End the death penalty: Its basis has collapsed
bits by cannon balls and left hanging from trees for their alleged roles in the Uprising. Now it took a trial in court and determination of guilt, at least on paper, but those charged with grave offences could still be put to death by the state apparatus. What freedom in 1947 brought was a substantial measure of justice in general, but self-rule has not yet translated into a ban on this particular practice.
The advocacy of such a ban has long stumbled on the shock of actual crimes in evidence, some of them so shocking that any ‘leniency’ is misread as sympathy for perpetrators. The case against capital punishment, however, is based not on emotion, but reason. As the country redrafts its penal code, it’s about time this reform found the legislative backing it deserves.
Across societies and ages, the penalty in question has survived on its reputed capacity to deter the most unwanted of acts. What might have worked in olden-day contexts of tyranny, however, would surely have lost force as human rights began to get encoded, legally and socially, and fear ceded space as a motive for conduct to civil concerns. Today, its efficacy as a deterrent stands in doubt.
Studies have shown only weak links between rates of crime and execution. State executions cannot be relied upon for social gains. Yet, the costs imposed by these remain heavy.
A life taken cannot be given back, so the risk of a false conviction doing it is far from trivial. With open-and-shut cases now a rarity, no justice system can promise 100% accuracy in affixing guilt, regardless of intent. Imperfection is a given.
Read more on livemint.com
