On the death penalty
It is time for the government to abolish the death penalty. Not bring it back.
Since coming to power in 2008, the PPP government quietly but boldly established a defacto moratorium on applying the death penalty. Given the problems with our criminal justice system, that was a decision both moral and brave. Now, however, this unstated understanding has come to an end with the execution of Muhammad Hussain, an army soldier, convicted of murdering a fellow soldier. Although Hussain’s guilt does not seem to be in doubt, the government would have been wiser to leave its blanket ban on executions in place. Taking the life of another human is the ultimate irreversible step and until we can be sure that every person who is given the death penalty is guilty beyond any doubt of the crime of which he has been convicted, it is far better to spare guilty men if it means no innocent lives will be taken, henceforth.
On practical grounds, we simply cannot be sure of the guilt of many people who have been handed down the death sentence. DNA testing is very expensive and does not automatically take place to determine incontrovertible guilt. Even in cases where DNA testing is employed, the government database of DNA samples is far too limited to return either positive or negative results in most cases. Add to this, the corruptibility of our justice system; starting with policemen who take shortcuts in investigations, to the judicial system, where the impartiality of judges is not always a given and you have a system with the potential to be riddled with errors. A life sentence is preferable to the death penalty because incorrect decisions can be overturned. On top of that, a moral case can also be made against keeping the death penalty on the statutes.
The power to take another life is a significant power to give to the state and there is scant evidence that it does much good. The deterrent effect it is supposed to have certainly has not reduced murder rates in countries that have the death penalty. And in a country like ours, where the rich can pay blood money to atone for their crimes, keeping the death penalty assures that it is applied unequally based on class. Perhaps, it is time for the government to abolish the death penalty. Not bring it back.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 16th, 2012.
On practical grounds, we simply cannot be sure of the guilt of many people who have been handed down the death sentence. DNA testing is very expensive and does not automatically take place to determine incontrovertible guilt. Even in cases where DNA testing is employed, the government database of DNA samples is far too limited to return either positive or negative results in most cases. Add to this, the corruptibility of our justice system; starting with policemen who take shortcuts in investigations, to the judicial system, where the impartiality of judges is not always a given and you have a system with the potential to be riddled with errors. A life sentence is preferable to the death penalty because incorrect decisions can be overturned. On top of that, a moral case can also be made against keeping the death penalty on the statutes.
The power to take another life is a significant power to give to the state and there is scant evidence that it does much good. The deterrent effect it is supposed to have certainly has not reduced murder rates in countries that have the death penalty. And in a country like ours, where the rich can pay blood money to atone for their crimes, keeping the death penalty assures that it is applied unequally based on class. Perhaps, it is time for the government to abolish the death penalty. Not bring it back.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 16th, 2012.