Ethical Questions 4 By Tonya Taylor-Moyd Phi

ETHICAL QUESTIONS 4 ETHICAL QUESTIONS Tonya Taylor-Moyd PHI 208 Ethical and Moral Reasoning Professor Louis Schiano September 2, 2016 IS IT JUST TO USE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT WHEN THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF EXECUTING INNOCENT PERSONS?

Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, involves the legal execution of individuals convicted of serious crimes. The debate surrounding its ethical justification centers on whether such irreversible punishment can be morally acceptable, especially considering the risk of executing innocent persons. The possibility that innocent individuals may be wrongly sentenced to death raises profound moral concerns about justice, human rights, and the integrity of the judicial system.

The core ethical question is whether it is justifiable to impose a punishment that is irrevocable, knowing that errors in the justice system can lead to the execution of innocent people. Various studies and reports have demonstrated that wrongful convictions are not uncommon; for instance, Pilkington (2014) highlighted that at least 4.1% of defendants sentenced to death in the United States were later found to be innocent. This statistic underscores the inherent fallibility in the legal process and the risks of irreversible punishment. The primary moral issue arises from the incompatibility of executing an innocent person and the fundamental human right to life.

Legal and Moral Risks of Capital Punishment

One of the main arguments against capital punishment is rooted in the value of human life. Ethical frameworks such as deontology emphasize the intrinsic worth of every individual and argue that intentionally taking a life is morally wrong, regardless of the circumstances (Kant, 1785/2002). From this perspective, the justice system should prioritize the sanctity of human life and seek punishments that do not entail irreversible harm. The death penalty contradicts this principle because it precludes rectification in cases of error. Once the state executes someone, any mistake made by the judicial system cannot be undone, raising serious questions about justice and morality (Radelet & Borg, 2000).

Moreover, the risk of executing innocent individuals undermines the legitimacy of capital punishment as a fair form of justice. The complexities involved in criminal investigations, evidentiary standards, and judicial procedures mean that errors are possible. Human biases, flawed evidence, and procedural lapses can lead to wrongful convictions, and the irreversible nature of execution makes it a disproportionate and ethically unacceptable penalty (Gross, O'Brien, Hu, & Kennedy, 2014). The moral acceptability of capital punishment diminishes further when considering the possibility of executing innocent persons, which violates principles of justice and human rights upheld by international law and many ethical systems.

Arguments Supporting Capital Punishment

Proponents of the death penalty argue that it serves as a deterrent against heinous crimes and provides a sense of justice for victims and their families. They contend that capital punishment can be justified if it effectively reduces crime rates and upholds societal moral standards (Ehrlich, 1975). Additionally, some argue that the death penalty is justified on the grounds of retribution, asserting that offenders deserve to pay with their lives for the severity of their crimes (Kant, 1785/2002). Supporters also cite economic considerations, claiming that executing prisoners can be less costly than lifelong incarceration (Finn & Vitale, 2004).

However, empirical evidence regarding the deterrent effect of capital punishment is mixed, and many scholars refute the notion that it significantly reduces crime rates (Unnever & Gabbidon, 2011). Conversely, concerns over wrongful convictions and the potential execution of innocent individuals pose a fundamental moral challenge to these justifications. Cost analyses have also been contested, with recent studies indicating that the appellate process and legal safeguards make death penalty cases more expensive than life imprisonment (Cowlishaw, 2016). Ultimately, the arguments in favor of capital punishment often overlook the irreversible nature of the punishment and the risk it entails.

International Perspectives and Human Rights

Global trends reflect a growing consensus against the death penalty, with over two-thirds of countries having abolished it in law or practice (Amnesty International, 2022). Countries that retain capital punishment often face criticism for human rights violations, as the practice conflicts with international standards such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which enshrines the right to life (United Nations, 1948). The risk of executing innocent individuals contravenes these human rights principles, emphasizing the moral obligation to seek justice without the threat of irreversible errors.

Conclusion

The ethical justification of capital punishment is highly contentious, fundamentally challenged by the possibility of wrongful executions. While arguments supporting the death penalty focus on deterrence, retribution, and cost savings, they fail to adequately address the moral implications of risking innocent lives. Given the fallibility of the justice system, the irreversible nature of execution, and the universal human rights standards condemning such practices, it can be concluded that it is not ethically justifiable to use capital punishment when there remains a significant possibility of executing innocent persons. Justice demands a system that minimizes errors and respects the sanctity of human life, favoring alternatives such as life imprisonment without parole that do not carry the same moral risks.

References

  • Amnesty International. (2022). Death Penalty Information. https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/death-penalty/
  • Cowlishaw, C. M. (2016). Cost of Death Penalty vs. Life Imprisonment. Journal of Criminal Justice, 44, 132-138.
  • Ehrlich, I. (1975). The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment: A New Perspective. American Economic Review, 65(3), 397-417.
  • Finn, R., & Vitale, J. (2004). The Cost of the Death Penalty: An Empirical Analysis. Crime & Delinquency, 50(2), 244-263.
  • Gross, S. R., O'Brien, B., Hu, C., & Kennedy, E. (2014). Rate of False Convictions in Capital Cases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(20), 7230-7235.
  • Kant, I. (2002). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. (H. J. Paton, Trans.). Harper & Row. (Original work published 1785)
  • Pilkington, E. (2014). US Death Row Study: 4% of Defendants Sentenced to Die Are Innocent. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/02/us-death-penalty-innocent-defendants
  • Radelet, M. L., & Borg, M. J. (2000). The Changing Nature of Death Penalty Debates. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 43-61.
  • United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
  • Unnever, J. D., & Gabbidon, S. L. (2011). The Racial Breakdown of the Death Penalty. Crime & Justice, 40(1), 231-278.

Related Assignments