India
needs to do away with the death sentence. It is barbaric, inefficient and
unjustifiable.
The main role of the criminal judicial system in India is to prevent
crime,
immobilize cruel criminals and rehabilitate prisoners. Logically speaking,
death
sentence defies these purposes of our criminal justice system and life
imprisonment
is a far better way to achieve them. Life imprisonment acts as a
deterrent,
it might be worse than death. Serving life in prison facilitates prisoner’s
rehabilitation,
while death is ultimate.
Death
sentence is the practice of executing prisoners after they have been
convicted
of a serious crime by the legal system. Crimes that cause punishments
like a
death penalty are called capital crimes. Death penalty is given to people
who have
done heinous crimes like murder and rape. Methods such as stoning,
crucifixion,
beheading and drowning have been used for execution in the past.
Nowadays,
methods like electrocution, injections shooting or history are used for
executing
criminals.
History
bears testimony to the fact the ultimate punishment for men given by
men is
the death sentence. Whenever the wrong done has shaken us, jarred our
senses,
or made us want to hit back, with vengeance, the courts of the land award
the death
sentence. When you surf through the pages of Indian freedom struggle,
examples
abound where the British sentenced political offenders to the death
sentence.
Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru were hanged by the Britishers who
considered
them their political rivals.
We fail
to understand that death penalty leaves no scope/hope for the reformation
of a
criminal. It leads to the death of a criminal and puts an end to all hope. Most
of the
crimes are committed ‘in the heat of the moment’ when an individual is
unmindful
of the repercussion of his/her action.
I think
that life imprisonment is worse than death sentence which puts an end to
the life
of an individual. An individual who is condemned to life imprisonment is
forced to
spend his life behind the bars. Solitary confinement where a prisoner is
isolated
from any form of human contact is even more severe. Life imprisonment
can be
more effective as a form of punishment than the death sentence.
People
who don’t have any sympathy for criminals should understand that death
would be
good for them. It instantly puts an end to their suffering. If they are
confined
in prison for decades, the pain and suffering continues. Terrorists would
prefer to
become a martyr by getting a death sentence than to suffer the pain and
humiliation
of life imprisonment.
In a
democratic country like India, death sentence denies the civil liberties
of a
person and is against the fundamental values. Practically it is unfair and
theoretically
it is uncivilized. A cruel and inhumane punishment like death penalty
should
have no place in a developing country such as India. In order to promote
respect
for human rights, our government should make it a priority to abolish an
irreversible
and inhumane punishment like death
penalty. It is always wrong to kill
someone
and executing a convict is like murdering him/her legally. The defenders
of death sentence believe that murderers are a threat to the welfare and
safety of society. They believe that it is necessary to give death sentence to murderers
in order to protect the citizens.
Those
favouring death penalty are of the view that death penalty is one such
practice
that can maximize the balance of good over evil. Death penalty is
beneficial
for the society as it deters heinous crimes. The defenders of death
penalty
argue that in order to get justice, criminals who are convicted of serious
crimes
should be condemned to death. If the society doesn’t ensures that the
convicts
suffer as much as they made their victims suffer, it would be like favouring
the
criminals. So, by killing those who deliberately kill others, justice can be
ensured.
I have
heard this statement several time: “If you murder someone you should be
killed in return.”
It is
based on ‘an eye for an eye’ philosophy which is not only unjust but also
immoral. If
an individual commits a murder and you kill them as a punishment, aren’t you
committing
the same crime? How can this be justifiable under any circumstances?
You are
committing the same crime that the criminal has committed by sentencing
the death
penalty to him/her.
Does
giving death sentence to criminals degrades us to their level? How can we
consider
ourselves morally superior to them when we are not even ready to give
them a
chance to become a better human being? If criminals are sentenced to life
imprisonment
there are chances that they may reform themselves and feel guilty
about
their bad deeds. They can become a better human being. It’s high time we
realize
that by giving death penalty to them, we are supporting the concept of ‘an
eye for
an eye.’
Nobody
deserves to die for their actions even if they are cruel and unjust. If a
person is
given death sentence for a mass murder, he/she is forced to face what
his/her
victims have faced. This will lead to nothing but one more murder. If we
want the
murderer to die, then will there be any difference between the murderer
and us? The
mere thought of wishing that someone should die is shameful.
Amnesty
International is a non-governmental organization which opposes the death
penalty
in all cases and considers it as a violation of human rights. As per their
charter:
The death
penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights. It is the premeditated
and
cold-blooded killing of a human being by the state. This cruel, inhumane and
degrading
punishment is done in the name of justice. It violates the right to life
as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Amnesty
International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception
regardless
of the nature of the crime, the characteristics of the offender, or the
method
used by the state to kill the prisoner.
