Essay On Capital Punishment
Essay On Capital Punishment
Essay On Capital Punishment
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
Evaluate the effectiveness of the legal and non-legal responses in concerns
with the contemporary human rights issue of capital punishment.
Human rights are the basic universally recognised liberties and entitlements
accorded to all people that are inalienable but unfortunately these rights in the
use of capital punishment are abused. Capital Punishment also referred to as
the death penalty, or execution is a legal process whereby a person is put to
death by the state as a punishment for a crime such as murder, aggravated
sexual assault, apostasy, treason and in more recent times the trafficking of
humans and drugs. Over 60% of the world's population live in countries where
a persons right to humane treatment and to a life of liberty and freedom is
violated because of the use of capital punishment. Both legal and non-legal
methods have undertaken various measures to address the issue of capital
punishment.
Legal methods such as United Nations Resolutions and Protocols and
international and domestic legislation have been put in place in order to
achieve A Global Moratorium on Capital Punishment.
The United Nation as a Global Entity encourages its nation states to move for a
Global Moratorium on Capital Punishment through its binding resolutions and
protocols. The United Nations Convention on the Right of the Child in article 37
prohibits the subjection of a juvenile to torture, capital punishment and
deprivation of liberty and the Second Optional Protocol to the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in its 11 articles stresses the necessity of
a universal ban on capital punishment. Although the United Nations is a very
influential power without the initial signing and ratification of its binding
resolutions and protocols a nation state is not liable when breaching any of the
articles within the resolution/ protocol due to a its right to state sovereignty a
countries ability to enforce its own laws.
Global legislation concerning the abolishment of capital punishment is
dependent on the initial signing and ratification of United Nations resolutions
and protocols.
The Australian Federal Government passed into Legislation the abolishment of
capital punishment with the Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973 (Ctlh) which
ratifies the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This legislation
forbids the use of capital punishment and makes R v Ronald Ryan (VIC ) 1966
the last person executed on Australia soil.
But without the initial signing and ratification of United Nations resolution and
protocols nations are allowed to use capital punishment in the sentencing of an
offender. An example of this is the case of Singapore v Van Tuong Nguyen
(2005) ("Terrified Walk to a Long-Drop Execution." The Daily Telegraph.
December 1, 2005), were Van Nguyen (an Australian citizen) was hung in
Changi prison on the 2nd of December 2005 under Singapores Mandatory
[Type text]
Page 1
Capital Punishment Section 316 of the Criminal Procedure Code for smuggling
396 grams of heroin into Singapore.
[Type text]
Page 2
Page 3
Through the combination of both legal and non-legal measures it can be noted
that some success has been achieved in reaching a Global Moratorium on
Capital Punishment as, as of 2012 97 countries have abolished capital
punishment. Legal methods although internationally recognised and legally
binding, enable freedom to countries that wish to use capital punishment
through state sovereignty which has allowed 58 nations to actively practice
capital punishment. Non-legal measure seem to be more effective they aware
the international community of the breach of human rights attained through
capital punishment and have even convince countries such as Cambodia to
eradicate the use of capital punishment in their legal system. In order to
achieve a Global Moratorium on Capital Punishment legal methods need to
adopt measures that that are not only internationally recognised and legally
binding but methods that aware the governmental powers of each nation
state the breach of human rights they have legalised which could like in
Cambodia convince nation states to abolish capital punishment without taking
away their right to state sovereignty.
Page 4
grounds that the Mayans were forming a sub verse internal communist enemy
against the government.
Methods that have been put in place to deal with Crimes against the
international community are international treaties and international courts.
International treaties outline actions that are considered acts of Genocide and
War Crimes and determine their criminal jurisdiction. The Geneva Convention
1949 is four treaties and three protocols that set out the standards in
international law for the humane treatment of the victims of war. Article 6 of
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court of 2002 gives the ICC
criminal jurisdiction over the acts of genocide that have occurred since July
2002.
These treaties can only apply to those States who sign and ratify the treaty and
a Sate who hasnt signed or ratified the treaty can easily claim state
sovereignty and not be held responsible under alleged crimes claimed in the
treaty.
Extradition Treaties are bound by bilateral agreements between countries
where by one country surrenders a suspect or convicted criminal to another
country to face criminal charges or sentencing.
The Extradition Act 1988 (Clth) ensures that the guilt of the accused has to be
proven beyond all reasonable doubt and that the accused will receive a fair trial
in the state to which they are being returned. This has proven to be effective
in the case of Dragan Vasilijkvoic an alleged war criminal who through an
extradition treaty between Croatia and Australia is now being trailed fairly in
Croatia where the alleged war crimes during conflict in Balkans 1991-1993 took
place.
Although extradition treaties have proven to be a great method an extradition
treaty is not granted if the offence is considered political in nature and the
requested state can easily grant refugee status to criminal protecting the
criminal.
[Type text]
Page 5
[Type text]
Page 6