Ethics - Current Affairs, October 2017 UPSC Notes | EduRev

Daily Current Affairs (Oct`17 - Oct`18)

Current Affairs : Ethics - Current Affairs, October 2017 UPSC Notes | EduRev

The document Ethics - Current Affairs, October 2017 UPSC Notes | EduRev is a part of the Current Affairs Course Daily Current Affairs (Oct`17 - Oct`18).
All you need of Current Affairs at this link: Current Affairs

9.1. ETHICS OF DEATH PENALTY
Death penalty is the practice of executing someone as punishment for a specific crime after a proper legal trial
and can only be used by a state.
 

Ethical issues involved
Matter of Justice - Justice demands that courts should impose punishment befitting the crime so that the courts reflect public abhorrence of the crime. Any unfair application of the death penalty should not become the basis for abolishing it. At the same time, death penalty is seen rather as retributive form of justice which some consider as immoral because the death penalty delivers a 'double punishment'; that of the execution and the preceding wait and this is a mismatch to the crime.

Deterrence as a concept – Death penalty acts as a catalyst to promote the law and the fear of law which acts as a deterrent to future offenders. The statistical evidence doesn't confirm that deterrence works (but it doesn't
show that deterrence doesn't work either). Also, even if capital punishment did act as a deterrent, there are concerns raised as to whether it would be acceptable for someone to pay for the predicted future crimes of others.

Community acceptance - The very humanistic edifice is constructed on the foundation of ‘reverence for life’ principle. When a member of the community violates this very principle by killing another member, the society may not feel itself bound by the shackles of this doctrine and therefore does not endorse the humanistic approach reflected in ‘death sentence-in-no-case’ doctrine.

Socialization as a factor - Crimes are as much about social failure as they are about individual responsibility. This is not to suggest the absolute lack of individual agency in the things we do. Our demands for justice have to be tempered by this reality. Society then cannot demand to take the life of an individual when it has contributed to that process and outcome.

Moral obligation to protect human life – This argument works both ways - Convicts threaten safety and welfare of the society. Only by putting convicts to death can society ensure that they do not kill again. Similarly, on the other hand, given the value we place on life, if a less severe alternative to the death penalty exists which would accomplish the same goal (life-imprisonment); we are duty-bound to reject the death penalty in favor of the less severe alternative.

Conclusion
In India, Supreme Court has laid down the scope of exercise of power to award death sentence and carved the
rule of “rarest of the rare cases” to justify the extreme penalty, death, affirming the principle of “life imprisonment” as the rule and death penalty as the exception. It is, therefore, in the fitness of things that India
has not so far abolished capital punishment but used it more judiciously.

Offer running on EduRev: Apply code STAYHOME200 to get INR 200 off on our premium plan EduRev Infinity!

Related Searches

practice quizzes

,

mock tests for examination

,

October 2017 UPSC Notes | EduRev

,

Exam

,

Ethics - Current Affairs

,

Sample Paper

,

October 2017 UPSC Notes | EduRev

,

Viva Questions

,

October 2017 UPSC Notes | EduRev

,

Previous Year Questions with Solutions

,

Objective type Questions

,

Semester Notes

,

Summary

,

Free

,

Extra Questions

,

study material

,

MCQs

,

video lectures

,

Important questions

,

past year papers

,

pdf

,

Ethics - Current Affairs

,

ppt

,

shortcuts and tricks

,

Ethics - Current Affairs

;