|
|
|
|
| Sunday, 10 July 2005 |
 |
|
 |
Features |
 |
|
News Business Features
Editorial
|
Is the death penalty a deterrent to crime?
by Ranga Jayasuriya The murder of High Court Judge Sarath Ambepitiya and his security officer last year sent shock waves across political and law enforcing authorities in the country. The murder brought the nation to realisation, that a myriad of under-world gangs, have taken the nation by ransom. It was an indication that the under-world has moved to threaten the judiciary,showing signs of a rise of a Colombian style Mafia culture. The Government is facing criticism for its inability to reduce crime, re-introduce to death penalty for rape, murder and narcotic dealings. And this week a Trial-at-Bar in Colombo sentenced to death all five accused in the murder of Judge Ambepitiya. The issue open to discussion however is whether the death penalty is a deterrent to violent crime. The high violent crime rate today has little to do with the de-facto moratorium on the death penalty which is effective since 1976 when the country carried out its last execution. The rise of armed crimes in Sri Lanka since the late 80s is attributable to the drastic social changes taking place since the country adopted the free market economy, which introduced a "money culture". Studies conducted abroad on the issue reveal that the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime. In the United States, an FBI study shows that States which have abolished the death penalty have lower murder rates than States which have not. The States of Texas carried out the first execution in 1982 and moved to be the national leader in capital punishment. But, statistics reveal that during the period from 1982 to 1991, the crime rate in Texas rose by 24 per cent and violent crime by 46 per cent, in contrast to the rise of the US national crime rate of 5 per cent.Perhaps, this could be a case in point to argue, that capital punishment, rather than being a deterrent to violent crime, could brutalise the social fabric. Further more, Canada, Norway and most other Scandinavian countries which have abolished the death penalty record a lower violent crime rate than the USA. Pointing to the high execution rate of blacks, US abolitionists argue that the death penalty is racist.(African Americans are only 12 per cent of the US population, but have 43 per cent of prisoners on death row. Although Blacks constitute 50 per cent of all murder victims, 83 per cent of the victims in death penalty cases are whites). Equally important, abolitionists argue that the death penalty punishes the poor, as the success of litigation is dependent on the lawyers; more qualified the lawyer, the higher the charges. This is obviously a case in point in Sri Lanka where even after the conviction, well-to-do prisoners receive special privileges in their cells. The death penalty is irrevocable and despite best safeguards it could condemn the innocent to death. A recent study in the US has produced evidences of 349 cases in which innocent people have wrongfully been convicted for offences punishable by death. Such inherent lapses in the judicial process could be further compounded by the fact that Sri Lanka's police is continuously accused by local and international human rights watchdogs of torture and murder inside police cells and forced confessions extracted by torture. If the death penalty is not a deterrent to violent crime, why should it be reintroduced?. The pro-death penalty groups argue that it is a "just retribution," a punishment for violent crimes. However the important point here again is that the contemporary standards of justice have rejected the notion that "just retribution" could be achieved by repeating the acts which society condemns. "Criminal codes do not sanction the raping of rapists or the burning of arsonists' homes; still less is the deliberate taking of a life by the State an appropriate punishment for murder," states the human rights watchdog, Amnesty International, further describing that "executions are no more than judicially sanctioned killings". However, according to Amnesty International, during the year 2003, more than 1,146 people have been executed in 28 countries and more than 2,756 people have been executed in 63 countries.(These figures include only cases that are known to AI, the real figures are certainly higher) Eighty-one per cent of all known executions took place in China, Iran and USA. In the year 2002, at least 1,060 people were executed in China, 113 in Iran and 71 in the United States. However, for countries that believe in the virtues of death penalty; post-apartheid South Africa has some moral lessons to offer. The first hearing of the Constitutional Court of the Rain Bow nation was "S. V. Makwanyane," which raised the question of the constitutionality of the death penalty. The facts of the case, in which Makwanyane was sentenced to death was not directly relevant. The core issue was, did the death penalty violate sections 9,10,11 (2) of the Constitution of South Africa, which guarantees the right to life, the right to dignity and the right to be free from torture and cruel punishment. In the judgement, handed down on June 6, 1995, the Court unanimously found that the death penalty was indeed unconstitutional. In the final analysis, it was recorded that it is social justice, equality and the abolition