I
strongly support the abolition of death sentence. Here are few reasons why I
feel
so:
1) Death
sentence is a cruel form of punishment. It reminds us of the era when
slavery,
human branding and several other types of corporal punishments were
common.
In a developing nation like ours, there is no place for such barbaric
practices.
Death sentence has been abolished by almost two-thirds of the nations of
the
world. India should consider abolishing the death penalty which should have no
place in
a civilized society.
2)
Executing a person is a violent display of homicide which is considered legal.
It
endorses punishing others by killing to curb social evils. It is a bad example
set by
the society for the public which includes vulnerable children. A society
where
human life is respected will never kill someone and sentence them to death
sentence.
As per the government, such a harsh punishment like death penalty is
justifiable
and beneficial for the welfare and safety of the society. But such an act of
bloodshed
can never do well to anyone and has a negative impact on the society.
3) Every
human being has the right to life which is considered as one of the basic
human
rights. The death sentence not only violates this most basic right of human
beings
but also violates certain other rights such as the right to not be subjected to
any form
of torture, degrading or inhumane punishment or
treatment. The death
penalty
deprives of person of the right to live, rendering it incompatible with human
rights.
Further, it impairs human dignity which is not acceptable at any cost.
4) In
some cases, the death sentence is applied discriminatorily and randomly. The
constitution’s
guarantee of equal protection is undermined by the death penalty.
Sometimes
the death sentence has been arbitrarily used against the minorities,
poor and
members of political, religious and ethnic groups. Rich people are less
likely to
get a death sentence as they have access to famous and capable lawyers.
On the
other hand, the poor are less likely to get an efficient lawyer to represent
them. We
cannot rule out the inconsistent and irresponsible application of a
ruthless punishment like death penalty.
5) There
is always a possibility that an innocent person can get executed. Criminal
justice
system of India may be highly developed but chances of human failure are
always
there. Considering that death sentence is irreparable and irreversible, we
should
focus on the importance of human life which is invaluable. Why should we
support a
form of punishment which can kill
innocent people for no fault of theirs?
6) The
main purpose of the death penalty is to deter crime by instilling fear in the
minds of
the people but the extent to which the death penalty has managed to do
the same
is highly questionable. The advocates of death penalty consider it as a
deterrent
to crime but death penalty is never the answer. There is no evidence that
death
sentence acts as a deterrent to crime against women and its use will deter capital
crimes.
7) What
is the need of executing a criminal when he can be sentenced to life
imprisonment?
One of the reasons to execute a criminal is to make sure that he/
she never
commits any crime in future. Sentencing them to life imprisonment
without
the possibility of parole can serve this purpose too. Criminals serving
life
imprisonment rot in jail till they die. They have to endure pain and suffering
throughout
their lives which can be better than killing them. It is likely that while
serving
life imprisonment a criminal would realize his mistake and feel guilty
for his/her
action and try to become a better person. While in case of the death
penalty,
a criminal is given no chance to learn from his mistakes. It’s unfair as
every
person should be given a chance to become a better human being.
8) The
tooth for a tooth mentality of getting justice seems revengeful to me. Killing
someone
just because they committed murder serves no purpose. It can’t bring
the dead
victim back to life. It is normal to have a feeling of vengeance towards
a
murderer and sympathy towards the victims, but at the same time, it is morally
wrong to
kill someone under any circumstances. We need to understand that by
killing a
criminal, we can never achieve justice.
Has the
hanging of Kasab and Afzal Guru stopped the militant from spreading
terror?
Have the acts of terrorism lessened or ceased after their death sentence?
Will the
recent verdict of death sentence to all four convicts in case of Nirbhaya
gang rape
and murder case ensure that women and children are safe? Not a day
passes,
when you pick up the newspaper and find cases several cases of sexual
assault
on the weaker sex. The criminals and their activities have not and will
not
abate. It appears that it is impossible to instill them with fear and make them
realize
of their wrong deeds. Their mindset needs to be changed. They are a part of
the
society who are condemned and ostracized but they continue to flourish. It is
the deed
that is wrong not the doer. A man doesn’t become a criminal on his own
free
will, it is his circumstances, his upbringing and the society which make
him/her
so.
It’s a
shame that a punishment like
death sentence which is against life, human
rights
and well-being is still prevalent in India.
The reasons that support
the abolishing of the death sentence will always outweigh the
reasons that don’t support it.
Personally,
I think that times have changed, our thought processes have evolved,
and our
value system has changed and in these troubled times all that has been
prevalent
till now needs careful consideration for change. Society needs to be
safeguarded,
no doubt, but is it necessary that the judicial injunction - ‘thou shalt
die’ need
not be always correct.
