Thou Shall Not Kill: The Constitutionality of Death Penalty Under Nigerian Legal System

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Onyekachi W. Duru ◽  
Ndubuisi A. Nwafor ◽  
Chioma O. Nwabachili
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
Human Right

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.

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.

Epilogue

2020 ◽  
pp. 264-270
Author(s):  
Arzoo Osanloo
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Differential Treatment ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Social Field ◽  
Regulatory Scheme ◽  
Bureaucratic State

This epilogue looks at the modern bureaucratic state. It considers what it means for a state's regulatory scheme to be comprised of such a range of free-roaming and diverse actors who operate in a semi-autonomous social field and participate in shaping and regulating its operations. Consequently, the epilogue reflects on what forgiveness work means for rights, law, and the higher aims of the Qur'anic mandate of mercy. Mercy means a lessening of deserved punishment (leniency) and, at the same time, mercy's very presence suggests injustice lies everywhere. That is, where there is mercy, there is injustice. However, mercy can play a crucial role in bringing about justice. The insistence on mercy, even if it is a power from above, can offer a crucial corrective to injustice. In some ways, this feature of the legal system explains the involvement of government agents in forgiveness work and suggests the basis for the state's differential treatment of anti-death penalty or human right activists versus forgiveness workers.

The Origins of LWOP in California

2021 ◽  
pp. 16-48
Author(s):  
Marion Vannier
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Archival Research ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
Capital Murder ◽  
Historical Investigation ◽  
Prison Wardens

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.

The Death Penalty — Response

1991 ◽  
Vol 25 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 512-523
Author(s):  
Leon Sheleff
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Life Imprisonment

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.

Capital Punishment

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hugo Adam Bedau
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Justification Of Punishment

Understanding and justifying capital punishment need to proceed from within a larger framework that can be and often is left implicit. That framework consists of one's views about punishment generally; only within that context can one adequately face the narrower issues peculiar to understanding and justifying the death penalty. If punishment as such could not be justified, then a fortiori neither could the death penalty. If punishment generally serves certain purposes or functions, then presumably so does the death penalty. Not so conversely, however. The death penalty might not be justified, but that need not put in doubt the justification of punishment in general. The discussion in this article proceeds on two assumptions. First, the general features defining punishment within a legal system will be taken for granted. Secondly, the function and purposes of the death penalty will be assumed to be those shared by punishments generally.

Varieties of Attack on the Death Penalty

1969 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Greenberg ◽  
Jack Himmelstein
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Challenge ◽  
Death Sentences ◽  
The Way

The latest execution in the United States occurred on June 2, 1967. Since then, death sentences have been stayed as courts across the country consider a legal challenge to the constitution ality of the death penalty. This paper describes the distorting effect that capital punishment has had on the legal system and the discriminations in the way it has been administered—for example, in rape cases it is applied almost exclusively to Negroes convicted of raping while women. The legal attack focuses on those procedural vices that reflect the arbitrariness and irration ality inherent in capital punishment. Courts are being called on to subject the death penalty to a reasoned examination and to test its validity against the commands of the Constitution, while the number of persons on the nation's death rows continues to grow past the 500 mark. This confrontation on the issue of capital punishment is part of the more general conflict taking place over how society may best cope with its problems without resort to violence.

scholarly journals Kantian and Utilitarian Ethics on Capital Punishment

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 28-35
Author(s):  
Mfonobong David Udoudom ◽  
Samuel Akpan Bassey ◽  
Okpe Okpe ◽  
Timothy Adie
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
The World

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.

scholarly journals SANKSI PIDANA KEMATIAN BAGI ORANG KORUPSI DI INDONESIA (Death Criminal Sanctions For Personnel Of Corruption In Indonesia)

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-135
Author(s):  
Irvino Rangkuti, Alvi Syahrin, Suhaidi, Mahmud Mulyadi
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Shock Therapy ◽  
Death Sentence ◽  
Prison Sentence ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
Running Away ◽  
Economic Standpoint

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".

“A Fate Worse than Death”

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan J. Mccann
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Prison System ◽  
Industrial Complex ◽  
Prison Industrial Complex ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
Rhetorical Strategy ◽  
Abolitionist Movement ◽  
Personal Experiences ◽  
Lasting Change

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.

The Death Penalty in Post-Mao China

1990 ◽  
Vol 123 ◽  
pp. 503-520 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Scobell
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Justice System ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Wide Range

The People's Republic of China has come under strong international criticism recently over its use of the death penalty. Capital punishment had a long history in China as a permanent fixture of the criminal justice system well before the establishment of the People's Republic in 1949. Today the death penalty is an integral part of the legal system and is meted out for a wide range of offences.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document