The UN recently had the 192 member states vote on a resolution on stopping the death penalty. In the news we read that India as well as China, USA, Iran were among the 38 countries that voted against it. 36 countries abstained and 107 votes were in favor of abolishing death sentences.
In India the law prohibits the execution of pregnant women and children and they make a point about it that they only apply the death penalty in the ‘rarest of rare cases’. In 2007 the General Assembly accepted a similar resolution and since then the number of positive votes and abstentions increased. So the trend is towards more and more countries abolishing the death penalty which is many countries anyway already happened.
I am very much in favor of abolishing death penalty because I believe you cannot take what you cannot give. You cannot give life, where do you take the right from to take it?
I was thinking more about this and I feel of course death penalty is given in rare cases and not for a small offence. If you see those criminals however whom you put in this rare category, such as terrorists that have the aim to kill and murder, terrorists who become suicide bombers, you will notice something: you don’t really punish them with a death sentence!
They themselves have the intention to be killed. If you look at the 9/11 terror attack on the world trade center in New York, USA, or if you look at the 11/26 attack at the Taj Hotel and other places in Mumbai, India, those who were responsible actually had the wish to die! When killing themselves these terrorists wanted to take as many people with them as possible. If you find such terrorists, place charges on them, give them a trial and decide to give them a death sentence because they are in the category of the rarest of cases, they don’t really care!
Then they are dead but what exactly did you do? You fulfilled their wish, that’s the only thing they wanted from the beginning! Where was the punishment? They are not afraid of dying! When someone becomes a hard-core criminal, they have already reached the conclusion that they can die anytime. There can be any police man’s bullet and it is over. They know that this is the extreme case that can happen to them at any time.
If you see it from another point of view, death also frees you from everything. Once you are dead, you are dead and you don’t need to care anymore. Just with one injection, one pull of a trigger, they are dead the next minute. Maybe what you consider the worst of all punishments actually makes them happy. They get free from everything. If you are not afraid of death, why would you not be happy to die?
It may be more difficult for them to be imprisoned for the rest of their lives. With death you make them free from pain, from guilt, from any responsibility. If they get a life-long sentence and feel that there is no possibility for them to get freedom from prison for the rest of their lives, it will be a better punishment.
If someone is executed because he is a murderer, doesn’t that mean you follow the rule ‘an eye for an eye’? And isn’t that exactly the rule followed by those who actually commit the crime?
Another – very big – argument against the death penalty is that there have been many cases in which people have been exonerated, often even after being executed. It was found that they were actually innocent! If there is even a tiny little doubt about a person’s guilt, how can you murder him or her saying that this is justice? There have been cases in which there was a serious doubt of guilt but still the accused was executed.
Seeing all this and considering again that we are not the ones authorized to decide about life or death, I think the countries that voted against and the countries that abstained from voting about the abolishment are wrong. Not even in the rarest of cases you should become a killer yourself.
Today is my best friend Govind’s birthday which was once again a nice reason for us to bake a cake. We celebrated and had a beautiful evening.