The writer is director of the Department of Gender Studies at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad
There are people who take a principle - based stand on the issue. They believe that the death penalty is the most barbaric sentence. No civilised nation should allow the state to commit the same act as the criminals. The probability of the miscarriage of justice is always there in criminal justice system administered by human beings. In a society like ours, where the criminal justice system is riddled with inefficiency and corruption, prosecution and investigation are often influenced by the rich and powerful and governments consistently fail to provide fundamental rights to work, decent living and dignity to people. The state is directly responsible for creating the social conditions that breed crime and chaos. What right does the state then have to condemn people to death?
The other standpoint uses religious argument to favour capital punishment as a part of the Islamic system of punishment — eye for an eye and life for a life. In my view, this is an argument out of its historical context. Also, it completely negates the spirit of Islam which is based upon social justice. The religious lobby ignores the fact that these punishments were prescribed at the time when there was no institutional system and infrastructure of jails where people could be locked up for their crimes. Also they conveniently ignore Islamic history, where these punishments were suspended in the wake of the state’s failure to fulfil its obligations towards its citizens. The example of Hazrat Umar Farooq (RA), who suspended Islamic punishment during famine applies here.
The third standpoint uses the argument of deterrence and the political security situation of the country. Criminals, mafias, terrorists outfits, and suicide bombers are killing and kidnapping people, while enjoying impunity. It is contended that these criminals must be hung to prevent such crimes in the future.
My contention is that this argument is based on a myth. Death penalty given to individuals does not curb terrorism, extremism and sectarian violence. It is naive to assume that resumption of death penalty will bring peace and security to the country instead of addressing the root causes of crimes. There is a mix of evidence on the correlation between the death penalty and the rate of crime in a society. Many countries in the world, such as Denmark, Iceland and Switzerland do not practise capital punishment but have low crime rates. However, on the other hand, four out of the top 10 lowest crime rate countries in the world — Japan, Bahrain, Hong Kong and Singapore — have retained death punishment. Therefore, it can be inferred that capital punishment is not a factor in crime prevention. It is actually the economic and social development of a society that is the real deterrence to crime rate.
The increasing criminalisation and brutalisation of our society is the result of the misplaced state policies, failure of governance and the breakdown of rule of law. We cannot remove these structural causes of criminality, militancy, extremism and brutality by executing individuals.
The core element in the pro-capital punishment argument is that people who commit crimes cannot be reformed. This standpoint is derived from the philosophical position that human beings are by nature evil, cruel and deceitful. Therefore, criminals should be eliminated from society.
I strongly believe that if the state is serious about preventing crimes in society, the best deterrence is through social and economic development, establishment of rule of law, equality and social justice. Let us not brutalise our society further by giving people death penalties.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 11th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (18)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1713861311-0/Untitled-design-(11)1713861311-0-270x192.webp)
@Umair: You need to reevaluate your views. Women get raped regardless of how they dress. Exploitation of women in Afghanistan is a case in point. And do keep in mind that men/boys also get raped. Dressing has nothing to do with the sick mind and motivation of the rapist.
We need to stop west blindly, Not every thing that comes from West is Best for mankind. Capital punishment is a time honured practice sanctioned by every culture,religion and civilization up untill now. In Pakistan one of the leading cause for terrorism and loss of lives is lack of death sentences. These criminals continue to operate from the prisions with perpetual cycle of violence and loss of innocent lives. The author says that No civilzed nation is practicing that. Can the author tell me by what other parameters or criteria we can be considerd civilized nation. The answer is none so just by abolishing death sentences will the world start considering us civilized. T o be considerd civilized from western standards we will have to sanction many more things Gay marriage or free sex between adults among many more. Our contry is in a state of war with 40,00 innocent lives lost. Abolishing Capital punishment should be our last concern.By the way, I have seen author on TV shows and mostly agree with her opinions but this is some thing she is out of line in my opinion.
My only contention is that sometimes the barbarity, savagery, and enormity of the crime committed leaves us with the death penalty as the only option.
I will ask her after someone GOD FORBID, kills her father, mother, husband, son and daughter, what will she recommend for him/her. Islam is so good that even with this, it has given the right to the family of deceived to forgive him/her, but the death penalty is an option for such crimes to serve justice. WIth such people one death for so many will not be enough they will get more reward in the hereafter. Secondly and most importantly, if they are not punished here, they will get the punishment in the here after, so it is better for them to be punished here, then get it in the here after!
can the same argument you gave above be aplied to rape? In a society like ours, where the criminal justice system is riddled with inefficiency and corruption, prosecution and investigation are often influenced by the rich and powerful and and women dress in a provocating fashion, and men are provacated by their behaviour, and this a natural reaction that man cannot control and the women is also inviting because of her dressing. What right does the state and the women then have to condemn people to death? ...
@Adnan Waqar:
All justice and punishment systems are man-made. Some just label themselves to be of divine origin.
The most self-contradictory and perplexing piece on this subject ever!
The writer should refresh her knowledge about Hazrat Umer's suspension of Islamic punishment, its background and the punishments it encompassed.
So we put them in Jail for life and give them the right to vote? Why should Tax Payers money be spent on these criminals?
@aaaaa:
Why give him the easy way out? Let him grow old in age and hopefully come to regret his actions.
Madam how can you write all this and keep a straight face?? I am not at all part of any religious junta, and personally very close to Liberals. But its sickening to watch people coming up with such lame excuses, for removing the capital punishment. Try telling that to a father whose daughter is raped...or a mother whose son is murdered in cold blood. How can you possibly negate their feelings in this regard? What if it was one of yours you had to bury?? One of yours who was taken away before time? One of yours who was gang-raped? One of your who was butchered? Talk to me about contexts and philosophy about capital punishment after that, till then you mock and insult the feelings of countless people, still alive, but as good as dead, because of such barbaric calamities had befallen them. Shame on such literary exercise.
What do you mean by civilized nations? why was Kansi apprehended in most civilized nation country? Killer must be apprehended, its rule of law.
Well according to you death penalty can't curb crimes so it should be abolished,my point is,even by locking up criminals in the jails crime rates can't be controlled,then why shouldn't we abolish jails and let the bandits and criminals rome in the streets.I think you will support this idea also that no one should be apprehended for any crime cz by apprehending someone crime rates can't be controlled. If ur son is killed by someone will u show such tolerance and say "Ok Sir! you killed my son,its all right,we are very tolerant people,you are free,go kill another person and lets chill cz death penalty can't control crime rate".
Dr Farzana whilst I would agree with your argument that that there is little correlation between capital punishment and crime prevention, I would use the religious argument to refute your point of view. God has punished many nations for their deeds throughout history, did that put an end to people's denial of God? By your argument was it wrong or unjust of God to punish these people? By creating an equitable social environment could the outcome have been any different. I don't know but the fact is we do not live in a perfect world, human beings have their limitations. It is essential that every society has its system of reward and punishment similar to the system devised by God in the hereafter.
I would like to put this question to you "What punishment would you suggest for the individual who has recently raped a dead body of a teenage girl in Gujranwala"?
the killer of 90 Norwegiens is today enjoying his life in jail and even planing to write a book. how do you justify that? What was the fault of those innocent people? Why shouldnt their families get revenge from this lunatic?
What kind of civilisation is this which doesnt acknowledge the right of victim to live but is more concerned with right of the killer to live.
Islam also acknowledges the right of the aggrieved i.e. murder victims family. If they refuse to pardon or accept blood money then there is no room left for leniency. by not acknowledging the right of victim, you would force people to exact revenge on their own.
Every major religion in the world preaches compassion, forgiveness and mercy over vengeance. The death penalty is inconsistent with these religious teachings. Proponents of the death penalty unfairly use religion to justify state-sanctioned killing, torture and violence.
“Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society... then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them... We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.” Karl Popper An argument which can be extended to capital punishment. Case in point: What shall we do with Mumtaz Qadri?