is also argued that anyone who would be deterred by the death penalty would already have been deterred by life in prison, and people that are not deterred by that would not be stopped by any punishment. This argument is typically supported by claims that those states that have implemented the death penalty recently have not had a reduction of violent crime. A stronger variant of this argument suggests that criminals who believe they will face the death penalty are more likely to use violence or murder to avoid capture, and that therefore the death penalty might theoretically even increase the rate of violent crime. [14].
- The death penalty is unnecessary. This view, espoused by Pope John Paul II, an outspoken critic of capital punishment, holds that modern prisons are secure enough to reliably protect society from further harm by death row prisoners, whereas in centuries past, life imprisonment may not have been feasible. Therefore, the death penalty serves no purpose to society and violates the sanctity of human life.
- Criminal proceedings are fallible. Some people facing the death penalty have been exonerated, sometimes only minutes before their scheduled execution. Others have been executed before evidence clearing them is discovered. While criminal trials not involving the death penalty can also involve mistakes, there is at least the opportunity for those mistakes to be corrected. This has been particularly relevant in cases where new forensic methods (such as DNA) have become available. Since 1973, 122 people in 25 US states have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence. The Houston Chronicle reported on November 19, 2005 that a man named Ruben Cantu probably was innocent of the crime for which he was executed in Texas in 1993. [15]
- Death penalty as armed forces' disciplinarian means usually has the opposite effect than desired, eroding the morale of the troops rather than improving it, and striking a wedge between the commissioned and enlisted servicemen as the latter are likely to consider shooting their own as murder. In extreme cases death penalty may lead to fragging incidents.
- Capital punishment usually costs more money than life in prison due to the extra costs of the courts such as mis-trials, appeals, and extra supervisions. Additionally, many (if not a majority) of death sentences are overturned on appeal. So the cost is incurred, regardless of the result.
- In the US, over 95% of defendants cannot afford legal representation and end up being represented by court-appointed attorneys whose credentials are sometimes questioned.
- It denies the possibility of rehabilitation. Some hold that a judicial system should have the role of educating and reforming those found guilty of crimes. If one is executed he will never have been educated and made a better person. A Christian variant of this argument would be that no one can place themselves beyond salvation, so society should never give up hope of rehabilitation.
- Some argue that, in the US, the race of the person to be executed can affect the likelihood that they receive a death sentence. Death-penalty proponents counter this by pointing out that most murders where the killer and victim are of the same race tend to be "crimes of passion" while inter-racial murders are usually "felony murders"; that is, murders which were perpetrated during the commission of some other felony (most commonly either armed robbery or rape), the point being that juries are more likely to impose the death penalty in cases where the offender has killed a total stranger than in those where some deep-seated, personal revenge motive may be present. A recent study showed that just 44% of Black Americans support the death penalty. [16]
- Capital punishment has been used politically to silence dissidents, minority religions and activists. A major exponent of this is the People's Republic of China from which there are many reports of the death penalty being used for politically motivated ends. [17]
- In most Western nations, retribution, or any benefit to the victims, is not stated as a purpose of the criminal justice system.
- Some executions are botched, lethal injection in the US having the highest rate according to Amnesty International. This is often due to the fact that qualified medical professionals are prohibited from taking part. Even those who die instantly may suffer prolonged mental anguish leading up to the execution. Other procedures, including the electric chair, cyanide gas chamber and hanging are rarely fast or effective processes and are not designed to minimize pain and suffering.
- Some argue that the death penalty is a violation of human rights primarily Article 3 and Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Some assert that it violates the "natural rights" laid out by 17th-century English philosopher John Locke who set out many of the foundations of American law. The American Declaration of Independence also includes the "right to life" as the first listed of the natural rights. While those against capital punishment might claim this as an irrevocable right, proponents may claim that, as protection from abuse is the basis of such rights, that the right was forfeit by the seriousness of the crimes.
- An International Gallup poll undertaken in 2000 found that 60% of western Europeans opposed the death penalty. In France, a TNS Sofres poll revealed that twenty years after abolition of capital punishment, 49% of respondents opposed reintroduction of the policy compared with 44% who wanted to reinstate capital punishment. In 2000, a poll in Germany found the percentage of West Germans in favor of capital punishment at just 23% the lowest level in Europe. Just 37% of East Germans favored capital punishment in 2000. (Financial Times, August 22, 2003) A recent US study found that 41% of the public voted in favor of capital punishment, whilst a higher percentage of 44% voted against the death penalty when voters were offered alternative sentences. The most popular alternative to capital punishment being "life without parole" and some form of restitution to the families of victims. [18] In the United States it is argued that most other developed nations have eliminated the death penalty.
