The Origins of LWOP in California

Author(s):  
Marion Vannier

Chapter 1 turns to the Californian Congress where opponents of the death penalty first lobbied for LWOP before legislators. It critically examines the period during which the idea of sentencing offenders to life imprisonment with no possibility of release first emerged, starting in the early 1900s and culminating with the introduction of LWOP for capital murder in 1978 in the Californian Penal Code. What emerges from this archival research is that different experts—prison wardens, police officials, academics, spiritual leaders, and criminologists—offered LWOP as a strategic way for legislators to argue against the death penalty. This novel approach was however diverted from its progressive endeavours to serve more punitive agendas. Legislators concerned with preserving capital punishment in contexts of sensationalized crimes and early forms of populist demands drove the reforms that introduced LWOP. This historical investigation reveals that the punishment’s particular severity can serve agendas which are seemingly in tension with one another.

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 193
Author(s):  
Mei Susanto ◽  
Ajie Ramdan

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.


1991 ◽  
Vol 25 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 512-523
Author(s):  
Leon Sheleff

One of the most disturbing aspects of examining the extensive capital punishment debate, with its clear indications of discriminatory practices, ambiguous judicial directives, undeniable miscarriages of justice, controversial statistical data, and inept, inconsistent and/or unjust implementation, is the constantly gnawing thought that if this is the situation vis-à-vis what is considered the most extreme penalty with its special super due process, then what is happening in the cases of lesser penalties. These latter cases of petty thieves sentenced to years of incarceration for relatively minor delinquencies, of accused inadequately defended without appeals being lodged within the judicial system or public interest shown, of compulsory life imprisonment without parole, no doubt reflect all of the faults and errors of capital punishment.


Author(s):  
Mfonobong David Udoudom ◽  
Samuel Akpan Bassey ◽  
Okpe Okpe ◽  
Timothy Adie

It is an indisputable fact that most societies in the world agrees that if a person violates the laws, he/she should be penalized.  However, the variations appear when it involves what sensibly punishment ought to be applied, predominantly for major crimes like murder. Death penalty, which as well referred to as execution or capital punishment, is one amongst these variations which have caused several arguments and debates between its opponents and supporters. Today, numerous countries are attempting to seek out different sanctions for major crimes like life imprisonment relatively to capital punishment. This research tries to take a look at the idea of capital punishment from Kantian and Utilitarian ethics perspectives.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-135
Author(s):  
Irvino Rangkuti, Alvi Syahrin, Suhaidi, Mahmud Mulyadi

The application of capital punishment itself has been regulated in Indonesia as contained in the law. Article 2 paragraph (2) of Corruption Act concerning Eradication of Corruption Crimes. According to Romli Atmasasmita, it was argued that the death penalty for corruptors was effectively implemented in the People's Republic of China (PRC), and it was quite successful to reduce corruption. This certainly can be used as an example in Indonesia in imposing capital punishment for corruptors. The imposition of capital punishment for perpetrators of corruption is urgently needed as "shock therapy" because psychologically the death penalty aims for the benefit of general prevention so that others do not participate in committing crimes. Also, the application of capital punishment is based on the reason that capital punishment is more certain than the prison sentence because the prison sentence is often followed by running away, forgiveness, or because of the release. When compared from an economic standpoint, basically the death sentence is more efficient when compared to life imprisonment. As for the problems that can be formulated, namely: legal arrangements regarding corruption in the Corruption Act; the application of capital punishment sanctions against perpetrators of corruption in Indonesia. The results of the study show that: Corruption is a type of extraordinary crime ("extra-ordinary crime") that must be handled extraordinarily, so that the act is contrary to the 1945 Constitution, therefore it does not need to be protected by the 1945 Constitution. accommodated in Article 2 paragraph (2) of the Corruption Act, must meet the requirements "in certain circumstances" by the Elucidation of Article 2 paragraph (2), but its application has never been implemented, so it is necessary to review the rules "in certain circumstances".


Author(s):  
Bryan J. Mccann

This chapter contends that antiprison and anti-death penalty activists need to reexamine their rhetorical habits and political strategies if they hope to achieve any lasting change in the nation's prison system. It draws from literature theorizing the death penalty's place in the prison-industrial complex, rhetoric of anti-death penalty activists, and personal experiences of grassroots abolitionist organizers to critique the prevalence of LWOP (life imprisonment without the possibility of parole) in the death-penalty abolitionist movement. Specifically, the chapter argues that while the alternative of LWOP serves as an understandable rhetorical strategy to spread the anti-death penalty gospel to more ambivalent audiences, it undermines a central organizational posture of the abolitionist cause: understanding capital punishment as only the most macabre expression of a colossal and broken prison-industrial complex.


