scholarly journals Secretive Symbolism? The Death Penalty, Executions, and Japan

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 579-601
Author(s):  
Billy Holmes
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Alternative Explanation ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
Wide Spread ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Symbolic Function ◽  
Execution Rates ◽  
Nuanced Understanding ◽  
The Right

AbstractThe importance of analysing the death penalty and state-imposed executions is derived from their concerning the right to life, and their retaining wide-spread support throughout retentionist, abolitionist de facto, and abolitionist states worldwide. Discrepancies in the execution rates of retentionist states appear reducible to their serving symbolic or pragmatic functions i.e. they are used primarily to validate public opinion or primarily to deter crime. Prima facie, Japan seems akin to a symbolic state, due to its low execution rate and its official justification for both retaining the death penalty and continuing to use executions i.e. doing otherwise would be undemocratic. However, the practices that surround executions in Japan shroud them in secrecy and silence, which appears at odds with both its apparent symbolic function and this justification. This makes Japan a uniquely important case study for research on practices surrounding executions. Understanding why this contradiction exists will entail a more nuanced understanding of the ways in which the death penalty, executions, and the practices surrounding them, can function in retentionist states. This essay aids such understanding by critically analysing this official justification and various other arguments for why this might be the case and advancing an alternative explanation.

scholarly journals Kant's Justification of the Death Penalty Reconsidered

2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin S. Yost
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
Legal Philosophy ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Right

It is hard to know what to think about Kant's ‘passionate sermons’ on capital punishment. Kant clearly feels that it is one of the most important punishments in the state's arsenal. But his vehement insistence on the necessity of execution strikes many readers as philosophically suspect. Critics argue that Kant's embrace of the death penalty is incompatible with, or at least not required by, the fundamental tenets of his moral and legal philosophy (Schwarzschild 1985; Merle 2000; Potter 2002; Hill 2003). These arguments typically employ one of two strategies. The first is to deny that execution is required by retribution in even a prima facie sense; arguments along this line typically question the coherence of Kant's doctrine of the ius talionis (Sarver 1997). The second is to show that there are inviolable moral principles that render the death penalty illegitimate; this criticism typically appeals to the value of human dignity or the right to life (Radin 1980; Pugsley 1981; Schwarzschild 1985; Merle 2000; Potter 2002). There is a third strategy that could be used to criticize Kant, although it is not aimed at him specifcally. This strategy invokes legal principles of fairness or due process. It asserts that, regardless of capital punishment's moral appropriateness or legitimacy, capital punishment is unjust due to the fallibility of legal actors and institutions (Nathanson 2001). Someone adopting the third strategy might claim that, while Kant's justifcation may be acceptable in principle, it fails to justify the death penalty in the world we live in.

The right to life: A comparative analysis of the relevant norms of the Constitutions of the Republic of Azerbaijan and Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-32
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Human Right ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The relevance of the work is determined by the fact that the right to life belongs to the basic constitutional human rights, therefore, its observance and protection is the duty of the state. Despite its undeniable importance, today the right to life anywhere in the world is not really ensured in sufficient quantities. The constitutional consolidation of the right to life raises a number of issues related to the concept, nature, legislative and practical implementation of this right. It should be noted that various aspects of the human right to life were considered in the scientific works of G.B. Romanovsky, O.G. Selikhova, T.M. Fomichenko, A.B. Borisova, V.A. Ershov and other Russian authors. The aim of the study is to study and comparative analysis of the legal content of the constitutional norm that defines the right to life, to comprehend and identify possible problems of the implementation of this right. To achieve this goal, this article discusses relevant issues of ensuring the right to life, proclaimed by Article 20 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and Article 27 of the Constitution of Azerbaijan Republic. The results of a comparative analysis of these constitutional norms and the relevant norms of industry law allow us to determine, that there is no contradiction between Article 20 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the norms of the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation, which imply the death penalty as an exceptional measure of punishment, because a moratorium has been imposed on the death penalty in the Russian Federation since April 16, 1997. However, after the abolition of the death penalty in the criminal legislation of the Republic of Azerbaijan in 1998, there was a discrepancy between parts II and III of Article 27 of the Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the criminal legislation of Azerbaijan Republic that requires the introduction of the necessary changes in the content of the analyzed constitutional norm. The value of the work is determined by the fact that the introduction of appropriate changes will contribute to the further improvement of the Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the effective implementation of the right to life of everyone.

