Return to Uzone News Portal
Uzone.id – In the past half century, the death penalty has increasingly been viewed as a human rights issue. More than 120 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice, according to The Death Penalty Project.
The pros and cons of the death penalty are still debated today. It is the most severe form of punishment and raises questions about justice, morality, and human rights.
Some support the death penalty, based on the severity of the crimes committed by an individual or group. Others oppose the death penalty on humanitarian grounds.
This ethical dilemma revolves around the complex balance between upholding justice and the sanctity of human life, while recognizing the inherent imperfections of the legal system.
Questionable Effectiveness
Most would argue that the death penalty is a powerful deterrent to serious crimes or heinous acts. However, empirical evidence on the deterrent effect of the death penalty is inconclusive.
Many studies show little or no correlation between the death penalty and lower crime rates. Some states and countries without the death penalty have lower rates of violent crime than countries that still use it.
This raises the question of whether society should use this measure at all. If the death penalty does not significantly curb crime, we must consider whether its continued use is morally justified.
Justice for Victims vs. Sanctity of Life
The main theme of this debate is justice. For those who support it, the death penalty is a form of retribution for the heinous crimes of criminals. For them, someone who takes a life in a cruel and calculated way loses their right to continue living.
While some oppose it, legally sanctioned ‘murder’ actually diminishes the value of life and perpetuates the cycle of violence.
They believe that even the most despicable criminals have the potential for redemption and that taking another person’s life, even in the name of justice, violates the moral order of society.
Risk of Innocent Deaths
It must be admitted that the justice system designed by humans is not as perfect as God Almighty, even though it has been made as fair as possible. It is possible – although unlikely – that the court’s decision is wrong.
Unlike a life sentence, the irreversible nature of the death penalty makes it especially troubling in this context. Remember, an executed person cannot be brought back to life.
This inherent risk has led many to argue that even in the most extreme cases, the death penalty is too dangerous to be justified.
One strong factor in many opposing the death penalty is “the growing recognition of the potential for error in its application,” criminology professors Carolyn Hoyle and Saul Lehrfreund, co-directors of the London-based NGO The Death Penalty Project, wrote in a blog for the University of Oxford’s Death Penalty Research Unit. With a justice system prone to error, bias and coercion, wrongful executions are, in fact, “inevitable.”
In fact, a 2021 report titled “The Innocence Epidemic,” concluded that at least 185 people have been wrongfully convicted and sentenced to death since the 1972 U.S. Supreme Court ruling.
The report was released by the Washington-based nonprofit The Death Penalty Information Center. Nearly 70% of those cases involved “official misconduct by police, prosecutors, or other government officials” — even more so in cases involving defendants of color.
The Impact of Bias and Inequality
There is both bias and inequality in the application of the death penalty. Research shows that factors such as race, socioeconomic status, and geographic location can influence who is sentenced to death. For example, wealthier defendants are more likely to be able to afford better legal representation, increasing their chances of avoiding the death penalty.
This again goes back to the ‘imperfection of humanly designed justice systems’. When a system fails to apply the death penalty consistently across all levels of society, its ethical legitimacy is called into question.
So what are the alternatives?
Many argue that life without parole is more humane and just than the death penalty.
Life sentences allow for correction if wrongfully convicted. They are still severe punishments for serious offenses, but are ‘non-lethal’.
By emphasizing restorative justice rather than retaliation, society can address the underlying causes of criminal behavior and work towards a more just and humane criminal justice system. (Faisal)
