Doing Away with Capital Punishment in Russia

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bakhtiyar Tuzmukhamedov
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
The Right ◽  
Relationship Of

The Russian Constitution protects the right to life. At the same time, it states that “capital punishment until its complete abolition may be established by federal law as an exclusive form of punishment for particularly grave crimes against life,” but only on the condition that an accused in a capital case shall be entitled to a trial by a court comprising professional judges and a lay jury (Article 20 (2)). This chapter will describe the uneasy relationship of Russia with the death penalty, both domestically and internationally. It will speculate whether the Constitutional Court applied international law as a common denominator to interpret the Constitution, or instead turned to international sources as an auxiliary means to support its own understanding of constitutional goals.

scholarly journals The problem of the legislative sentence to the death penalty in russia in the context of international obligations

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-161
Author(s):  
A V Ivanov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Long Time ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
The Right

Legislative Sentence to the death penalty as an exceptional measure of capital punishment and its relation to the right to life have been a subject of public discussion for a long time, and nowadays they are topical ones for every civilized state.The International law prohibits the use of capital punishment by a country because the death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhumanand degrading punishment as well as because the legislative Sentence to the death penalty is contrary to the basic principle of respectfor human rights and fundamental freedoms including the recognition of an absolute right to human life.One of the essential conditions for invitation of Russia to the Council of Europe has been the legislative Sentence for the abolition ofthe death penalty, but Russia still has not ratified Protocol No. 6, and has not taken action on the absolute refusal of the death penalty,so the problem of the Sentence to the death penalty as a capital punishment, continues to be topical more than ever.

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.

scholarly journals DEATH PENALTY AND THE RIGHT TO LIFE IN HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE, THE 1945 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA, AND INDONESIAN LAW

2017 ◽  
Vol 96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oksidelfa Yanto . .
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Deterrent Effect ◽  
General Nature ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Positive Law ◽  
Legal Power ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

The execution of Death penalty in Indonesia is based on the court verdict that has had a permanent legal power. Only through the court ruling a man can be executed a death penalty upon the guilty alleged at him/her. The death penalty application in Indonesia is provided in the positive law with specific or general nature. As a country having the most verdicts with the capital punishment, either to its local citizen or to the foreign citizen who commits any offenders in the jurisdiction of Republic of Indonesia, triggering the existing of pro and contra stance on the capital punishment execution. The opposing stance based its argument on the human rights perspective, affirming that the capital punishment can be categorized as a form of savage and inhuman punishment and is in the contrary with the constitution. While the stance supporting the capital punishment execution is based on the argumentation that the perpetrator must be avenged in compliance with his/her commit, in order to give a deterrent effect for others who want to commit similar offense. Nevertheless as a matter of fact, there are still many similar offense occurred though capital punishment has been implemented.<br /><br />Keywords : Capital punishment, rights to live and human rights.

scholarly journals Imbas Konsistensi Hukuman Mati pada Hubungan Bilateral dalam Kasus Narkoba

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 255
Author(s):  
Moh Rosyid
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
International Convention ◽  
The Reformation ◽  
The Family ◽  
Penal Law ◽  
The Right

<p>This article discusses about the debate over death penalty in the drug abuse cases. The Constitutional Court on October 30<sup>th</sup>, 2007 on the judicial review of Article 80 of the Law No 22/1997 on Drug declared that death penalty is not violating the Constitution which guarantees the right to life. Furthermore, Indonesia has ratified the International convention on narcotics and psychotropic. On the other hand, the opponent of death penalty argues that death penalty violates Article 28A of the Amendment of the Constitution that all people have the right to life. Secondly, death penalty is cruel and inhumane. Thirdly, there is possibility for false trial, and fourth, death penalty is not in-line with the reformation of penal law which imposes on restorative justice instead of retributive. Fifth, the effect is just a myth and sixth, the family becomes co-victim. Seventh, death penalty also threatened Indonesian living abroad and the last, death penalty cause the loss of Indonesia in International relations.</p>

scholarly journals DEATH PENALTY EXECUTION AND THE RIGHT TO LIFE IN PERSPECTIVE OF HUMAN RIGHTS, 1945 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA, AND INDONESIAN LAW

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Oksidelfa Yanto
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Deterrent Effect ◽  
General Nature ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Positive Law ◽  
Legal Power ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