KEBIJAKAN MODERASI PIDANA MATI

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 193
Author(s):  
Mei Susanto ◽  
Ajie Ramdan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Moderation Model ◽  
The Right

ABSTRAKPutusan Nomor 2-3/PUU-V/2007 selain menjadi dasar konstitusionalitas pidana mati, juga memberikan jalan tengah (moderasi) terhadap perdebatan antara kelompok yang ingin mempertahankan (retensionis) dan yang ingin menghapus (abolisionis) pidana mati. Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini adalah bagaimana kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam putusan a quo dikaitkan dengan teori pemidanaan dan hak asasi manusia dan bagaimana kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam RKUHP tahun 2015 dikaitkan dengan putusan a quo. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian doktrinal, dengan menggunakan bahan hukum primer dan sekunder, berupa peraturan perundang-undangan, literatur, dan hasil-hasil penelitian yang relevan dengan objek penelitian. Penelitian menyimpulkan, pertama, putusan a quo yang memuat kebijakan moderasi pidana mati telah sesuai dengan teori pemidanaan khususnya teori integratif dan teori hak asasi manusia di Indonesia di mana hak hidup tetap dibatasi oleh kewajiban asasi yang diatur dengan undang-undang. Kedua, model kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam RKUHP tahun 2015 beberapa di antaranya telah mengakomodasi amanat putusan a quo, seperti penentuan pidana mati di luar pidana pokok, penundaan pidana mati, kemungkinan pengubahan pidana mati menjadi pidana seumur hidup atau penjara paling lama 20 tahun. Selain itu masih menimbulkan persoalan berkaitan dengan lembaga yang memberikan pengubahan pidana mati, persoalan grasi, lamanya penundaan pelaksanaan pidana mati, dan jenis pidana apa saja yang dapat diancamkan pidana mati.Kata kunci: kebijakan, KUHP, moderasi, pidana mati. ABSTRACTConstitutional Court’s Decision Number 2-3/PUU-V/2007, in addition to being the basis of the constitutionality of capital punishment, also provides a moderate way of arguing between retentionist groups and those wishing to abolish the death penalty (abolitionist). The problem in this research is how the moderation policy of capital punishment in aquo decision is associated with the theory of punishment and human rights and how the moderation policy of capital punishment in the draft Criminal Code of 2015 (RKUHP) is related with the a quo decision. This study is doctrinal, using primary and secondary legal materials, in the form of legislation, literature and research results that are relevant to the object of analysis. This study concludes, firstly, the aquo decision containing the moderation policy of capital punishment has been in accordance with the theory of punishment, specificallyy the integrative theory and the theory of human rights in Indonesia, in which the right to life remains limited by the fundamental obligations set forth in the law. Secondly, some of the modes of moderation model of capital punishment in RKUHP of 2015 have accommodated the mandate of aquo decision, such as the determination of capital punishment outside the main punishment, postponement of capital punishment, the possibility of converting capital punishment to life imprisonment or imprisonment of 20 years. In addition, it still raises issues regarding the institutions that provide for conversion of capital punishment, pardon matters, length of delay in the execution of capital punishment, and any types of crime punishable by capital punishment. Keywords: policy, criminal code, moderation, capital punishment.

The ICCPR as a ‘Living Instrument’: The Death Penalty as Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment

2004 ◽  
Vol 68 (6) ◽  
pp. 507-519 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amrita Mukherjee
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
The Right

This article examines the recent views of the UN Human Rights Committee on the issues related to the death penalty. Obligations under Articles 6 (the right to life) and 7 (the right not to be subjected to torture or other, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment) are correlated. Despite widely divergent opinions within the Committee on the issue, this human rights body is moving towards strengthening the obligations of abolitionist states and, in so doing, restricting the availability of the sanction for retentionist states. This is consistent with the object and purposes approach and the nature of the ICCPR as a living instrument.

scholarly journals Right to life and possible interference in its implementation: Constitutional and legal aspect

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 453-457
Author(s):  
Marina L. Voronkova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Aspect ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Embryos ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The World ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

Introduction. The problems of realizing the right to life are relevant to varying degrees in all countries of the world. Their importance can hardly be overestimated, since the preservation of a full-fledged family, society and the state as a whole depends on their solution. The article examines the problems associated with abortion, surrogacy, the development of biotechnology, death penalty, and analyzes the legislative experience of various states and Russia in these areas. The purpose of the study is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the problems arising in connection with the realization of the right to life and its possible restrictions. In the course of studying the problems, both general scientific and special legal methods were used: historical and dialectical methods, methods of analysis and synthesis, as well as the comparative legal method. Theoretical analysis. Russia (RSFSR) was the first country in the world to legislate in 1920 to allow abortion. According to the author, artificial termination of pregnancy solely at the request of a woman (without taking into account medical and social factors) causes irreparable harm to society, especially given the difficult demographic situation in modern Russia. In addition, this does not correspond to the guiding thesis of responsibility to future generations, enshrined in the preamble to the Constitution of the Russian Federation. In the context of realizing the right to life, each state faces a problem related to death penalty. Can a state, where the right to life is guaranteed, take the life of criminals? Apparently, each state should decide this issue based on the extent to which a particular crime poses a threat to society, a threat to life and health of people. Results. In our opinion, in countries with liberal legislation in relation to abortion, such as Russia, it is necessary to prohibit abortion at the request of a woman, since in this case the woman’s desire violates the right to life of an unborn child. The state should protect the right to life from the moment of conception, not birth, but this is a long process that should lead to an extensive interpretation of Part 2 of Art. 17 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. In addition, Russia needs to pay attention to the legislative experience of Germany and France in relation to surrogacy. In these countries, the legislator has clearly substantiated why surrogacy is in fact a crime against the family. In these countries, surrogacy is criminalized. Also, with the development of biotechnology all over the world, the problems of IVF and cryopreservation of human embryos are acute. This problem can also be solved at the level of legislation by allowing IVF only to married couples (man and woman) who cannot give birth to a child, and by limiting the number of fertilized eggs to a minimum, so that later the issue of destroying unclaimed embryos is not resolved. In general, it seems that in a mature society that wants to develop and tries to prevent the destruction of its state, it is necessary to protect the right to life by all possible legislative methods.

