The Death Penalty in the 21st Century

This article is written by MOHD BILAL KHAN, a passionate law student at Aligarh Muslim University, brings a unique blend of historical insight and legal expertise to his writing.

The Death Penalty in the 21st Century: Legal, Ethical and Human Rights Considerations:

Legal Context: 

Article 6 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) “nothing in this article shall be invoked to delay or to prevent the abolition of capital punishment by any State Party to the present Covenant.” This article give the permission to use death penalty but in limited circumstances. Many countries still use death penalty for punishment however the draft has already moved for its abolition in the international law. in 1984, the UN economic and social council protect the rights of those who are facing death penalty by adopting safeguard guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death the penalty and in 1989 the UN general assembly adopted the second the second optional protocol of the ICCPR that permit abolition decisive new momentum. “For many years, the United Nations has opposed the death penalty in all circumstances,” said UN Human Rights Chief Volker Türk. “I share this position with the firmest conviction. Ultimately, this is about the UN Charter’s promise of the highest standards of protection of all human beings.”

According to Türk, there are evidence that support the death penalty has no or little impact on deterring or reducing the crime, there are studies that shows those countries that have abolished the death penalty has reduced the crime rate furthermore “The existence of the death penalty in countries that maintain it — as well as the threat of its use — can be turned to improper purposes, such as instilling fear, repressing opposition, and quashing the legitimate exercise of freedoms,” he said.

Definition:

The definition of human rights have different version. Some writers question the term “Human Rights” because for them the word “Human” is sexist version because the word “Human” is marked by the presence of MAN, so Baxi prefers the word “Huper “ in –place of “Human” there “Human Rights” become the “Huper Rights”. According to Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the former secretary of UN, human rights constitute a “common language of humanity”.

Milne argues that human rights are simply what every human being owes to every other human being and such represent universal moral obligations. These rights can summarized as the right to life, to freedom from unprovoked violence and arbitrary coercion, to dealt with honesty, to receive aid in distress, and to be respected as a human person.

Debates

Now, if talk about the death penalty, African region is working hard to abolished the death penalty, according to Idrissa Sow, Chairperson of the Working Group on Death Penalty, Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Killings and Enforced Disappearances in Africa of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights. In a major development, Central African Republic, Equatorial Guinea, and Zambia recently abolished the death penalty for all offences. There are other countries that abolished Death penalty such as Kazakhstan, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone and the Central African Republic. In brief the death penalty in our common experiences a hereditary survivor from the past that should shed in the 21st century.

José Manuel Santos Pais, Member of the Human Rights Committee, said that the death penalty, if it must be imposed, should only be used for the most serious crimes. Crimes that are not of extreme gravity involving an intentional killing should be excluded, such as corruption and drug offenses.

“States parties [to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights] are to review their criminal laws, revoke death sentences issued for crimes not qualifying as the most serious crimes and pursue the necessary legal procedures to resentence those convicted for such crimes,” he said.

Some questioned whether the death penalty should even be used for the most serious crimes. Mai Sato, Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law at Monash University, Director of Eleos Justice, and Deputy Director of Crime Info, grew up in a country where the death penalty is used for serious crimes such as murder and seen as an important avenue for victims’ families to seek justice. While she was growing up, she never doubted the existence or necessity of the death penalty.

“But having spent the last two decades in countries without the death penalty, my sensibilities about what constitutes justice have changed, as well as my understanding of the social and political functions that the death penalty serves,” she said.

Human Rights in international law:

The meaning of Human Rights according to the UN “inherent to all human being, whatever one’s language or any other status”. “all are equally entitled to” these “human rights without discrimination. These rights are inter-related, interdependent and indivisible.”

UN Charted and human rights:

In January 1942 the UN declaration of human rights stated that complete victory over their enemies was essential to defend life, liberty, independence and religion freedom, and to preserve human rights and justice in their own lands as well as in other lands.

Article 13(I)(b) of UN Charter to give assistance in the realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without any distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.

Human Rights in India:

The preamble of Indian constitution assures the dignity of individual and this dignity has been well protected under part 3 [Article 12-35] of Indian constitution. Article 32 and 226 protected the basic human rights by providing the remedies such as right to move to the Supreme court for the enforcement of the fundamental rights, it’s also a fundamental right.

Right to information act is a human right under article 19 of UDHR, the right to information act introduced in india in 2005 as a human rights.