Wednesday, 26 March 2014 00:01
-
- {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
Reinstating the death penalty in Sri Lanka has gained public attention yet again, with many people visiting the Bogambara Prison advocating its return. Yet there are significant hurdles to such a step in Sri Lanka’s mired legal system.
On the surface the argument for the death penalty is a simple one. Crimes and the level of violence in Sri Lanka have undoubtedly increased. Therefore the death penalty is seen as a deterrent and, in the cases of child abuse and rapists, a worthy form of retribution.
There have been and always will be cases of executions of innocent people. No matter how developed a justice system is, it will always remain susceptible to human failure. Unlike prison sentences, the death penalty is irreversible and irreparable. Moreover, the death penalty is often used in a disproportional manner against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic, political and religious groups.
Perhaps the most telling argument of all is that the death penalty violates the right to life, which happens to be the most basic of all human rights. It also violates the right not to be subjected to torture and other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment. Furthermore, the death penalty undermines human dignity, which is inherent to every human being.
The death penalty lacks the deterrent effect which is commonly referred to by its advocates. As recently stated by the General Assembly of the United Nations, “There is no conclusive evidence of the deterrent value of the death penalty” (UNGA Resolution 65/206). It is noteworthy that in many retentionist states, the effectiveness of the death penalty in order to prevent crime is being seriously questioned by a continuously increasing number of law enforcement professionals.
Public support for the death penalty does not necessarily mean that the taking away the life of a human being by the state is right. There are undisputed historical precedents where gross human rights violations have had the support of a majority of the people, but which were condemned vigorously later on. It is the job of leading figures and politicians to underline the incompatibility of capital punishment with human rights and human dignity.
Sri Lanka abstained from voting for a heavily-backed UN resolution that supports a global moratorium on the death penalty leading to its eventual abolition in December 2012. The resolution was adopted by the UN General Assembly and the draft was approved with 110 countries voting in favour, while 39, including the United States and India, voted against.
Sri Lanka was among 36 countries that abstained. Sri Lanka’s abstention comes amidst highly-publicised moves to hire a new hangman. Capital punishment remains in the statute books but implementation was suspended more than 30 years ago. The Government’s current position on hanging is unclear but increasingly it appears the people are for it.
Yet it cannot be denied that political patronisation, lack of resources, outdated laws and massive backlogs are creating a mockery out of justice far more than the lack of the death penalty. Social attitudes too need to change as society is responsible for the creation of criminals as well as rehabilitating them and readmitting them to public life.
In 2012 the Government was even looking at the possibility of allowing death row prisoners to repeal their lifetime sentences and have the hope of someday leaving their cells. Now it seems mercy could be exchanged for the hangman’s noose in a decision that could cost everyone dearly.
