Nguyen Tuong Van is guilty of trafficking heroin through Singapore. There is no doubt of his guilt. Also, there was never any doubt of his punishment. He will hang. He was condemned the moment he set foot into Singapore.
The question for me is not whether he is guilty but whether he or anyone should be subject to the death sentence. It would be easier to understand if the death penalty was effective, but it isn't.
There are three justifications commonly given for punishment:
- Retribution: Only retribution is achieved and this presumes the condemned are in fact guilty. Since 1973, 119 people in 25 US states have been found innocent and released from death row based on evidence derived via new forensic methods (such as DNA).
- Deterrent: If the death penalty worked as a deterrent, countries with the death penalty would have lower capital crime. This is not the case.
- Reformation: criminals are not reformed by the application of a death penalty, indeed it is irrelevant.
Victor Hugo saw the practice of execution in the light of a class struggle, “‘I have tirelessly fought to stop the assault of those above on those below.” The writer’s opinions were not just based on ideals — as Hugo had witnessed several executions in his life. One that stayed with him in particular, was that of an 18-year-old girl who had stolen a single handkerchief. Hugo felt sympathy for those who committed crimes because he believed that crimes were a result of miserable conditions.
What can I do? I'm not an active campainer for the abolition of the death penalty but I will vote with my wallet by boycotting Singapore and Singporean products for three years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_penalty
http://www.vusst.hr/ENCYCLOPAEDIA/punishment1.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment