Abolish the Death Sentence Essay Example
Abolish the Death Sentence Essay Example

Abolish the Death Sentence Essay Example

Available Only on StudyHippo
  • Pages: 6 (1385 words)
  • Published: June 18, 2022
View Entire Sample
Text preview

Issuing of the death penalty for crimes started a long time ago with the first sentence taking place in Egypt in the 16th century BC. There are various forms of execution employed among them, shooting, beheading, lethal injection, and hanging. The war against issuing of death penalties has been going on since time immemorial. The first state to abolish it was Michigan in 1846 and since then, there have been many death penalty abolition movements working and campaigning for its abolition. While unfortunately, not all countries have been able to do away with the capital punishment, a lot of reforms are put in place in its issuing by the introduction of faster and significantly less painful and humiliating means. However no matter how humane or rosy an execution method employed may be, it does not justify issuing of death penalties in any way. Capital punishments s


erve no significant purpose therefore discarded.
First and foremost, in the death sentences issued in most countries, the trials do not meet the international fair trial standards.  The death penalty is irreversible and irreparable, and thus human rights treaties and covenants agree with the need for a fair hearing in a court of law. The international standards relating to a fair trial includes the right to a fair trial, freedom from compulsory self-incrimination, the right to legal defense and also right to appeal in criminal cases. There have always been a good number of failures of the prosecution to disclose exculpatory evidence and other prosecutorial misconducts, leading to wrongful executions, for instance in Japan. Cases of inadequate legal representation, inappropriate investigations, racial prejudice, torture, and falsified evidence are also high. In

View entire sample
Join StudyHippo to see entire essay

some countries like Malawi, most prisoners cannot appeal their convictions, because the defense counsels are not assigned to handle the requests.

Moreover, in many cases, some of the victims of death penalties are always innocent. Most of them are usually tortured and subjected to other forms of ill-treatment to get them to "confess" their crimes. Cases of such behavior are in records in countries such as China, Iraq, and North Korea. According to research carried out by a team of legal experts in Michigan, at least 4.1% of the defendants sentenced to death in the USA alone are always innocent. Many people have been wrongfully put on the death row only to be declared innocent later. Availability of DNA testing has been useful in uncovering false convictions (Kazuko, 1252). Most of the times, however, the discovery of a wrongful conviction does not serve the purpose of delivering justice because it is usually too late by then. A more reliable form of punishment rather killing people has to be implemented.

By punishing people via death does not reduce the crime rates. There is simply no convincing evidence that capital punishment lowers the number of murders better than long-term prison sentences (Nathanson, 8). As much as people argue that the capital punishment instills fear of partaking in criminal acts, it does not in any way serve to prevent people from still committing them. Actually, in countries like China and others in the Middle East where the capital punishment is mostly practiced, with China having the highest executions carried out, there is no significant reduction in the crime rates. Neither is there more crime or less of it in states

that have abolished the death penalty.

As such, the idea that capital penalty can reduce the crime rate is not right.
Besides, some of the reasons given for sentencing people to death are petty and ridiculous and have to be instead punished differently like by giving life imprisonment without quittance. For instance, drug related crimes are punishable by death sentence in countries Asia and the Middle East. So is partaking in adultery in Maldives and Saudi Arabia, economic crimes in China, Viet Nam, and North Korea, apostasy in Saudi Arabia as well as religious reasons such as insulting the prophet of Islam in Iran. These crimes are not serious enough to be punishable by death penalty according to the international law and standards.

In most countries, the passing of the death penalty is an arbitrary exercise, which is carried out unjustly involving practices of racial apartheid, racial bias, and ethnic discrimination. Judges and juries make the decisions based on factors that they set. Some of these factors are minimal and have nothing to do with the nature of the crime such as the defendant’s race and background. (Nathanson, 6). Most of the victims of the death gallons are the blacks and the less fortunate in the society. The whites and upper class are hell bent to be treated better and less guilty than they are in most states by the jury. It's true that crimes of rape, torture, treason, murder, and larceny should not escape the pivot of justice on an apodictic moral code but the death penalty is sure not that fair way out in a justice system that administers unfair and unequal punishment.  It is unfair

to lay a man's life in the hands of his fellow men who will only serve to sentence it to wrongful termination.

The death penalty is justified in the name of retribution. Retribution is punishment administered in the spirit of personal or moral vengeance.  In simple terms no matter how much it may be justified, it is just but another form of revenge. An eye for an eye made the world blind.  Some will say that everyone gets what they deserve, but actually, by subjecting one to the gallons for having killed someone else carries on the cycle of crime. Instead of creating peace, it creates hostility and bitterness among the members of the family of the victim and the offenders. Revenge is a common form of human emotions. At times it is understandable.  It is, however, a thoughtless response to critical situations.

Capital penalty violates the right to life, the most basic of human rights. It diminishes the value of human life. It depicts that a fellow person can control another's life term. Rightfully, only God has the right to take away one's life. There those who however do not believe in a God and thus for them this might not be a logic reason. However, just because the public does not shun death penalties, it does not in any way mean that taking away the right to life of a fellow man by the state is justified in any way.

In other countries, the death penalty is used by politicians for selfish purposes. Their political opponents bear the consequences by being subjected to it, for instance, in Sudan. This method is a form of blackmail used

by the people. It instills fear in them and suppresses them from expressing themselves. In states like this, it clearly does not make sense to uphold the law of capital sentence. It only degrades human life and subjects people to miserable life. Rules are meant to make the society a better place to dwell in not oppress people.

Religiously speaking, the death penalty is not approved. The upholders of death punishment will quote the Bible in the Old Testament, where killing the wrongdoers were allowed, but, that was in the Old Testament before the New Testament era came along. God is the author of life and only He should have the authority to pass judgment upon it.
Some of the executions are extremely brutal and humiliating. When an execution occurs publically, it is humiliating, not only for the victim but also to his family. In the USA, live broadcasting occurs. In other nations, they carry out public hanging. Not only does it humiliate, but also traumatize to watch the entire execution.

It is a good thing that most countries are heading to do away with capital punishments. Most states no longer execute people. There however still a few that hold on to the practice. China has the highest number of executions carried out. Bearing in mind death punishment is a very harsh form of punishment in the legal system (Nathanson, 9), I therefore strongly advocate for the abolishment of the death penalty. The state sure does need to punish its criminals, but the capital punishment is not a suitable method of reforming the erroneous. Better punishing methods such as life imprisonment can be put to use instead.

Get an explanation on any task
Get unstuck with the help of our AI assistant in seconds