Last month Australians were outraged at the executions of two Australian citizens, Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, for drug trafficking in Indonesia. Prime Minister Tony Abbott described the men's deaths as “both cruel and unnecessary... Cruel because both [men] spent a decade in jail before being executed. Unnecessary because these young Australians were fully rehabilitated while in prison” (The Australian, 2015).
The executions sparked wider discussions about capital punishment, with many politicians and members of the public indicating that they think the death penalty should be abolished for all crimes worldwide.
In only the last few weeks the United States of America has sentenced a 21 year old to death, however it seems that Australia has now fallen silent. Should Australians be continuing to fight the death penalty? Should the Australian government speak out against the Boston Bomber's sentence?
- It is estimated 19,000 people are on death row across the world.
- The highest execution rates are in China, USA, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
- 32 US states have the death penalty.
- In 2014 the USA executed 35 people and sentenced at least another 72 people to death (Amnesty International, 2015, 12).
- As of October 2014, 3,035 people were under sentence of death in America (Amnesty International, 2015, 12).
- The main method of execution in the US is lethal injection. However back up options include electrocution, gas chamber, hanging and firing squad (#TalkAboutIt, 2015).
Case Study: Boston Marathon Bombing
On the 15th April, 2013, two homemade pressure-cooker bombs exploded at the finish line of the Boston Marathon. The explosions killed 3 people and injured more than 260 others.
http://germany.usembassy.gov/germany/img/assets/4468/capmapbig.gif
Following the bombings, brothers Tamerlan (26) and Dzhokhar (19) Tsarnaev were named as suspects. Tamerlan was killed in a gun battle with police on 18 April 2013. Dzhokhar escaped the gun battle but was badly injured. He was found hiding inside a boat parked in a backyard and arrested later that night.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/16/us/dzhokhar-tsarnaev-death-sentence.html?_r=0
The Boston Marathon Bombing was labelled a terrorist act in the media as the brothers are said to have completed the attack for political reasons. When Dzhokhar was found, he had written on the inside of the boat about the US military fighting in Islamic countries and said to "stop killing our innocent people."
Tsarnaev was charged under US federal law and in May 2015 was found guilty of 30 different charges, 17 of which carried a death penalty. These charges included the use of weapons of mass destruction.
During the trial Tsarnaev's defence lawyers spoke of his youth at the time of the bombings and how, at 19, he was very influenced by his radical older brother. The lawyers said that Tamerlan was the mastermind behind the attack and that while Dzhokhar took part in the plan, it would not have occurred if not for his older brother.
Despite these arguments, following his conviction the jury sentenced Dzhokhar Tsarnaev to death by lethal injection.
A number of questions have been raised about Tsarnaev's death sentence. Massachusetts abolished the death penalty in 1984 and the last execution in Massachusetts occured in 1947. In a state outspokenly against to capital punishment, is this sentence being implemented because it is truly considered appropriate for Tsarnaev or as a political tool for America to speak back to 'terrorists' worldwide?
Arguments for Capital Punishment:
Some say the death penalty is a crime deterrent. That is, potential criminals will be less likely to commit a crime if they know the penalty for it is execution. This comes from an idea that humans fear death more than anything else (Ledewitz, 1991). However there is no evidence that capital punishment works as a greater deterrent than imprisonment (Amnesty International, 2015). The death penalty has existed for centuries, and yet crimes which carry this punishment are still being committed.
Many believe a guilty person deserves to be punished in a way that is appropriate for the crime they committed. The worse the crime, the more severe the punishment. This comes from the Old Testament notion of "an eye for an eye" - if the criminal murdered someone, then they deserve to die. However as a criminal sentenced to death is likely to be kept on death row for years, the punishment is worse than just ending their life. The criminal will suffer for years in anticipation of their execution (BBC Ethics, 2014). In considering the death penalty as justice there is also a difference between punishing the criminal because they broke the law and wanting revenge because of the pain they have caused. The punishment they receive should not be based on revenge. While it may be natural to want the criminal to be killed, this does not necessarily mean the law should create means to do so (Oliver, 2014).
From a financial perspective some say that the death penalty should be used rather than taxpayers' money going towards keeping the criminal in prison for the rest of their lives. If the criminal is convicted in their 20s and sentenced to life in prison, it is possible they could spent 60 years or more behind bars. On the surface it seems like this would be much more expensive than killing the criminal. However it costs the government as much as 10 times more to execute a prisoner than to sentence them to 'life without parole'. In the US it is estimated to cost the state $308 million per execution (Oliver, 2014).
Under Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights everyone has the right to life. By sentencing a convicted criminal to death, the state is denying them their internationally recognised right to live. Some say that the criminal has given up this right by committing the crime, however this is a messy argument. Allowing the death penalty continues a culture of violence where one violent action is answered with another.
Arguments against Capital Punishment:
The death penalty is the ultimate, irreversible punishment. Once a convicted criminal has been put to death that is it. However, our legal system is not flawless: it is judged by humans and humans make mistakes. Thus there is always a chance innocent people may be found guilty. It is estimated that 4% of prisoners on death row in the US are not guilty (Oliver, 2014). Since 1973 150 prisoners on death row in the US have later been found to be innocent (Amnesty International, 2015). This clearly shows the imperfect nature of the law. It is an unacceptable risk to complete executions in a system where innocent people could be killed.