- The death penalty has led to the death row phenomenon, severe psychological distress among prisoners on death row.
Arguments for
- Retribution — In modern democracies, most murders do not get the death penalty. The court only imposes death penalty in case of multiple homicides or unusually horrendous murder. In such cases, the proponent of death penalty argue that it is the closest and arguably the only acceptable form of justice.
- Deterrence — Many econometric studies have shown a negative relationship between the death penalty and murder rates [19]. In most survey when those who support death penalty were asked the reason(s) for his or her support, retribution is listed as the main reason while deterrence comes next. (See above section for reference to statistics)
- Means of maintaining discipline in the armed forces. This can be best summarized by statement of Leon Trotsky: An army cannot be built without reprisals. Masses of men cannot be led to death unless the army command has the death penalty in its arsenal. So long as those malicious tailless apes that are so proud of their technical achievements — the animals that we call men — will build armies and wage wars, the command will always be obliged to place the soldiers between the possible death in the front and the inevitable one in the rear.
- Prevention — it prevents offenders from ever returning to society (life sentences hold out the possibility, however remote, of eventual release), thereby preventing them from committing further crimes.
- It shows how seriously society looks at the most heinous crimes. People who have committed the most heinous crimes (typically murder) have no right to life. The death penalty shows the greatest respect for the ordinary man's, and especially the victim's, inviolable value.
- It provides "closure" for victims' families.
- It is less cruel than prolonged imprisonment, especially under the conditions that might be popularly demanded for heinous criminals. Depending on the State, prisoners spend about six to twelve years on death row.
- It provides extra leverage for the prosecutor to deal for important testimony and information.
- It enjoys popular support (in countries where this applies).
- Life imprisonment is very expensive.
- Just as the virtuous deserve reward proportionate to their good deeds, so too the vicious deserve punishment proportionate to their bad deeds. One might even hold, with Kant, that respect is shown to the criminal as someone who has chosen a particular path in life by visiting the appropriate punishment on the criminal.
- Criminals may be led to rethink and reconcile their lives by the pressing expectation of death.
- It upholds the rule of law, because it discourages vigilantism on the part of the victim's family or friends (in the form of lynching or retaliatory murder). If not controlled, such actions can lead to extremely destructive vendettas or blood feuds.
- Without the death penalty, a person already serving a life sentence may have no reason not to kill in prison.
- If the death penalty were abolished, a criminal would have little or no reason not to kill potential witnesses during the commission of a robbery (assuming that robbery would earn the criminal a life sentence or a very lengthy prison sentence).
- By waiving the threat of a death penalty, individuals can be encouraged to plead guilty, accomplices can be encouraged to testify against their co-conspirators, and criminals can be encouraged to lead investigators to the bodies of victims. The threat of the death penalty can be a powerful mechanism for greasing the wheels of justice.
Religious attitudes towards the death penalty
Buddhism and capital punishment
The first of the Five Precepts (Panca-sila) is to abstain from destruction of life. Chapter 10 of the Dhammapada states "Everyone fears punishment; everyone fears death, just as you do. Therefore do not kill or cause to kill. Everyone fears punishment; everyone loves life, as you do. Therefore do not kill or cause to kill." Chapter 26, the final chapter of the Dhammapada states "Him I call a brahmin who has put aside weapons and renounced violence toward all creatures. He neither kills nor helps others to kill." This is interpreted by many Buddhists (especially in the West) as an injunction against supporting any legal measure which might lead to the death penalty.
However, as is often the case with the interpretation of scripture, there is dispute on this matter. Thailand where Buddhism is the official religion, practices the death penalty. Other countries where the majority of the population are Buddhist (such as Sri Lanka, Japan, Korea and Taiwan) also retain the death penalty. Moreover, almost throughout history, countries where Buddhism was the official religion (most of the Far East and Indochina) practiced the death penalty. One exception is when in Japan Emperor Saga abolished death penalty in 818, which lasted until 1165, although in private manors executions in retaliation to other events continued to be conducted.