scholarly journals EKSISTENSI HUKUMAN MATI DITINJAU DARI ASPEK HAM SIPIL DALAM PERSEPEKTIF HAK UNTUK HIDUP

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 72-91
Author(s):  
I Gusti Bagus Hengki
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Research Methodology ◽  
Scientific Paper ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Perpetrators And Victims ◽  
The Right

This scientific paper is expected to find out how the existence of the death penalty is viewed from the aspect of Civil Human Rights in the perspective of the right to life and whether the existence of the death penalty is contrary to the ideology of the Pancasila State and the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and the Human Rights Law with a normative research methodology with using a statutory approach. From the results of the discussion that the existence of the death penalty in terms of the Civil Human Rights aspect in the perspective of the right to life still needs to be maintained, because it does not conflict with the ideology of the Pancasila State and the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, the Human Rights Law, UDHR and ICCPR, as well as religion. in Indonesia, as long as it is not carried out arbitrarily, in accordance with the provisions of the legislation. This needs to be done because to provide protection for individual perpetrators and victims against acts of revenge, emotional, uncontrollable, vigilante, so that it does not guarantee that the death penalty is abolished. Indeed, there are parties who are pro and contra about the death penalty by both underpinning Pancasila, all of which is to make Pancasila a "Justification".   Tulisan ilmiah ini diharapkan dapat mengetahui bagaimana eksistensi  hukuman mati  ditinjau dari aspek  HAM Sipil dalam perspektif hak untuk hidup  dan apakah eksistensi  hukuman mati bertentangan dengan  ideologi Negara Pancasila dan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 serta  Undang-Undang HAM dengan metodologi penelitian normatif dengan menggunakan jenis pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute Approach). Dari hasil pembahasan bahwa eksistensi hukuman mati ditinjau dari aspek HAM Sipil dalam perspektif Hak untuk hidup  masih perlu dipertahankan, karena tidak bertentangan dengan ideologi Negara Pancasila dan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945, Undang-Undang HAM, UDHR dan ICCPR, maupun agama yang ada di Indonesia, asal dilaksanakan  tidak sewenang-wenang, sesuai dengan ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan. Hal ini perlu diadakan  karena untuk memberikan perlindungan terhadap individu pelaku dan korban terhadap tindakan balas dendam, emosional, tidak terkendali, main hakim sendiri, sehingga tidak menjamin bahwa kalau hukuman pidana mati ditiadakan.  Memang ada pihak yang pro dan kontra tentang hukuman mati dengan sama-sama mendasari Pancasila, semuanya itu untuk menjadikan Pancasila sebagai “Justification“.

13. The right to life

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rhona K. M. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
National Security ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Security Forces ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right

This chapter examines African, American, European, and international jurisprudence on the right to life. It discusses the positive obligation incumbent on States to protect life; the permissible deprivation of life (the death penalty, death caused by national security forces, and death during armed conflict); and the issue of genocide. The chapter concludes that the right to life is of paramount importance in international human rights law. International law covers not only the straightforward human rights aspects, but also extends to the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide.

Article 2 CFR

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobias Lock
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
The Right

Everyone has the right to life. No one shall be condemned to the death penalty, or executed.

scholarly journals Feu la D.C.D. L'arrêt Miller et la peine de mort

2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 567-576
Author(s):  
Henri Brun
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
First Time

The Miller case, decided by the Supreme Court of Canada on October 5, 1976, puts the death penalty under the light of the Canadian Bill of Rights which formulates the right to life and the right to protection against cruel and unusual treatment or punishment. The following comment on the case relates to the interpretation given specific clauses of the Bill of Rights by the Court on that occasion. But it stresses especially the law that flows from the case about the compelling weight of the Bill of Rights over acts of Parliament enacted after the Bill came into force. In Miller, the Supreme Court expressed itself on the subject for the first time.

scholarly journals Non-universal Human Rights? How Article 6 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Undermines Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-117
Author(s):  
Billy Holmes
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Final Section ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Universal Human Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights facilitates inequality regarding the imposition of the death penalty and thus, it cannot ensure universality for the protection of the right to life. Paragraph two of this article states: ‘sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes.’ This article argues that the vagueness of the phrase ‘the most serious crimes’ allows states to undermine human rights principles and human dignity by affording states significant discretion regarding the human rights principles of equality and anti-discrimination. The article posits that this discretion allows states to undermine human dignity and the concept of universal human rights by challenging their universality; by facilitating legal inequality between men and women. Accordingly, it asserts that the implications of not expounding this vague phrase may be far-reaching, particularly in the long-term. The final section of this article offers a potential solution to this problem.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document