<p align="center"><strong><em>Abstract</em></strong></p><p><em>The execution of Death penalty in Indonesia is based on the court verdict that has had a permanent legal power. Only through the court ruling a man can be executed a death penalty upon the guilty alleged at him/her. The death penalty application in Indonesia is provided in the positive law with specific or general nature. As a country having the most verdicts with the capital punishment, either to its local citizen or to the foreign citizen who commits any offenders in the jurisdiction of Republic of Indonesia, triggering the existing of pro and contra stance on the capital punishment execution. The opposing stance based its argument on the human rights perspective, affirming that the capital punishment can be categorized as a form of savage and inhuman punishment and is in the contrary with the constitution. While the stance supporting the capital punishment execution is based on the argumentation that the perpetrator must be avenged in compliance with his/her commit, in order to give a deterrent effect for others who want to commit similar offense.    Nevertheless as a matter of fact, there are still many similar offense occurred though capital punishment has been implemented.    </em></p><p><strong><em>Keywords : Capital punishment, rights to live and human rights</em></strong><strong><em>.</em></strong><strong><em> </em></strong></p>

scholarly journals Hukuman Mati dalam Tindak Pidana Narkotika Ditinjau dari Perspektif Hak Asasi Manusia (Studi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 2-3/Puu-V/2007

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 361-366
Author(s):  
Christofel Brayn Leonard Totomutu ◽  
I Ny Oman Gede Sugiartha ◽  
I Made Minggu Widyantara
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Processing Method ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Original Source ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Laws And Regulations

The capital punishment is regulated in several laws and regulations in Indonesia, in particular for narcotics crimes that are submitted for judicial review against the Constitution. The type of research used is the type of normative. The sources of the data used in this research are primary, which are taken from the original source of the law and secondary materials are materials derived from books, journals and scientific works and tertiary legal materials. The technique of collecting data in this research is carried out by collecting existing materials or studying documents from existing laws and regulations as well as the decisions of the constitutional court judges and explaining the sentence by using the legal material processing method systematically. The purpose of this research was to determine the capital punishment for narcotics crime in terms of human rights and to find out the judges considerations on the capital punishment for narcotics crime in Indonesia based on the decision of the constitutional court number 2-3/PUU-V/2007. The results of the research revealed that the capital punishment for narcotics crime has been stated in articles and laws, but on the other hand there is a consideration of the panel of judges regarding the capital punishment case for narcotics crime that the capital punishment in the Narcotics Law does not contradict human rights and human rights as in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia because the guarantee of human rights and the right to life in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia does not adhere to absolute principles.

scholarly journals KEBERADAAN PIDANA MATI DALAM KITAB UNDANG-UNDANG HUKUM PIDANA (KUHP)

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 104
Author(s):  
Ni Komang Ratih Kumala Dewi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Deterrent Effect ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
The Right

Capital punishment is the heaviest crime and difficult to apply in a country of law considering the death penalty is one of the acts of human rights violations, but to make someone discourage of committing a crime there needs to be rules or penalties that can provide a deterrent effect and provide security for the community from all form of crime. The purpose of writing is directed to find out the regulation of the Death Penalty in the Criminal Law Code which is stipulated in several articles in the Criminal Code and the existence of capital punishment in the legal system in Indonesia in terms of human rights perspective, which of course would be contrary to human rights, especially the right to life, however capital punishment is also needed as an effort to prevent the occurrence of crimes, especially those classified as serious

scholarly journals Implementasi Nilai Pancasila Terhadap Hukuman Mati Tindak Pidana Narkotika

PRANATA HUKUM ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-167
Author(s):  
Fathur Rachman
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Death Sentence ◽  
Ethical Values ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Drug Offenders ◽  
Life And Death ◽  
Positive Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Universe

The proliferation of drug trafficking and use activities in Indonesia today, makes Indonesia a drug emergency. Narcotics is an extraordinary crime and needs special attention in its eradication efforts. Therefore great power is needed by using the toughest legal actions in which Indonesia has a death sentence. The purpose of capital punishment is to give a violent deterrent to drug offenders and as a warning to other communities not to commit these crimes. The issue examined in this paper is the suitability of Pancasila as the legal basis for the application of the death penalty, and the application of the death penalty to narcotics crime. The reality of capital punishment in Indonesia shows that the implementation of the judicial system is not good and the execution of the death penalty is always postponed so that it seems indecisive . In addition, the regulation of capital punishment also raises the debate between the ethical values of Pancasila and positive law (KUHP). It is undeniable that in the effort to implement such assertiveness sometimes experience obstacles both from within and outside the country. As well as various counter opinions regarding capital punishment that violate human rights . Even in Indonesia alone for those who contradict the death penalty, it is associated with violating the first precepts of Pancasila, where God is the ruler of the universe who has full provisions for the right to life and death. But Indonesia still applies the death penalty based on the positive law (KUHP).

9. Integrity of the person

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel S Rodley
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Security Forces ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Law Enforcement Officials ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
The Right ◽  
Peremptory Norms

This chapter examines rights at the core of the concept of integrity of the person. Specifically, it considers the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment and the right to life. The chapter addresses complex definitional issues of what constitutes torture, and addresses other ill-treatment, mainly in the light of treaty definitions and case law of courts and other bodies charged with applying relevant treaties. The same approach is taken with respect to the right to life, where the central issues of the limits international law places on the death penalty and on the use of force by security forces and law enforcement officials are considered. Both rights are considered to be rules of customary international law and probably peremptory norms of international law (jus cogens).

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document