Media Influence on Public Perceptions of Capital Punishment
The media is often focussed on crime stories both in fictional dramas and in news coverage, and scholars have tended to agree that most of the public's understanding of the criminal justice system comes from the media (Britto and Noga-Styron, 2014, 82). Recent studies have found that portrayals of crime in the media have a significant impact on the public's support for capital punishment (Britto and Noga-Styron, 2014, 95).
The public plays an important role in the administration of capital punishment in countries such as America. Not only do they elect the government who creates these policies, it is citizen-jurors that decide whether a convicted criminal is sentenced to death.
The media often sensationalises news stories and can show criminals as "wild," "animalistic" or "just plain evil". This can cause fear and anxiety about the prevalence of crime (Haney, 2009, 732). By representing criminals in this way and failing to look at all aspects of their life, the media can make the public less empathetic towards criminals and more likely to judge them harshly (Haney, 2009, 735-736).
Misrepresentations in the media run the risk of making the public very afraid, angry and wanting to severely punish criminals for their actions (Haney, 2009, 738-739).
Media coverage of Capital Punishment Cases
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/17/36/d8/1736d81adc2fd7ecbdb7ad490cb2d0ba.jpg
http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2013/05/04/1226635/180583-bali-nine.jpg
Australian media followed the case of the Bali Nine executions constantly over the past few months. The public saw that two Australians had been rehabilitated and were no longer the criminals that has been arrested for drug trafficking a decade earlier. People came to learn about 'Myuran the incredible painter' and 'Andrew the spiritual leader'. Everyone knew about the two Australians who were "cruelly and unnecessarily" executed.
The public did not hear so much about the other six people executed alongside Chan and Sukumaran: a mentally ill Brazilian, an Indonesian man, a Ghanaian man and three Nigerian men (Watson, 2015).
It was easy for Australian politicians and the Australian public to speak out against Indonesia. The problematic nature of capital punishment could be tied in to concerns about "Indonesia's Third World legal standards and corruption" (Gill, 2015). There was a clear incentive and benefit to speaking out - possibly saving the lives of two Australians.
We lost the battle to save the Bali Nine duo – they were tragically executed on the 29 April 2015. But this does not mean Australia should give up on the fight against the death penalty.
http://jurist.org/images/wiki/15/05/Tsarnaev.jpg
So far Australians have had very little to say about Dzhokhar Tsarnaev being given a death sentence. Discussions of his sentence have been noticeably absent from Australian media which is unfortunate following our outrage at the Indonesian executions.
In the Boston Bomber case there is no immediate benefit in fighting the sentence – it's not going to save an Australian life. It is a bit harder for Australia to speak out against the legal system of our American allies. The capital punishment arguments can not be tied into ideas of 'corruption' or differing 'legal values', we would be required to look into the morality and effectiveness of the death penalty itself.
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02537/Boston-explosion-m_2537196k.jpg
The Indonesian government was criticised for using capital punishment for political means rather than properly examining the merits of the death penalty for each individual. President Joko Widodo was accused of executing foreigners as part of his 'tough on drug crime' public image (Jones, 2015).
However it seems that Tsarnaev's sentence can also be seen as a national political action. The attack occurred in Massachusetts – a state morally opposed to the death penalty and who has abolished it as a means of punishment. Therefore the federal government pushed for Tsarnaev to be tried under US federal law which would allow a death penalty trial.
Only people who were open to the death penalty were allowed to serve on the jury. In a state opposed to capital punishment this means the jury was not representative of the local population (Harrop, 2015). In fact families of the bombing victims have indicated they did not want Tsarnaev executed but rather be given a prison sentence of 'life without parole'.
It seems the Boston Bomber's sentence is being used a political message to potential terrorists that the US is 'tough on terror' rather than because it is deemed the necessary and appropriate punishment for Tsarnaev.
Politics and the media should be focussing on the causes of terrorism and the calls for violence across the world in an effort to deter attacks through intelligence, rather than hoping the threat of the death penalty will deter them (Madeira et al, 2015).
Capital punishment doesn't work as a deterrent, it doesn't achieve justice, it is expensive and drawn out, it runs the risk of executing innocent people and denies the right to life.
Amnesty International (2015) Death Sentences and Executions 2014 Report
BBC Ethics (2014) 'Capital punishment: Arguments in favour of capital punishment' BBC <http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/capitalpunishment/for_1.shtml>
Britto, S and Noga-Styron, K (2014) ' Media Consumption and support for Capital Punishment' Criminal Justice Review vol 39(1), 81-100
Haney, C (2009) 'Media Criminology and the Death Penalty' Depaul Law Review vol58:689
Harrop, Froma (2015) 'Death Penalty for Tsarnaev Hurts Boston' Real Clear Politics, 19 May, <http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/05/19/death_penalty_for_tsarnaev_hurts_boston_126631.html>
Jones, Barry (2015) 'The deep bilateral hypocrisy on the death penalty' The Conversation, 11 March, <https://theconversation.com/barry-jones-the-deep-bilateral-hypocrisy-on-the-death-penalty-38650>
Ledewitz, B (1991) 'The Morality of Capital Punishment: An Exchange' Duquesne Law Review, vol 29, 719
Oliver, John (2014) Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Death Penalty, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kye2oX-b39E>
(2015) 'Bali 9 execution: Australia reacts to the deaths of Chan and Sukumaran' The Australian, 29 April, <http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/bali-9-execution-australia-reacts-to-the-deaths-of-chan-and-sukumaran/story-fn59niix-1227325398207>
(2015) '#TalkAboutIt: Capital punishment around the world' ABC News, 6 April, <http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-06/explainer-capital-punishment-around-the-world/6371238>