The first precept of Buddhism focuses mainly on direct participation in the destruction of life. This is one reason that the Buddha made a distinction between killing animals and eating meat, and refused to introduce vegetarianism into monastic practice (see Vegetarian section of Buddhism). In Jataka, which tell stories of the past lives of the Buddha, Boddisatva (a previous incarnation of the Buddha) actually kills someone to save another person's life, though because of this action, he was no longer able to achieve enlightenment in that particular life. Therefore, few (if any) Buddhist groups issue blanket decrees against Buddhists being soldiers, police officers or farmers (which in Buddhism is classified as a profession involved in destruction of life), and some argue that the death penalty is permissible in certain circumstances. In general, Buddhist groups in secular countries such as Japan, Korea and Taiwan tend to take anti-death penalty stance while those in Thailand, Sri Lanka and Bhutan where Buddhism has strong political influence, the opposite is true.
Almost all Buddhist groups oppose the use of the death penalty as a means of retribution.
Christianity and capital punishment
Christians are divided on the issue of capital punishment - some are in favour, some are against it under all circumstances. Firstly, there is a tendency for Christian opinions to match those of the countries they live in; many Christians based outside the USA are against capital punishment, while some Christians of largely American denominations are in favor of it. Often overlooked is the fact that virtually all of the mainline Christian churches in the United states have maintained official positions against the death penalty since the 1950s and early 1960s. [See http://www.pfadp.org People of Faith Against the Death Penalty] Secondly, various Christian groups, including members of the Catholic Church, tend to oppose it while most conservative Protestant groups support it—exceptions to this rule include the Amish and Mennonites as they oppose the death penalty.
Pope John Paul II described capital punishment as part of a "culture of death". Many Roman Catholics, especially in America, tended to agree with his view, which is a clear testament to his influence over the Roman Catholic Church of his time. However, the Church as a whole is not completely opposed to the death penalty under all circumstances as a matter of doctrine; rather, John Paul II, as an individual, was opposed to it. The official church teaching however, is that capital punishment can be necessary at times when a society does not have the means to keep its citizens safe from criminals. Catholics are called to oppose the death penalty if the condemned can be successfully kept behind bars to protect society. If, however, the condemned poses a threat to the well-being of society and is not likely to be able to be kept behind bars then capital punishment is permissible. However, this last exception in the modern day world seems extremely rare.
Those in favor of capital punishment often point to passages in the Old Testament that advocate the death penalty such as Genesis 9 which states, "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man." Those against tend to select their passages from the New Testament that advocate love, forgiveness, and mercy. In Matthew 5:38-39, Jesus says, "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also…"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven."
In John 8, a story is told of a woman who was caught in the act of adultery. The Old Testament Law demanded that she be put to death by stoning; Jesus saves her life by requiring that the first stone be cast by someone who has never sinned, and rather than take that role himself, simply tells the woman not to transgress again.
Another verse quoted often by supporters of capital punishment is Romans 13:4, "...But if you do evil, be afraid; for [the governing authority] does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil." - supporters point to the fact that a sword is a instrument used for killing, not scourging.
Interpreting the Bible as a story of man's redemption through repentance to Christ, some Christians argue that by executing a murderer we are cutting short his life and taking away his opportunity to repent. Some conservative Christian groups who believe in a literal Hell argue that all who die without repentance automatically go there, and point out that many serial killers, including Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy, became born again Christians in prison. The less forgiving might observe that the families of their victims are unlikely to be comforted by the prospect of these men entering heaven.
Christianity is based on the teachings of Christ. Therefore advocating the Old Testament over the New Testament has been argued against by groups such as Quakers and some non-Christian critics to show inconsistency in the views of pro capital punishment Christians.
Judaism and capital punishment
The Jewish view of all laws in the Bible is based on the reading of the Bible as seen through Judaism's corpus of oral law. These oral laws were first recorded around 200 CE in the Mishnah and later around 600 CE in the Babylonian Talmud.
The laws make it clear that the death penalty was only used in very rare cases. The Mishnah states that "A Sanhedrin that puts a man to death once in seven years is called destructive. Rabbi Eliezer ben Azariah says: a Sanhedrin that puts a man to death even once in 70 years. Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Tarfon say: Had we been in the Sanhedrin none would ever have been put to death" (Mishnah, Makkot 1:10).
Rabbinic law developed a detailed system of checks and balances to make sure that the penalty could only be carried out:
- if there were two witnesses to the crime. Witnesses must conform to a prescribed list of criteria. For example, females and close relatives of the criminal are precluded according to Bibilical law, while full-time gamblers are precluded as a matter of Rabbinical law.
- if the witnesses verbally warned the person that they were liable for the death penalty
- if that person then acknowledged that he/she was warned, yet then went ahead and committed the sin regardless.
- Further, an individual was not allowed to testify against him/herself.