2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Onyekachi W. Duru ◽  
Ndubuisi A. Nwafor ◽  
Chioma O. Nwabachili

Abstract Two wrongs cannot make a right; there is hardly any justification for the continual use of capital punishment (death) as a form of punishment in Nigeria. This paper will canvass that, even though death penalty is a constitutionally permissible form of punishment in Nigeria, but it goes against the recent positive and developmental strides in the areas of civilization, criminology and human right. The paper leans in favor of the abolitionist perspective by arguing that life imprisonment is as effective as the death penalty as a means of deterrence.


2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
R Ahmad Muhammad Mustain Nasuha

This study aims the death penalty in Indonesia. We know where the death penalty is contrary or not in terms of the constitution and Islamic law, then we can conclude that if the legal implementation of the death penalty in Indonesia continue to be done or should be abolished. Based on research and the analysis conducted, conclude that Indonesia According to the Indonesian Constitution that the death penalty in Indonesia is constitutional. Constitutional Court Decision No. 2-3 / PUU-V / 2007 states that the imposition of the death penalty was constitutional. Any law governing capital punishment is not contrary to the Constitution of the State of Indonesia. However the legislation in Indonesia death penalty is still recognized in some legislation. There are three groups of rules, namely: Criminal Dead in the Criminal Code, Criminal die outside the Criminal Code, Criminal die in the Draft Bill. According to Islamic law that the death penalty could be applied to some criminal act or jinazah, either hudud qishahs, diyat or ta'zir among others to: Apostate, Rebel, Zina, Qadzaf (Allegations Zina), Steal (Corruption), Rob (Corruption), Murder.


Author(s):  
Benjamin S. Yost

Against Capital Punishment offers an innovative proceduralist argument against the death penalty. Worries about procedural injustice animate many popular and scholarly objections to capital punishment. Philosophers and legal theorists are attracted to procedural abolitionism because it sidesteps controversies over whether murderers deserve death, holding out a promise of gaining rational purchase among death penalty retentionists. Following in this path, the book remains agnostic on the substantive immorality of execution; in fact, it takes pains to reconstruct the best arguments for capital punishment and presumes the appropriateness of execution in limited cases. At the same time, the book contends that the possibility of irrevocable mistakes precludes the just administration of the death penalty. The heart of Against Capital Punishment is a philosophical defense of the well-known irrevocability argument, which analyzes the argument’s premises, establishes their validity, and vindicates them against objections. The central claim is that execution violates the principle of remedy, which requires legal institutions to remedy their mistakes and to compensate those who suffer from wrongful sanctions. The death penalty is repellent to the principle of remedy by dint of its irrevocability. The incompatibility of remedy and execution is the crux of the irrevocability argument: because the wrongly executed cannot enjoy the obligatory remedial measures, execution is impermissible. Against Capital Punishment also reveals itself to be free from two serious defects plaguing other versions of proceduralism: the retributivist challenge and the problem of controversial consequences.


Author(s):  
Андрей Петрович Скиба ◽  
Андрей Владимирович Ковш ◽  
Александра Николаевна Мяханова

В статье проводится сравнительно-правовой анализ ряда норм катарского уголовного законодательства, а также российского уголовного и уголовно-исполнительного законодательства. Рассматриваются виды наказаний, связанных с лишением свободы, и их содержание по Уголовному кодексу Катара. Дополнительно обращается внимание на систему и содержание отдельных наказаний (в виде смертной казни, пожизненного лишения свободы и лишения свободы на определенный срок). Формулируется авторская редакция статей 57-62 Уголовного кодекса Катара, касающихся системы основных видов наказаний и их содержания. The article provides a comparative legal analysis of a number of norms of Qatari criminal law, as well as Russian criminal and penal enforcement legislation. The types of punishments related to deprivation of liberty and their content under the Qatari Criminal code are considered. In addition, attention is drawn to the system of punishments, the content of individual punishments (in the form of the death penalty, life imprisonment and imprisonment for a certain period). The author's version of articles 57-62 of the Criminal Code of Qatar concerning the system of main types of punishments and their content is formulated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document