Abstract
The death penalty has been a subject of debate among scholars and critics which resulted in various contributions to the issue made by different scientists. The death penalty is a very contentious issue, especially in the modern society where rates of crimes are rather high. This research paper attempts to critically analyze and evaluate the pros and cons of the death penalty and its impact on the society as viewed by various scholars. Some critics (Henderson, 2002) suggest that the capital punishment should be abolished while others argue that it should be utilized for the overall good of the human society. To put it in simple terms, the capital punishment is the lawfully conditioned killing of a criminal through the judicial process for retribution. The capital punishment has been practiced in almost all the societies and all epochs in the development of the mankind. Religious movements have always declared their wish to fight it. However, no religion of the world, whether it is Christianity, Judaism, Islam or any other, has ever protested against it in reality. Social organizations, political parties and public unions of people have always expressed their various points of view on this issue, but these facts have never amounted to anything specific but lots of controversy in the society (Edds, 2004).
Introduction
The death penalty has been used to punish those who commit serious crimes including murder, mass murder, rape, treason and crimes against humanity. It is defined as the lawful infliction of death as way of punishing those who have committed an offence. Even the Holy Bible addresses this type of punishment as the only applicable to murderers and kidnappers. The first documentary evidence of adoption of the death penalty roots from the 16th century England. The introduction of the new Capital Offence Act by the British Parliament in the 17th century led to the substantial increase in capital punishments carried out yearly. Under the Waltham Blacks Acts, between 1750 and 1850, thousands of criminals were executed by the English authorities (Atwood, 2005).
In the human society, such serious issues as the capital punishment have always caused lots of controversial opinions. Accordingly, to fight such a wide range of opinions and the political dissent on the whole, the societies of different epochs invented different methods of execution. The capital punishment was one of the methods to eliminate those disagreeing with the official line of the Government, as well as those protesting against the death penalty as such (Scheck & Peter, 2001). Also, numerous countries implemented the death penalty in their military justice organs and tribunals as a means of punishing people guilty of espionage and treason. Sexual offences have also been defined as such that are subject to the death penalty – rape, adultery, sodomy were all followed by the capital punishment. Certain critics go so far as offer the capital punishment to be spread over the religious sphere as a means of dealing with people guilty of apostasy. Finally, drug trafficking is viewed as a capital offence in many counties, especially in such Asian states as Thailand, China, etc (Edds, 2004).
China is one of the countries where human trafficking and corruption cases are considered capital offences resulting in the executions of those guilty of these offences. The country has adopted this form of punishment in dealing with cowardice, desertion and insubordination taking place in the military forces (Beccaria, 2004).
The use of the capital punishment dates back to the ancient times. The pre-historic period of the existence of the mankind was already marked with the executions of people in primitive tribes and family communities. Already in those times, people had their own views on laws and principles of retribution. “Eye for eye” was a usual principle according to which the first human civilizations lived and developed their legislatures. However, the low rates of murder and other capital offences resulted in the existence of numerous alternatives to the death penalty in the ancient societies. Financial compensations, exile or banishment were viewed as more humane and less problematic ways to punish capital offenders. However, these alternatives were implemented only in relation to the community members while the outsiders were subjected either to slavery or the death penalty for the serious crimes (Bigel, 2000).
Finally, the blood feuds were rather often observed in the ancient societies as the instruments of justice in cases when the state authorities failed to settle the disputes between the conflicting parties. The actual situation and the specific context of the crime determined the seriousness of the punishment that was to be implemented in every particular case. Religious customs and traditions also had considerable power over the people’s minds in respect of choosing a respective way to punish a criminal for this or that offence (Beccaria, 2004).
Literature Review
Different scholars have contributed in various manners to the research on this contentious issue which is applicable to all the human societies. As usual, there are numerous supporters of the death penalty as a means to build the society based on law and order. On the other hand, the opponents of this punishment measure also express their opinions saying that the capital punishment does not solve the social issues and does not reduce crime rates all over the world. Novels, films and famous non-fiction works present matters relating to the death penalty in a very debatable way. Atwood (2005) is one of the early contributors to this controversial issue and his suggestion is based on the effects of culture on implementation of the capital punishment in the society. He suggests that culture that dominates a society acts as an instrument for manipulation and humanization of real life stories of people who commit crimes and other acts of legal intricacies that are prohibited by the criminal justice system of every particular state. The author educates the society as a whole on litigious issues of the death penalty introduction and on the arguments presented by those calling for the capital punishment in the country. He also presents these contentious issues through well known films and writings. Atwood (2005) suggests that the way the capital punishment is used in the society is attributed to its peculiarities, and if changes are to be done, they should start with the reform of the society as such and only then move on to the capital punishment system.
The capital punishment is mostly used in the societies where culture of impunity is dominant. The epoch of Colonialism in America demonstrates this point vividly. Banner and Staut (2004) through their book, “Death Penalty”, critically scrutinize the changes that have occurred in the nature of the death penalty in the US which has adopted the capital punishment as part of the administration system. The death penalty eliminates the worst criminals in the society if administered properly in the state. Banner and Staut (2004) suggest that the capital punishment should not concern those innocent of any offences or convicted by mistake. Although it is an effective way of eliminating the most dangerous criminals from the society, innocent people can suffer from it. So, implementation of the capital punishment should be strictly controlled.
Banner and Staut (2004) continue their argument stating that US community has established the Constitution which accommodates the death penalty for social purposes. Banner argues that for proper implementation of the policy, it is necessary to clearly understand legal, constitutional and moral aspects of the capital punishment system. He also suggests that the death penalty should be carried out in a very procedural manner in order to reflect the moral values in the society. Moreover, Banner states that the capital punishment should be carried out in accordance with the law to avoid any violations of the Constitution. According to Staut, fair punishment can be carried out only if all the procedures of investigation, trial and execution are conducted in conformity with the laws of the country (Banner & Staut, 2004).
Some prominent philosophers and scholars such as Bigel (2000) argue that opinions on the capital punishment have been evolving all the time. According to Bigel, the capital punishment should not be practiced in the society. Early philosophers protested against the idea of the capital punishment to be used in relation to wrongdoers as far as it contradicted the idea of human rights and violated the right of any person for life. Bigel’s work is mainly concerned with the abolishment of the capital punishment by underscoring the public opinions through the open debate. He suggests the discussion of the demerits that the capital punishment carries, and calls for the public consideration of the latter. The capital punishment is not effective since it is not a guarantee of the elimination of crimes from the society. Bigel also argues that reforms should be made in the criminal justice systems that are used in the modern society. The death penalty used in relation to wrongfully convicted innocent people and the lack of justice for the poor are the phenomena demanding the abolition of the capital punishment (Bigel, ).
Scheck and Peter (2001) develop the topic of those innocent executed in the countries of Europe making use of the capital punishment. The authors list such factors as fear of witnesses, the activities of snitches to falsify testimony, insufficient defense counsel in most countries, false confessions by the victims, racism that can be observed in most European countries and mistakes of the judicial systems as the basic ones that lead to convictions of innocent people. Peter argues that it is very difficult to prove whether the death penalty deters people from committing crimes. Although considerable data suggest that people fear the capital punishment, it is not proven that actual crime rates can be reduced by its introduction. Moreover, the ancient philosophers argued about the impossibility of the capital punishment of those committing their crimes in a fit of anger or fear. Only the planned capital offences are subject to this kind of punishment (Scheck & Peter, 2001).
Corruption in the highest levels of the court system of every state is also a usual phenomenon which might result in the execution of an innocent person. For example, criminals related somehow to the top ranking judicial officials might avoid punishment, while to fill in this gap an innocent person might be found guilty and executed. Racism also constitutes a great problem in this respect as far as discriminated minorities, like African Americans, Native Americans, etc., are often tried without the proper diligence and convicted wrongfully. Edds (2004) suggests that state has to classify offences more strictly into those subject to the capital punishment and other less serious crimes. The author further argues that most countries still support the capital punishment. Thus, the citizens should be given the freedom to exercise their rights through voting. In this way, they can support the form of punishment that they wish to be used in their country. It is necessary for the state to consider the opinions of its citizens in ruling such serious issues. This will enable the state to impose the policy effectively in the society so as to avoid protest manifestations or riots. However, Edds suggests that the capital punishment is better than life imprisonment since it requires limited resources and allows the government to save the money of taxpayers for some other sectors of economy. Imprisonment of murderers, rapists, and drug traffickers can be very expensive, and the author sees no reason for ordinary citizens to fund this (Edds, 2004).
Discussion
A fair and just society is the one where each individual is equal in his or her rights for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to all other members of this society. However, certain activities by society members violate these basic freedoms, and often violate the laws according to which the society lives. The capital punishment can be adopted to deal with such cases. Anti-social and immoral behavioral patterns should be eliminated from the society, even by means of the capital punishment. Human life is viewed as the fundamental value of the society, and the death penalty can be best employed to deal with activities that deliberately deny this value’s priority. On the other hand, it should be kept in mind that innocent people might be wrongfully convicted and executed, and to avoid this, the judicial systems of all countries should be improved.
