No to the death penalty
Best way to prevent society from criminal harm is to separate them, not kill them, as we often think in frustration.
It is not easy to say no to the death penalty in a country like ours where militias, ethnic outfits, sectarian killers and criminal gangs have proliferated and roam around with impunity. For this reason alone, some of us might want to continue with the death penalty. The question is: has the fear of death penalty deterred these groups from murder and chaos in society? No.
But the death penalty alone cannot be a reason for preventing crime in society. We have had this penalty since independence and even before, during the British imperial rule and under many of the kingdoms and empires that ruled us.
We are not alone in punishing murderers and terrorists this way; there are many other countries in this league. Why to change then?
I have a twofold argument against the death penalty. First, the empirical evidence suggests that even with the death penalty, murders have never stopped, and at best, there is fuzzy relationship between a decline in such crimes and the death penalty, if any. If we account for other factors in societies where murder crimes have dropped, the death penalty may have hardly any influence. Which other factors really matter in bringing down the crime rate? Three are important to consider. These are economic development, social equality and rule of law.
There is enough data about Pakistan to show that our society has experienced a negative trend in these three areas over the past many years. Report after report has documented evidence that Pakistan is in trouble in all these areas. Examples of other countries demonstrate that when they established rule of law and invested policy and material resources in bringing about equality and economic development, their societies achieved stability, order, harmony and peace. The opposite of that has happened in Pakistan. Therefore, we cannot bank on the death penalty as a deterrent but rather should address the real causes of the trouble that create and promote chaos and disorder. If we do ranking of what we must do to get Pakistan back on the rails, rule of law must be the number one priority. Rule of law has many dimensions — impartiality and effective judiciary at all levels, equality of everyone before the law and autonomy of policy and prosecution agencies from political influences. That will be the starting point.
Even if we develop and achieve stability, murders and other crimes for which we award death sentences may not disappear. Nor have Western societies with a better account of themselves on justice, rule of law and development succeeded in eliminating crimes. There is some fault with human nature. This may sound a bit pessimistic but murders and heinous crimes may never end; we may just be able to reduce their rate.
Back to the death penalty, this is neither a solution to crimes nor is it humane to even consider it a punishment. Taking one’s life can be a revenge of society but not a punishment. I have wondered for many years how taking away one’s life could be a punishment.
The fact that we and other societies have practised the death penalty for centuries cannot be a valid reason to continue with it. Today, we have better alternatives in locking away such criminals in prisons without the possibility of paroles. The best way to prevent society from criminal harm is to separate them, not kill them, as we often think in rage and frustration.
It is a tough call in the conservative, revenge-driven culture of Pakistan, to demand an end to the death penalty but whosoever can, must raise voice against this cruelty.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 20th, 2012.
But the death penalty alone cannot be a reason for preventing crime in society. We have had this penalty since independence and even before, during the British imperial rule and under many of the kingdoms and empires that ruled us.
We are not alone in punishing murderers and terrorists this way; there are many other countries in this league. Why to change then?
I have a twofold argument against the death penalty. First, the empirical evidence suggests that even with the death penalty, murders have never stopped, and at best, there is fuzzy relationship between a decline in such crimes and the death penalty, if any. If we account for other factors in societies where murder crimes have dropped, the death penalty may have hardly any influence. Which other factors really matter in bringing down the crime rate? Three are important to consider. These are economic development, social equality and rule of law.
There is enough data about Pakistan to show that our society has experienced a negative trend in these three areas over the past many years. Report after report has documented evidence that Pakistan is in trouble in all these areas. Examples of other countries demonstrate that when they established rule of law and invested policy and material resources in bringing about equality and economic development, their societies achieved stability, order, harmony and peace. The opposite of that has happened in Pakistan. Therefore, we cannot bank on the death penalty as a deterrent but rather should address the real causes of the trouble that create and promote chaos and disorder. If we do ranking of what we must do to get Pakistan back on the rails, rule of law must be the number one priority. Rule of law has many dimensions — impartiality and effective judiciary at all levels, equality of everyone before the law and autonomy of policy and prosecution agencies from political influences. That will be the starting point.
Even if we develop and achieve stability, murders and other crimes for which we award death sentences may not disappear. Nor have Western societies with a better account of themselves on justice, rule of law and development succeeded in eliminating crimes. There is some fault with human nature. This may sound a bit pessimistic but murders and heinous crimes may never end; we may just be able to reduce their rate.
Back to the death penalty, this is neither a solution to crimes nor is it humane to even consider it a punishment. Taking one’s life can be a revenge of society but not a punishment. I have wondered for many years how taking away one’s life could be a punishment.
The fact that we and other societies have practised the death penalty for centuries cannot be a valid reason to continue with it. Today, we have better alternatives in locking away such criminals in prisons without the possibility of paroles. The best way to prevent society from criminal harm is to separate them, not kill them, as we often think in rage and frustration.
It is a tough call in the conservative, revenge-driven culture of Pakistan, to demand an end to the death penalty but whosoever can, must raise voice against this cruelty.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 20th, 2012.