Civil and criminal penalties

There are several kinds of punishment available to the courts. In civil cases, the most common punishment is a fine, but specific performance and injunctions may also be ordered. For criminal offenses fines are also often used when the offense is not a very serious one and when the offender has not been in trouble before. Another kind of punishment available in some countries is community service. This requires the offender to do a certain amount of unpaid work, usually for a social institution such as a hospital. For more serious crimes the usual punishment is imprisonment. Some prison sentences are suspended: the offender is not sent to prison if he keeps out of trouble for a fixed period of time, but if he does offend again both the suspended sentence and any new one will be imposed. The length of sentences varies from a few days to a lifetime. However, a life sentence may allow the prisoner to be released after a suitable long period if a review (parole) board agrees his detention no longer serves a purpose. In some countries, such as the Netherlands, living conditions in prison are fairly good because it is felt that deprivation of liberty is punishment in itself and should not be so harsh that it reduces the possibility of the criminal re-educating and reforming himself. In other countries, conditions are very bad. Perhaps because of an increase in crime or because of more and longer sentences of imprisonment, some prison cells have to accommodate far more people than they were built to hold and the prisoners are only let out of their cells once a day. Britain and the United States are trying to solve the shortage of space by allowing private companies to open prisons.

In some countries there is also corporal punishment (physical). In Malaysia, Singapore, Pakistan, Zambia, Zimbabwe, among others, courts may sentence offenders to be caned or whipped. In Saudi Arabia theft and possession of alcohol may be punished by cutting off the offender’s hand or foot.

Capital punishment (CP)

CP has been in practice since the ancient times and appeared alongside with the appearance of the first states and became lawful as soon as the first institutions of power appeared. Originally, it was used for a variety of crimes including minor offences or no crimes at all. In the 16-17^th centuries imprisonment became widely used and CP is left for the most serious crimes. In the 19-20^th a lot of states abolished CP but it’s still practiced in more than 90 countries (Japan, 38 states of the USA, countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America etc). Today CP can be prescribed for criminal homicide, treason, rape or arson followed by the death of the victim. And unlike earlier centuries today the trend is toward relatively swift and painless methods (lethal injection, electrocution, lethal gas, firing squad, hanging).

Although most countries still have a death penalty, almost every European nation have abolished it; some retain it only for exceptional crimes such as wartime offences; and others no longer carry out executions even when a death sentence has been passed. In other words, almost half the countries of the world have ceased to use the death penalty. The UN has declared itself in favor of abolition, Amnesty International actively campaigns for abolition, and the issue is now the focus of great debate.

Arguments FOR:

1. The Bible (Old Testament) subscribes to CP for a variety of crimes, including sex before marriage, adultery, homosexual behaviour, murder (killing a human is an offence against God, it requires severe punishment).

2. The possibility of an innocent to be executed is extremely small and continues to decrease with the improvement of the forensic science.

3. A death row prisoner can be released irrespectively whether he’s innocent or not, and this decision of acquittal is final what means that the prosecution cannot appeal to reconsider the case. So, once a criminal is in prison, he has a chance to leave it one day either by early parole or just escape, return to the society and probably continue what he’s been doing before. In this case CP is 100% effective type of punishment as it prevents the crime from being committed ever again: the murderer will never commit another crime once he has been executed.

4. By abolishing CP the state under-punishes criminals not only because they have a chance to escape the consequences of the crime but they also get a better living than those who are homeless and every day have to solve the question where to sleep and what to eat.

5. CP is considered to be more economical than life sentence (save money and time).

6. Even in the tragedy of human death there are degrees. We cannot place equal weight on the tragically lost life of a murder victim and that of a criminal. Victim rights are more important than criminal rights.

7. Execution is more humane than life imprisonment because it is quick and instantaneous. Making the prisoner suffer by rotting in jail for the rest of his life is more torturous and inhumane than execution.

8. CP cannot be cruel as it is logically impossible to be cruel while punishing a guilty murderer for murdering an innocent victim.

9. Punishments for crimes are decided by a legal system designed by and for the people that it represents. If a person were to hold a death penalty as morally wrong, they would also have to hold the alternative to CP, a jail sentence, as wrong. Is a jail sentence now to be referred to as a state sanctioned kidnapping?

10. It’s the function of penal law to prevent murder by demonstrating to everyone that it’s not in their best interest to murder.

Arguments AGAINST

1. The Bible — Christians are no longer bound by the legal codes of the Old Testament, and death penalty is no longer required. Since the Bible was written we became more tolerant, we eliminated death penalty for pre-marital sex, practicing a different religion, homosexual behaviour, so we should eliminate it for murder.

2. CP lowers the value of human life and brutalizes society.

3. CP denies the sacredness of human life.

4. CP does not deter crime. People who are in the “business” of killing take measures to make sure they are not suspected of criminal activity and do not get caught. A person who gets caught for killing another individual is usually someone who did not plan to murder in the first place.

5. CP is a barbaric form of punishment based on the desire to revenge so it should not exist in the civilized societies.

6. CP is wrong morally because it’s a cruel and inhumane taking of a human life. Methods can involve physical torture. CP is a euphemism for legally killing people and no one, not even the State has the authority to play God.

7. CP can be inflicted upon people who are innocent as defense lawyers are often incompetent and jurors corrupted.

8. CP is irreversible: in case of a mistake, the executed prisoner cannot be given another chance.

9. Disproportionate infliction on the poor and minorities.

10. More expensive than imprisonment and those who are convicted commonly use the costly process of appealing decisions.

11. In the last 100 years there have been more than 75 cases of wrongful conviction of criminal homicide.

As the debate about capital punishment continues, the phenomenon of death row (people sentenced but still alive) increases. In 1991, no one was executed in Japan, but three people were sentenced to death, bringing the total number on death row to fifty. Sakae Menda lived under sentence of death for thirty three years before obtaining a retrial and being found not guilty. The debate also involves the question of what punishment is for. Is the main aim to deter? This was certainly the case in the 18^th century England when the penalty for theft was supposed to frighten people from stealing and compensate for inabilities to detect and catch thieves. Is it revenge or retribution? Is it to keep criminals out of society? Or is it to reform and rehabilitate them?

Define whether the following statements are true or false. Explain your choice by giving extended commentaries.

1. It is good will of the citizen to report criminal incidents to the proper authorities.

2. It is the victim that has the power to decide whether to prosecute the person who allegedly committed the crime.

3. If the facts gathered by the investigating officers are not conclusive, a grand jury can compel witnesses to testify under oath.

4. An arrested person must be informed of the charge or charges against her or him and be forced to plead guilty.

5. If the accused fails to appear in time for the trial after he is bailed out, the amount posted is forfeited to the court.

6. If the accused pleads not guilty at the arraignment, the appropriate court will pass sentence at a later time.

7. Plea bargains are used to lighten the workload of the prosecutors and the overcrowding of the courts.

8. If the material or testimony that either the prosecution or the defense desires to put into evidence might improperly bias the jury, it will not be allowed.

9. Hearsay evidence is irrelevant in reaching the jury’s conclusion.

10. All crimes require a mandatory sentence.

11. A court may pass sentence but suspend its execution, allowing the convicted party to go free on parole.

12. If the terms of the parole are violated, the criminal is returned to jail or the penitentiary to serve the rest of his or her term.

13. An appeal may be taken to a higher court if the convicted party feel that errors of law were made in the conduct of the trial.

Дата добавления: 2015-11-14