of oppressive discrimination that would help reduce violent crime rather than any other judicial measures. Countries which have abolished the death penalty since 1976 1976: PORTUGAL abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1978: DENMARK abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1979: LUXEMBOURG, NICARAGUA and NORWAY abolished the death penalty for all crimes. BRAZIL, FIJI and PERU abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes. 1981: FRANCE and CAPE VERDE abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1982: The NETHERLANDS abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1983: CYPRUS and EL SALVADOR abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes. 1984: ARGENTINA abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes. 1985: AUSTRALIA abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1987: HAITI, LIECHTENSTEIN and the GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC (1) abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1989: CAMBODIA, NEW ZEALAND, RUMANIA and SLOVENIA (2) abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1990:ANDORRA, CROATIA (2), the CZECH AND SLOVAK FEDERAL REPUBLIC (3), HUNGARY, IRELAND, MOZAMBIQUE, NAMIBIA and SAO TOM? AND PRNCIPE abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1992:ANGOLA, PARAGUAY and SWITZERLAND abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1993:GUINEA-BISSAU, HONG KONG (4) and SEYCHELLES abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1994:ITALY abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1995:DJIBOUTI, MAURITIUS, MOLDOVA and SPAIN abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1996:BELGIUM abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1997:GEORGIA, NEPAL, POLAND and SOUTH AFRICA abolished the death penalty for all crimes. BOLIVIA abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes. 1998:AZERBAIJAN, BULGARIA, CANADA, ESTONIA, LITHUANIA and the UNITED KINGDOM abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 1999:EAST TIMOR, TURKMENISTAN and UKRAINE abolished the death penalty for all crimes. LATVIA (5) abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes. 2000 : COTE D'IVOIRE and MALTA abolished the death penalty for all crimes. ALBANIA (6) abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes. 2001: BOSNIA-HEZEGOVINA (7) abolished the death penalty for all crimes.CHILE abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes. 2002: CYPRUS and YUGOSLAVIA (later SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO) abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 2003: ARMENIA abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 2004: BHUTAN, GREECE, SAMOA, SENEGAL and TURKEY abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 2005: MEXICO abolished the death penalty for all crimes. *** Seventy-six countries and territories have abolished the death penalty. A further 15 countries have abolished it for all but exceptional crimes such as wartime crimes. Twenty-one countries were abolitionist in practice: They had not carried out any executions for the past 10 years and believed to have a policy or established practice in not carrying out executions. By April 2003, there were 112 countries which are abolitionist in law or practice and 83 countries which retain and use the death penalty. More than three countries a year on average have abolished the death penalty for all the crimes in the past decade. Sri Lanka carried out its last execution in June 1976 and since then successive Presidents have automatically commuted all death sentences. (Source - Amnesty International) *** ExecutionsElectric chairNobody knows how quickly a person dies from electric shock, or what they experience. The ACLU describes two cases where prisoners apparently lived for 4 to 10 minutes before finally expiring. Firing squad The prisoner is bound and shot through the heart by multiple marksmen. Death appears to be quick, assuming the killers don't miss. In the US, only Utah used this method. It was abandoned in favour of lethal injection on Mar 15, 2004 except for four convicted killers on death row who had previously chosen death by firing squad. Poison gas Cyanide is dropped into acid producing hydrogen cyanide, a deadly gas. This takes many minutes of agony before a person dies. Lethal injection Lethal drugs are injected into the prisoner while he lays strapped down to a table. If properly conducted, the prisoner fades quickly into unconsciousness. If the dosage of drugs is too low, the person may linger for many minutes, experiencing paralysis. Executions in the US are gradually shifting to this method. Stoning The prisoner is often buried up to her or his neck and pelted with rocks
until they eventually die. The rocks are chosen so that they are large
enough to cause significant injury to the victim, but are not so large that
a single rock will kill the prisoner. Not used in North America. Used in
some Muslim countries as a penalty for murder, adultery and other crimes. |
|
|
| News
| Business |
Features |
Editorial | Security | Produced by Lake House |
Death Penalty is not a deterrent to violent crime, nor is it a 'just
retribution'. It is irrevocable and despite stringent safe-guards, it could
condemn the innocent to death, rather than being a solution to the violent
crime, it would further brutalise the social fabric. 
