penalty brutalizes not only individuals as described above, but also the state. He argues that ‘the state’s power deliberately to destroy innocuous life is a manifestation of the hidden wish that the state be allowed to do anything it pleases with life’ 12 . Here Kateb is critical of the use of capital punishment as just another way for the state to overreach its power and interfere in the lives of citizens for no external benefit. I believe this view to be overly critical of the capitalist state and I would side with a more utilitarian approach such as that proposed by J.S. Mill that it is sometimes necessary for the state to intervene in society in order to maintain an ordered society. However I would argue that punishment such as life imprisonment without parole is a more effective way of intervening in society than through the use of capital punishment. Rehabilitation is a part of punishment that is held in particularly high regard by liberal religious believers who place a great emphasis on repentance and forgiveness. In a democracy the role of the state is to look after the welfare of its citizens. Liberals argue that punishment should have an element of forgiveness and even the most monstrous of criminals should be given a chance to redeem themselves –albeit within the confines of a life sentence. In ‘Summa Contra Gentiles’ , Book 3, Chapter 146 Aquinas writes ‘how many people are we to allow to be murdered while waiting for the repentance of a wrongdoer?’ 13 . Implicit here is the possibility for rehabilitation on death row as if one is not willing to repent in the face of death then it is unlikely that one will repent at all. Therefore there may be a place for the death penalty in a democratic society after all. The fourth aim of punishment, retribution is also the most controversial with many arguing that it is wrong to exact revenge on others. Nevertheless it is a tenet of democratic societies that those who break the law must pay some sort of punishment for their crimes. Take for example Frederick Baer who in 2005 was convicted in Indiana of two counts of murder, robbery, attempted rape and theft that included slitting the throat of a four year old girl that he had never met 14 . It is easy to see why many believe that the only way in which ‘true justice’ can be reached and the balance of justice be restored in society is for Baer to be punished with the same fate that befell his two victims. The death penalty can also be said to offer a sense of closure to the families of the victims, who, in a number of states, are able to watch those who murdered their loved ones being executed. However I believe that there are a number of fundamental problems with the idea of retribution: retribution requires people to be punished in proportion for the crimes that they have committed. Yet this is undermined due to the fallibility of human justice resulting in innocent civilians being killed in error. In his novel ‘The Idiot’ , Dostoevsky agreed that the death penalty did not re-balance the scales of justice 15 due to the long wait on death row under the Damoclean sword of American justice resulting in what is effectively a double punishment. Moreover there is a further issue with retribution that revolves around vengeance. In a recent article in the Spectator Charles Moore writes: ‘it is one of the strangest things about human nature that if something really disgusts us, we lose our sense of justice’ 16 . This reflects the old adage that ‘hard cases make bad law’ and this is especially true with death penalty cases. As humans we become so repulsed by the crimes that we become obsessed by trying to point the finger of blame at someone and we make it our duty to hold someone accountable for that which has so horrified us. As a result we end up demonizing these criminals (rightly or wrongly) which leads to us losing our sense of perspective and integrity when trying such criminals and thus such crimes can lead to punishments out of vengeance rather than retribution – for which there is no place in a democratic society. In conclusion I believe that the death penalty cannot be justified in a democratic society. We not only have a duty of care towards all; we also have an obligation to protect what is just and righteous. In the words of Archbishop Desmond Tutu ‘To take a life when a life has been lost is revenge; it is not justice.’
12 Kateb, G. (1992) The Inner Ocean: Individualism and Democratic Culture . Cornell University Press. 13 Aquinas.T. (1264) Summa Contra Gentiles. 14 McDonald.T. Inside Death Row with Trevor McDonald . ITV1. (2013) 15 Dostoevsky.F. (1868) The Idiot. 16 Charles Moore. The Spectators Notes. The Spectator (19/7/14).
86
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker