My contention is that severe punishments do not help bring down the crime rate.
LAHORE: Pakistan is a ‘death-penalty’ nation. In my own view, execution is the most barbaric sentence and no state should be allowed to take a citizen’s life. First of all, there is always the possibility that that there may be a miscarriage of justice — especially in a system such as the one prevalent in Pakistan. Secondly, the criminal justice system is governed by humans and they are not infallible.
In view of such considerations, no wonder, at least, 92 countries in the world have abolished the death penalty. France abolished the death penalty in 1981 whereas Britain abolished it in 1968. In Pakistan, death penalty can be awarded on 27 counts. At the time of Partition, this figure was just two. Consequently, a death sentence has become the norm, especially in the lower courts. Popular opinion in Pakistan seems to be in favour of the death penalty and this tends to impede any serious discussion on the topic.
Those who support death penalty base their arguments on certain cliches and myths. The most common of these is the argument that by hanging a few, crime will disappear altogether. In view of the fact that Pakistan faces a formidable threat in the form of terrorism, this argument is quoted even more by its proponents. My contention is that severe punishments do not help bring down the crime rate. There is a mix of evidence on the correlation between the death penalty and the rate of crime in a society. In the case of Europe, most countries that have abolished death penalty do not have high crime rates. And if you look at America, where many states that do have the death penalty, you will see that the rate of crime there is much higher compared with Europe.
While countries such as Denmark, Iceland and Switzerland have abolished the capital punishment and have a low crime rate, Hong Kong is a country that has retained the death penalty but is also ranked tenth in the world when it comes to crime rate.
These examples validate Fyodor Dostoevsky’s contention, made in his famous novel Crime and Punishment, where he wrote that “crime is a protest against abnormalities in the society”. It can be argued that a society should address economic and social problems to control crime and if that is done properly and efficiently, then crime will be lowered. Furthermore, I would argue that the high rate of crime seen in Pakistan is there primarily due to society’s brutalisation and that has happened as a result of misplaced state policies, bad governance and the absence of a social security net for the poor and underprivileged. We cannot remove these structural causes of criminality, militancy and extremism by executing people.
Another core component of the pro-capital punishment argument is that criminals cannot be reformed. This flows from another cliched philosophical position that human beings are ‘by nature’ evil, cruel and deceitful. Therefore, criminals should be eliminated from society. Again, one can cite the example of Scandinavian states where the ‘evil nature’ underwent a radical transformation as the welfare system expanded its reach. If Pakistan is really serious about preventing crimes in society, the best deterrence is social and economic development, establishment of the rule of law, equality and social justice. All of these conditions can be best met under a democratic dispensation. Let us not brutalise our society any further by executing people in the name of a crime-free society.
Sarmad Ali
Published in The Express Tribune, August 25th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
