The concept of death penalty and capital punishment came into being since biblical times however its legitimacy has largely remained questionable. Previously these government sanctioned executions were carried out by beheading the criminal, after a systematic application of torture. In status-quo, however, the common method is hanging. 193 member states of United Nation have signed the charter yet it is appalling that 37 of them go against the basic right to life of this foundational treaty. This deeply inhuman punishment is justified by labelling it as an excellent deterrent to treason and first degree murder however statistics have been telling us the opposite tale. Despite having alternatives available, certain countries like Kingdom of
…show more content…
Bearing this in mind, it is highly irrational to carry out executions under capital punishments. Death penalty is much more expensive than keeping a criminal under life without parole. This can be judged by the fact that with 11 executions spread over 27 years, on a per execution basis, California and federal taxpayers have paid more than $250 million for each execution. The reason for a high cost to carry out the process of capital punishment is the long and tedious justice system involved in it. This process is required to be carried out in order to ensure that no innocent men or women are being punished unjustly. However this risk has not been fully eliminated; innocent lives have been forgone alongside tons of money. If the alternate, life without parole, is resorted to, it is estimated that a State is likely to save up to $1Billion. This efficient allocation of budget can help a country spend this money on much important sectors e.g. education, roads, police officers and public safety programs, after-school programs, drug and alcohol treatment, child abuse prevention programs, mental health services, and services for crime victims and their families. This way there is a possibility of even making the criminal a valuable part of the society- no exemption from punishment is being provided …show more content…
It vividly states that “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person”. In no way is it approving of the crime and letting go the criminals without punishment, however barbaric acts of killing is what is being condemned. The irreversible nature of capital punishment is what makes it unacceptable in the modern legal system. Countries such as Sweden have completely abolished it from their legislature and have openly denounced such acts. It is important to note that Sweden is one of the most peaceful nations in the world and its crime rate is significantly low. The executions are often carried out with a government’s consent outside the legal framework by a country’s police or security force, or other persons or groups that cooperate with, or are tolerated by, the country’s government and are subsequently crimes against the right to life. This further strengthens the issue of abolishing capital punishment from the planet. Snatching away someone’s right to life by naming it retribution is doing no good to our society. Capital punishment on the other hand is more of a vengeance than retribution. As rightly said by Mahatma Gandhi “An eye for an eye, makes the whole world
Bearing this in mind, it is highly irrational to carry out executions under capital punishments. Death penalty is much more expensive than keeping a criminal under life without parole. This can be judged by the fact that with 11 executions spread over 27 years, on a per execution basis, California and federal taxpayers have paid more than $250 million for each execution. The reason for a high cost to carry out the process of capital punishment is the long and tedious justice system involved in it. This process is required to be carried out in order to ensure that no innocent men or women are being punished unjustly. However this risk has not been fully eliminated; innocent lives have been forgone alongside tons of money. If the alternate, life without parole, is resorted to, it is estimated that a State is likely to save up to $1Billion. This efficient allocation of budget can help a country spend this money on much important sectors e.g. education, roads, police officers and public safety programs, after-school programs, drug and alcohol treatment, child abuse prevention programs, mental health services, and services for crime victims and their families. This way there is a possibility of even making the criminal a valuable part of the society- no exemption from punishment is being provided …show more content…
It vividly states that “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person”. In no way is it approving of the crime and letting go the criminals without punishment, however barbaric acts of killing is what is being condemned. The irreversible nature of capital punishment is what makes it unacceptable in the modern legal system. Countries such as Sweden have completely abolished it from their legislature and have openly denounced such acts. It is important to note that Sweden is one of the most peaceful nations in the world and its crime rate is significantly low. The executions are often carried out with a government’s consent outside the legal framework by a country’s police or security force, or other persons or groups that cooperate with, or are tolerated by, the country’s government and are subsequently crimes against the right to life. This further strengthens the issue of abolishing capital punishment from the planet. Snatching away someone’s right to life by naming it retribution is doing no good to our society. Capital punishment on the other hand is more of a vengeance than retribution. As rightly said by Mahatma Gandhi “An eye for an eye, makes the whole world