As such, the death penalty was effectively legislated out of existence. Today, the State of Israel only uses the death penalty for extraordinary crimes. The last – and only – execution in Israel took place in 1962 against convicted Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann. It should be noted, though, that Israeli employment of the death penalty has little to do with Jewish law.
In Orthodox Judaism, it is held that in theory the death penalty is a correct and just punishment for some crimes. However in practice the application of such a punishment can only be carried out by humans whose system of justice is nearly perfect, a situation which has not existed for some time.
Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan writes: "In practice, however, these punishments were almost never invoked, and existed mainly as a deterrent and to indicate the seriousness of the sins for which they were prescribed. The rules of evidence and other safeguards that the Torah provides to protect the accused made it all but impossible to actually invoke these penalties…the system of judicial punishments could become brutal and barbaric unless administered in an atmosphere of the highest morality and piety. When these standards declined among the Jewish people, the Sanhedrin...voluntarily abolished this system of penalties." (Kaplan, Handbook of Jewish Thought, Volume II, pp. 170-71)
Rabbi Yosef Edelstein, Director of the Savannah Kollel, writes:
- So, at least theoretically, the Torah can be said to be pro-capital punishment. It is not morally wrong, in absolute terms, to put a murderer to death....
- However, things look rather different when we turn our attention to the practical realization of this seemingly harsh legislation. You may be aware that it was exceedingly difficult, in practice, to carry out the death penalty in Jewish society...
- ....I think it's clear that with regard to Jewish jurisprudence, the capital punishment outlined by the Written and Oral Torah, and as carried out by the greatest Sages from among our people (who were paragons of humility and humanity and not just scholarship, needless to say), did not remotely resemble the death penalty in modern America (or Texas).
- In theory, capital punishment is kosher; it's morally right, in the Torah's eyes. But we have seen that there was great concern—expressed both in the legislation of the Torah, and in the sentiments of some of our great Sages—regarding its practical implementation. It was carried out in ancient Israel, but only with great difficulty. Once in seven years; not 135 in five and a half.
In Conservative Judaism, the Rabbinical Assembly's Committee on Jewish Law and Standards approved a 1960 responsa by Rabbi Ben Zion Bokser on capital punishment. It states, in part:
- The Talmud ruled out the admissibility of circumstantial evidence in cases which involved a capital crime. Two witnesses were required to testify that they saw the action with their own eyes. A man could not be found guilty of a capital crime through his own confession or through the testimony of immediate members of his family. The rabbis demanded a condition of cool premeditation in the act of crime before their would sanction the death penalty; the specific test on which they insisted was that the criminal be warned prior to the crime, and that the criminal indicate by responding to the warning, that he is fully aware of his deed, but that he is determined to go through with it. In effect this did away with the application of the death penalty. The rabbis were aware of this, and they declared openly that they found capital punishment repugnant to them…There is another reason which argues for the abolition of capital punishment. It is the fact of human fallibility. Too often we learn of people who were convicted of crimes and only later are new facts uncovered by which their innocence is established. The doors of the jail can be opened, in such cases we can partially undo the injustice. But the dead cannot be brought back to life again. We regard all forms of capital punishment as barbaric and obsolete…"
- Proceedings of the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards 1927-1970 Volume III, p.1537-1538
Islam and capital punishment
Islamic scholars state that whilst the Qur'an professes the basic principle that everyone has the right to life, this principle allows for an exception when a court of law demands it. Their precept is "Do not kill a Soul which Allah has made sacred except through the due process of law." This exception authorizes the administration of capital punishment when Islamic law dictates. This is the line taken by most if not all countries where Islam is the state religion or the principal religion (e.g. throughout the Arab world, Indonesia, Malaysia etc.).
Islamic scholars also point out that Sharia (Qur'anic law) contains many safeguards to prevent miscarriage of justice. Sharia also has a clear injunction that strict equivalence must be observed; therefore if a woman kills a man, or a man kills a woman, or a slave kills a free person, or a free person kills a slave, capital punishment cannot be applied. One notable characteristic of Sharia is that the family of a murder victim can pardon the murderer. In Islam, the victim and/or the victim's family are the judges for all crimes; they decide what the punishment shall be under the supervision of a person who knows the Qur'an.
Hinduism and capital punishment
Hinduism preaches ahimsa (non-violence), but also teaches that the soul cannot be killed and death is limited only to the physical body. The soul is reborn into another body upon death (until Moksha), akin to a human changing clothes.
