Death penalty Should Be Abolished in China
Death penalty Should Be Abolished in China
Death punishment is among the oldest penalties, which means ending a criminal lifespan by ruling. Over the years, the problem of whether the death penalty ought to be eliminated in China has been a provocative topic. Most individuals argue that the death sentence is a lousy manner of punishing criminals since it substantially disrupts the human right to life and humanitarianism. A number of nations in the world have eliminated the death sentence. However, in China, the death sentence has continued to be significant. The death sentence has continued to exist in China for reasons related to the country’s legal system, national condition, and human nature (Chen, 54). This is because China has a very complex national status and has a vast population that has many different nations and religions. These factors have been one of the most significant barriers in deciding various legal measures to govern social order in the country. The death sentence should be eliminated in China to respect humanitarianism and avoid irrevocable punishments.
The death penalty in China has offered no reliable safeguards against crime dangers. Errors and crimes have continued to be made repeatedly in the trial for the death penalty due to poor representation, prosecutorial misconduct, racial prejudice, or even erroneous evidence (Clark, 178). Considerably, a death inmate faces challenges in convincing that they are innocent. The possibility of receiving the death penalty for an innocent person is inevitable despite how much the person tries to convince others of their innocence. Ideally, a death penalty is an irreversible punishment and irrevocable action. There is a great threat that an blameless person will be executed since there is a serious doubt over their guiltiness. Over the years, people have paid for crimes they have never committed due to absolute judgments. Some people have turned up to be innocent, but since they were sent to jail with a death sentence, their sentences are irreversible.
The death penalty has violated a number of human rights such as the right to live free from torture, inhuman, cruel, punishment, and right to life. Every person has an absolute right to life despite their actions, thus imposing a death penalty means violating human rights. The death penalty is morally unjust and wrong since human life is valuable. This means that even when these criminals are apprehended, their lives have value, and thus they should not be deprived of the value of life. Reasonably, the value of the life of the criminal cannot be deprived due to the misconduct of the criminal. Ideally, the correct action and most appropriate for an individual that has committed a crime equal to a death sentence are to try and help them out (Jiang, 863). Thus, it is ineffective to condone an action by another crime since the death penalty takes away the lives of individuals. The Chinese government made a major step when it restored the right of appeal in capital cases in the supreme court. This has been essential in reducing the number of executions. Ideally, the abolition of the death penalty will allow China to have a high moral ground over retentions nations like the United States and will pull the country from critics of violating human rights.
Considerably, China has laws that educate criminals about what is wrong and what is right as well as regulating the behaviors of citizens. At some point, it is believed that the death penalty prevents criminals from committing the same crimes. However, the death penalty does not perform these functions. Before the death sentence was abolished in Hong Kong, there were almost 128 death sentences that had been passed and still crimes committed even after the death sentences (Hood,1). This clearly indicates that the death penalty cannot prevent crimes since it is not more effective as compared to imprisonment. It is undeniable that those who have been executed can commit more crimes. However, this is not a sufficient justification to utilize death sentence since there are better ways to prevent similar crimes. For instance, rehabilitation and education are more appropriate ways of approaching this issue since the main objective of this to let them understand their mistakes and help them build a better attitude in their lives. Criminals have no chance of reforming and educating other individuals about what they have learned about the crimes. This is important in reducing the crimes and actions of criminals since they have a good understanding of the consequences. Therefore, the death penalty will not deter crimes and other criminals from committing similar crimes.
The death penalty is a more serious crime of murder, unintentional, and unlawful taking of human life. The death penalty in the culture of crime and violence is never the answer to preventing crimes. The government of the Republic of China and the entire republic of China should stop using the death penalty as a weapon of fear as well as suppressing political opposition and preventing other political and illegal crimes. The death penalty remains cruel, inhuman as well as degrading punishment that reduces the value of life. Executions have continuously violated the right to life and fail to prevent such crimes from occurring. The death penalty, which has remained embedded in the Chinese notion of justice, should be eliminated among the options of punishment due to its severity and consequence to the Citizens in China.
Chen, Xingliang. “Destiny of the death penalty in China in the contemporary era.” Frontiers of Law in China 1.1 (2006): 53-71.
Clark, R. Abolish the Death Penalty. In Capital Punishment. 2017. (pp. 176-180).
Hood, Roger. “Abolition of the death penalty: China in world perspective.” City UHKL Rev. 1 (2009): 1.
Jiang, Shanhe, et al. “Death penalty views in China, Japan, and the US: An empirical comparison.” Journal of Criminal Justice 38.5 (2010): 862-869.