Abolition of Death Penalty
Context:
- The foundation of any judicial system reform should be the abolition of the death penalty.
Abolition of capital punishment:
- The absence of a recommendation to abolish the death sentence from the parliamentary committee that reviewed the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the planned criminal code that is expected to replace the IPC, is disheartening.
- Rather than considering arguments on abolition from experts and jurists, the standing committee on Home Affairs made the terse suggestion that the administration take a look at the issue.
- Its observation is restricted to stating that it recognises the strong opposition to the death penalty stems from the belief that the legal system is not perfect and that it is necessary to keep innocent people from receiving death sentences.
- Nonetheless, subject matter experts presented the panel with some compelling arguments, pointing out that although the number of trial courts granting the death penalty was increasing, statistical patterns indicated that the Indian Supreme Court was becoming less like to uphold the death penalty.
- Additionally, social scientists had shown it had little deterrent effect, and the general consensus was in favour of abolishing it.
- Only seven individuals received the death penalty from 2007 to 2022; the remaining death sentences were either revoked or commuted to life in 2023 because they did not qualify as “rarest of rare cases.”
Death penalty against life:
- The arguments that the death penalty has been proven to be ineffective as a deterrent, that incarcerating a convict for the remainder of their natural life will be a harsher punishment and allow for reform, and that the majority of people on death row are from disadvantaged backgrounds were also emphasised by members who added notes of dissent to the report.
- Additionally, they have argued that the current IPC, Code of Criminal Procedure, and Evidence Act are essentially the same as the three bills that would create a new body of criminal law.
- If Parliament takes any action to implement the draught Bills with the modifications recommended by the legislative panel, it will only do so if it serves as a chance to reevaluate whether the death sentence is still necessary.
- According to the BNS, “life imprisonment” means serving out the balance of a person’s natural life, and this ought to be the standard option rather than the death penalty.
- If the tendency of requesting the early release of life sentences for political reasons is stopped and life sentences without remission become more prevalent, the case for abolition will strengthen.
The next steps:
- Remission ought to be a humanitarian gesture rather than a topic of political debate.
- A significant change to the legal system will be the elimination of the death penalty from the statute book and the implementation of a sensible, universal remission programme.