Should the death penalty be reintroduced for those convicted of serious criminal offenses?
Though the death penalty remains a contentious area of debate, most developed countries agree on its abolishment, and for good reason. In this essay, serious criminal offenses shall be defined as crimes with intent to harm that involve significant harm to individuals, property, or public safety, such as murder or intent to murder. Despite the gravity of such crimes, this essay argues that under no grounds should the death penalty be reintroduced due to the inability of courts to accurately and absolutely determine someone’s guilt, and our inherent human right to life.
To begin with, the death penalty should not be reintroduced as it is impossible to determine whether or not someone convicted is truly guilty of the offense. The death penalty is an irreversible penalty in which the person’s life can never return. Our fallibility as humans to determine a person’s guilt, no matter how democratic our judicial institutions may be, makes it so that we can never be completely sure of a convicted person’s culpability. Thus, reintroducing the death penalty returns the possibility that someone who is innocent may have their life taken away as punishment for a crime they did not commit. With imprisonment sentencing, there is still the chance that an innocent person may be exonerated in the future if they were later found not guilty. The death penalty however, does not allow for mistakes to be remedied and may cause irreversible damage to falsely convicted persons.
In addition to this, all humans are born with the natural right to life and the right to live free from inhumane treatment, protected under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. These rights can not be taken away, no matter what crime one may commit. In the modern age, such actions cannot be morally permissible because they go against the very essence of human advancement.
Furthermore, reintroducing the death penalty carries the possibility of setting a dangerous precedent, in which autocratic regimes may use this as justification for their own “criminals.” If countries like the UK were to reintroduce this penalty, we would be implying that state intervention on someone’s right to live is justifiable under certain circumstances, also determined by the state. This is a slippery slope that may lead other countries to follow suit and use the death penalty as a political tool or means of oppression. Therefore, the reintroduction of the death penalty in developed countries may aggravate a decline in democratic practices worldwide.
On the other hand, critics may argue that the reintroduction of the death penalty is a necessary step in deterring criminals. However, this argument does not take into account that many criminals who commit serious criminal offenses do not necessarily care about what would happen if they were caught. In fact, it is well known in psychology that these people, for instance serial killers, are narcissists or have psychopathic tendencies. Thus, they may not be deterred by the death penalty because they refuse to believe they could get caught, or the pleasure they obtain from their crimes simply outweighs whatever consequences may be imposed on them. A harsh criminal penalty may affect those committing less serious crimes, but for those who already intent on committing very grave crimes, the death penalty as a deterrent is not a strong enough argument to counteract the aforementioned arguments.
To conclude, under no circumstances should the death penalty be reintroduced for those convicted of serious criminal offenses because:
- it is an irreversible penalty that could have irreversible consequences for a person who may not be guilty for the crime they were convicted of;
- it is a violation of our innate human rights given in the UN human rights doctrine and is morally wrong;
- it could set a dangerous precedent;
- there are no counterarguments strong enough to present a reason why we should risk putting an innocent person to death or violating someone’s human rights.
Therefore, this essay reiterates that the death penalty would have detrimental moral and policy implications if it were to be reinstated.
