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

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.

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 72-91
Author(s):  
I Gusti Bagus Hengki

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“.


Author(s):  
Rhona K. M. Smith

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.


Author(s):  
Azadeh Dastyari ◽  
Asher Hirsch

Abstract This article provides an analysis of cooperative non-entrée policies in Australia and Italy. Through their funding, training and interception activities, Australia and Italy have aided and assisted Indonesia and Libya, respectively, in the commission of a number of internationally wrongful acts against refugees and migrants. These wrongful acts include refoulement; arbitrary detention; violations of the right to life; cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment; and violations of the right to leave. These human rights violations benefit Australia and Italy by preventing refugees and migrants from entering Australian and Italian territory. They are extensively reported and widely known. Neither Australia nor Italy can claim ignorance of the circumstances of these acts. In the light of this analysis, it is argued that, under Article 16 of the Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, Australia and Italy are therefore responsible for their complicity in human rights violations in Indonesia and Libya, respectively.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-117
Author(s):  
Billy Holmes

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.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Анастасия Сергеевна Шабанова

The right to life is the highest value, is the basis of all other human rights and freedoms, but Russian legislation does not contain a definition of a person's life. In legal science, the right to life is interpreted as the right of the individual to freedom and personal integrity, health protection, reducing the problem to the abolition of the death penalty and euthanasia. The article deals with issues that are especially relevant in connection with the development of artificial methods of reproduction: from when does the right to life arise and whether the embryo has a legal value.


2017 ◽  
Vol 96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oksidelfa Yanto . .

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.


2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Oksidelfa Yanto

<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>


Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter focuses on the right to life and freedom from ill-treatment, considered the two most fundamental human rights premised on the idea of the inherent dignity of human beings. The chapter examines the right to life as elucidated in Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), along with the ECHR’s positive obligations. It also highlights exceptions in Article 2(2) and the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) adjudication on controversial issues as to when life begins and ends, including abortion, the right to die, and the death penalty. The chapter then examines Article 3 and the interpretation of the Article by the ECtHR. In addition, the chapter looks at the UK’s approach to freedom from ill-treatment and the right to life, and concludes with a discussion of the scope of Article 3 with regard to freedom from ill-treatment.


Author(s):  
Bielefeldt Heiner, Prof ◽  
Ghanea Nazila, Dr ◽  
Wiener Michael, Dr

The dominant concerns of this chapter relate to two aspects of the relationship between ‘religion’ and the ‘right to life’. One is the need to ensure that nobody is denied the right to life on grounds of their religion or belief (this being directly related to freedom of religion or belief), and the other is that nobody should be denied the right to life in the name of religion or belief. At the same time, the chapter also considers the broader horizon of multifaceted issues that are often considered relevant to life and religion. Issues such as religious values relating to the importance of life, and religious positions on abortion and on the death penalty are discussed in order to illustrate that, although not per se falling within freedom of religion or belief, they can be rendered relevant for the practice of freedom of religion or belief, depending on religious or moral convictions which people lay claim to.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document