Book Review: The Death Penalty Debate: Two Opposing Views of Capital Punishment

1992 ◽  
Vol 89 (3) ◽  
pp. 429-431
Author(s):  
Michael L. Westmoreland-White
2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 302
Author(s):  
Shannon Pritting

The affordable but brief single-volume The Death Penalty: A Reference Handbook is edited by Professor Joseph Melusky of St. Francis University and Keith A. Pesto, a veteran US Magistrate Judge and lecturer at St. Francis. Pesto and Melusky have collaborated several times on related ABC-CLIO reference works including The Death Penalty: Documents Decoded (2014), Capital Punishment (2011), and Cruel and Unusual Punishment: Rights and Liberties under the Law (2003). This title is part of ABC-CLIO’s Contemporary World Issues Series, which “address vital issues in today’s society” and are “written by professional writers, scholars and nonacademic experts,” covering current topics such as marijuana, social media, and prisons (v).


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.


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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document