The religious, civil and criminal law of Hindus is encoded in the Dharmasastras and the Arthasastra. The Dharmasastras describe many crimes and their punishments and calls for the death penalty in several instances.
There are also aspects of Hindu teaching which can be invoked to prevent the use of the death penalty. The Mahabharata contains passages arguing against the use of the death penalty in all cases. An example is a dialogue between King Dyumatsena and his son Prince Satyavan (section 257 of the Santiparva) where a number of men are brought out for execution at the King's command.
- Prince Satyavan says: Sometimes virtue assumes the form of sin and sin assumes the form of virtue. It is not possible that the destruction of individuals can ever be virtuous.
- King Dyumatsena replies: If the sparing of those who should be killed be virtuous, if robbers be spared, Satyavan, all distinction between virtue and vice will disappear.
- Satyavan responds: Without destroying the body of the offender, the king should punish him as ordained by the scriptures. The king should not act otherwise, neglecting to reflect upon the character of the offence and upon the science of morality. By killing the wrongdoer, the King kills a large number of his innocent men. Behold by killing a single robber, his wife, mother, father and children, all are killed. When injured by wicked persons, the king should therefore think seriously on the question of punishment. Sometimes a wicked person is seen to imbibe good conduct from a pious man. It is seen that good children spring from wicked persons. The wicked should not therefore be exterminated. The extermination of the wicked is not in consonance with the eternal law.
In arts and entertainment
Literature
In the short story by Edgar Allen Poe, The Black Cat, the narrator is writing the day before he is put to death.
In The Stranger (L'Etranger) by Albert Camus, the main character is sentenced to death for shooting and killing an Arab on the beach.
Victor Hugo's The Last Day of a Condemned Man (Le Dernier Jour d'un condamné) describes the thoughts of a condemned man just before his execution; also notable is its preface, in which Hugo argues at length against capital punishment.
In The Chamber by John Grisham, a young lawyer tries to save a klansman on death row who is awaiting his execution in the gas chamber.
In An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge by Ambrose Bierce, the main character is sentenced to be hanged, but escapes back to his home. Near the end of his journey, it is shown that his entire escape sequence was a vision in the seconds before the rope breaks his neck. There have been at least three film adaptations.
Art
The electric chair was used to promote the electric industry in the early days of its inception and was by 1971 an icon of Americana. Andy Warhol famously depicted the electric chair in his 1971 screenprint series. The image was repeatedly printed in a range of colors including pink, blue and yellow. Warhol's art often demonstrated a preoccupation with death, and dealt directly with the commercialisation of violence and the ease with which modern technology had made killing possible.
Malaquias Montoya is an artist and professor of art at the University of California, Davis. His works of art dealing with the death penalty occasionally tour in a show entitled "Premeditated: Meditations on Capital Punishment, Recent Works by Malaquias Montoya". [20]
Film
Capital punishment has been the basis of many motion pictures including Dead Man Walking based on the book by Sister Helen Prejean, The Green Mile, and The Life of David Gale.
TV
- On the television drama The West Wing episode called "Take This Sabbath Day", President Bartlet and his senior staff face the moral and political struggle associated with the death penalty.
- The TV Show Prison Break is about a man trying to save his brother from the death penalty.
External links
Country by country list of legal position of Death Penalty from Encarta: [21]
Anti-Death Penalty
- The Death Penalty Information Center: Statistical information and studies
- Texas Moratorium Network: Advocacy group seeking a moratorium on executions in Texas
- Amnesty International: Human Rights organisation
- European Union - Information on anti-death penalty policies
- People of Faith Against the Death Penalty: Southern US-based advocacy group
- Reprieve.org: United States based volunteer program for foreign lawyers, students, and others to work at death penalty defense offices
- Death Penalty Quotes: Offers thoughts grouped by profession
- United States Conference of Catholic Bishops: details the Catholic Campaign to End the Use of the Death Penalty
- Michigan's Capital Punishment History
- Campaign to End the Death Penalty
Pro-Death Penalty
- Pro Death Penalty.com
- Pro Death Penalty Resource Page
- Clark County, Indiana, Prosecutor's Page on capital punishment
Pro-Death Penalty Historical documents
- Execution of Caleb Adams: Caleb Adams was publicly executed in Windham, Connecticut, USA, on November 29, 1803 for the brutal murder of six-year-old Oliver Woodworth.
Buddhist views of the death penalty
- The Dalai Lama - Message Supporting the Moratorium on the Death Penalty
- Buddhism & Capital Punishment from The Engaged Zen Society