However, there are marginal specific cases that demand closer consideration. Certain criminals sometime do accept that they have committed an offence such as murder but do not accept that it is an offence to be punished with the death penalty (Edds, 2004). This is another very significant danger that calls for more analysis and evaluation of the capital punishment before introducing it in the society. Definitions of the offences eligible for the capital punishments should be as clear as possible so that no one could challenge them and trick the law. The access of the court system to the most updated and adequate materials in this or that case should also be ensured for the accurate investigation procedure and verdict making. Finally, the failures and mistakes of the court and judicial systems should be eliminated so that not to allow convicting and executing innocent people because of the improperly conducted investigation, lack of evidence or corruption among the top ranking judicial officials (Edds, 2004).
The death penalty has the effect of causing trauma among the family members of the convicted persons. This trauma can be either moral or financial, or both. The family members and friends of the convicted innocent person have a duty to follow the proceedings in the court of law during the trial. This, in its turn, has the effect of weakening the financial position of the family. Moreover, following the court orders and hiring lawyers to defend the accused person all have negative impact on the financial and moral state of the family. Finally, families, as the most important parts of the human society, are broken by the court system through conviction of innocent people, which affects not only the criminals or innocent convicts, but also all their close friends, relatives, etc. (Albert, 2005)
The controversial and problematic situation with the implementation of the capital punishment in the numerous countries all over the world has long needed the practical solution. However, the disputes on the necessity or dangerousness of the capital punishment have not yet gone beyond the disputes as such. Certain European countries have abolished the death penalty and substituted it with the life imprisonment. Nevertheless, such a step has not brought the expected results, and there are numerous opinions in those countries that demand the restoration of the death penalty for the safety of the society (Johnson, 2000).
Also, the proper operation of the judicial and court systems is in question in many countries. Disputes are still being developed as for the tools to ensure the objective and non-biased trials for those accused of the capital offences. Courts prove to be not efficient in numerous cases concerning the death penalty. Prisoners, as a result, are left waiting for the court decision for several months or years; even longer periods are usually needed by the accused people to receive the ruling of the Court of Appeals in respect of their claims. Racism is the issue, which, aside of being difficult in itself, impacts the above mentioned drawbacks substantially. Racial discrimination can often be observed in the court rulings, which tend to acquit the representatives of the dominant races in a society, and convict the minority members irrespective of the evidence available (Johnson, 2000).
In addition to all the above said, it should be kept in mind that the capital punishment was first mentioned in the Old Testament. The bible clearly described the form of punishment that should be given to a person who sheds the blood of another person. Capital punishment was instituted by God as we can read from Genesis, “Whoever sheds man’s blood by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God, He made man.” However, it is also necessary to realize, that the introduction of the capital punishment depends much upon the principles of human life and law, rather than on the religious dogmas. Accordingly, people should find the ideal balance between the religious rulings and the principles of the legislation to establish either the absolute abolition of the death penalty or reduce its usage to certain specific cases stipulated in the Constitution (John, 2000).
Conclusion
It is evident that the capital punishment violates the basic human rights and freedoms. Racism and sexual discrimination are the phenomena that worsen the situation with the capital punishment implementation in many countries as discriminated minorities are executed more often that the representatives of dominant social groups. Moreover, implementation of the capital punishment is not the universal instrument to eliminate crimes from the society and deter people from crime commitment. Accordingly, in these issues human beings have to find the so-called “golden middle” between the capital punishment and human rights so that to achieve both – reduce crimes rates in the society and ensure the basic human rights and freedoms for every human person.
Reference
Albert, C. (2005). Ultimate Punishment: The Private Life of the American Capital Punishment. New York: HarperCollins.
Atwood, M. 2005. Capital Punishment. New York: Peter Lang, 130-150.
Banner & Staut, (2004). Death Penalty. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
Beccaria, C. (2004). Death Penalty. New York: New York University Press
Bigel, A. (2000). Justice and Capital Punishment. Lanham, MD.: University Press of America.
Edds, M. (2004). Dispensable Persons: A Study of the Modern Execution Process. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company
Henderson, H. (2002). Capital Punishment. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
John, C. (2000). God’s Mercy. New York: W.W. Norton.
Johnson, R. (2000). Death Work: An Eyewitness Account of the Death Penalty in the United States. Wadsworth Publishing Company
Scheck, Neufeld & Peter, R. (2001). Actual Innocence. Westport, CN: Greenwood Press.