scholarly journals Constitutional Law: Imposition of Death Penalty after Successful Appeal from Sentence to Life Imprisonment Held to Violate Double Jeopardy Provision of California Constitution

1964 ◽  
Vol 1964 (4) ◽  
pp. 915
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Double Jeopardy ◽  
Life Imprisonment

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.

The main types of penalties related to deprivation of liberty and their content under the Qatari Criminal Code (comparative legal analysis with certain norms of Russian legislation)

2020 ◽  
pp. 100-104
Author(s):  
Андрей Петрович Скиба ◽  
Андрей Владимирович Ковш ◽  
Александра Николаевна Мяханова
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Life Imprisonment

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.

scholarly journals Ways to improve the incentive impact on life imprisonment convicts

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 168-172
Author(s):  
S. L. Babayan ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
Incentive Effect ◽  
Penal Colony ◽  
Successful Adaptation

The article reveals some issues of application of incentive norms and institutions that stimulate law-abiding behavior of convicts sentenced to life imprisonment. It is proposed to supplement the penal enforcement legislation with a provision providing for the transfer of positively characterized convicts to life imprisonment to a penal colony of strict regime after serving at least 20 years in a correctional colony of special regime for life imprisonment. In order to increase the effectiveness of the incentive effect on convicts it also seems appropriate to provide for the possibility of transferring convicts from the strict regime to the colony-settlement for the following categories of persons: convicted with a particularly dangerous relapse of crimes; convicted to life imprisonment; convicted persons who have been commuted to the death penalty by way of pardon. The possibility of transfer to the colony-settlement for these categories of convicts will contribute to the maintenance and restoration of their socially useful ties and successful adaptation to the conditions of life in society. In addition it is necessary to change the mechanism of grant of parole and provide for this incentive institution only in respect of positively characterized convicts to life imprisonment, transferred by a court decision from the special regime for convicts to life imprisonment in the strict regime.

Normalizing Extreme Imprisonment

2021 ◽  
pp. 153-166
Author(s):  
Marion Vannier
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
The Public ◽  
The World

The concluding Chapter 5 offers a new explanation for how reforms and those driving them can end up normalizing, in the sense of making the public view as acceptable, incredibly severe punitive practices. While not responsible for activating mechanisms of normalization, some death penalty abolitionists have nonetheless helped to maintain and reinforce them. In the shadow of the traditional death penalty, an inhumane form of punishment has proliferated and been championed by a range of penal progressive reformers. This chapter then brings the story to the present. It shows how LWOP is developing in other states and the rest of the world and discusses the dangers of using life imprisonment to challenge LWOP.

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.

Emerging Trends from the Resentencing of Capital Offenders in Malawi

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 164-199
Author(s):  
Mwiza Jo Nkhata
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Evidence Code ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
High Court ◽  
Emerging Trends ◽  
Capital Offenders ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Mandatory Sentence

In 2007, the High Court of Malawi, sitting as a constitutional court, declared that the mandatory sentence of death for murder was unconstitutional. At the time of the High Court’s invalidation of the mandatory death penalty, Malawi’s prisons had over 190 prisoners serving their sentences as a result of the imposition of the mandatory death penalty. Some of these prisoners were on death row, while others had their sentences commuted to life imprisonment. When the mandatory death penalty was declared unconstitutional, the High Court also directed that all prisoners serving their sentences for murder should be brought before the High Court so that they could receive individual sentences taking into account the circumstances of the offense, the offender, as well as the interests of the victim(s). This paper interrogates the application of the sentencing discretion that was introduced with the outlawing of the mandatory death penalty in Malawi. Specifically, the paper analyzes decisions that have emerged from the resentencing of capital offenders in so far as judges have either considered or refused to consider the relevance of post-conviction factors during the resentencing. It is this paper’s central finding that a refusal to consider post-conviction factors, as some judges held, was not only unjustified but was also contrary to Malawi’s Criminal Procedure and Evidence Code and the Constitution of the Republic of Malawi. This refusal, the paper argues, resulted in sentencing discrepancies as well as a failure to properly utilize the discretion vested in the courts for purposes of sentencing.

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.

scholarly journals The Reducible Life Imprisonment Standard from a Worldwide and European Perspective

Global Jurist ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Davide Galliani
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Case Law ◽  
International Level ◽  
European Perspective ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
European Court ◽  
Comparative Methodology ◽  
The Right

AbstractLife Imprisonment, unlike the death penalty, does not attract the attention of the doctrine. There are, however, significant developments in the European Court of Human Rights case law. In this paper, using a comparative methodology, we highlight the standard that, at international level, allows to consider Life Imprisonment compatible with human dignity-that is the right to a substantial judicial review. It is no longer acceptable that the ‘last word’ on the lifers’ early release is still entrusted to political power.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document