Critic about dealth penalty in malaysia

Critic
In 1849, Cesar who is the King of Roman Republic argued that the death penalty is injustice itself and it is a futile exercise. Then, this causes Roman Republic acts as the first nations to abolish the Death Penalty in modern times. This is the movement based on the human rights. After that, Venezuela in 1863 and Portugal in 1867 also abolished the death penalty in their country. A new era of human rights and International Law sought first to set out the foundations of Human Rights (UDHR, 1948) to introduce moratorium of death penalty through all the countries after the second world war. In 1966 (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) and 1990 (Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights), they continue their work to invoke other countries to abolish the Death Penalty universally. More than two thirds of world's countries have abolished the death penalty such as European Union membership. It is clear that majority have supported a UN Resolution. However, there are still have some countries have not abolished the death penalty such as China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, United Kingdom and some states in the USA and especially in Texas, still regularly put people to death.
First and foremost, we can view the death penalty from the aspect of economic. Everyone is asking a question whether the death penalty should be abolished. If the death penalty abolished, it will replaced by life imprisonment and this will increase the burden of economic of a country. The government of that country needs to spend more budgets in this aspect. This will lead to the increasing of taxpayers and it is not fair for the citizens or taxpayers due to this replacement. However, we need to ask a question again whether the save of money is important than the life. As we know, we cannot compare everything with money in this world such as health, love, spirit and others. For example, we can buy the medicine but we cannot buy the health and we can buy a wife but we cannot buy a true love. Thus, money does not mean everything. A man is a precious created things, we cannot continue place the death penalty just because we worry about the burden of economic of a country. We should spend some of the budget in this aspect and we can ask the family of the accused to pay more so that it can be one of the solutions to cover the burden of the taxpayers.
Furthermore, there have some research points out that the death penalty system is much more expensive than sentencing inmates to life imprisonment. For example, California could save $1 billion over five years by replacing the death penalty with permanent or life imprisonment due to the constitution requires a complex and long judicial process for capital cases. Besides this, The Office of Legislative Research for the Connecticut General Assembly also concluded that:
“There are several problems involved in trying to determine the cost of a capital case. First, there is a wide variety of costs associated with capital cases. These include costs for prosecuting and defence attorneys, interpreters, expert witnesses, court reporters, psychiatrists, secretaries, and jury consultants. Another problem is the length and complexity of the process. Cases tend to last several years and can pass through three possible phases. The first phase includes state trial court (two trials - one to determine guilt, the other for sentence), state Supreme Court, and possible appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. The second phase is the state habeas corpus (post-conviction process) and appeals. The final phase is federal habeas corpus, which includes appeals to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and to the U.S. Supreme Court...1”
Next, we need to view the death sentence from the aspect of deterring. We know that one of the principles of death penalty is deterring the offender and also prevent others from repeating the crimes. However, the death penalty does not deter crimes. In Malaysia, the Kelang Session Court stated that it does not seem to have any effect on the crime rate based on the statistics which compiled in particular court. For example, there has no effect on the number of cases of drug offences brought for the Kelang Session Court although the severe sentence provided for include the death penalty. Therefore, I think the education is more important than the severe sentence but I do not denied the importance of severe sentence too. We need to teach our next generation since they are young so that they would not commit the crime. We need to implant or instill the moral value to our next generation. If they have the spirit of the religion and morality such as justice, righteousness, kindness, uprightness and humanities, I sure they would not commit the crime easily. This is the more effective way to reduce the crime rates compare to death penalty or severe sentence such as whipping or long time imprisonment.
Third, the death penalty is irreversible. If a mistake is bound to be happened, and this means people being put to death for a crime they did not commit, it is so unfortunate incident that we do not hope to see it happens. We cannot take back a people’s life in such situation. It is unfair to the innocent person because they never commit the crime. However, they are being put by the death penalty due to the wrong judgments. This will be occurred if death penalty has not been abolished. Imagine what if that were you or someone you loved being put by the death penalty although you or you loved do not commit the crime. It is so cruel and terrible. For example, a Texas man who stayed in Cameron Todd Willingham was found innocent after his 2004 execution of death penalty. However, this could not cover back the life of him because the punishment is done. In addition, Justice Harry Blackmun claims that the application of the death penalty is so arbitrary because it violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against the unusual punishment. It is cruel and there is an irreconcilable conflict between two requirements in capital sentencing. Therefore, most of the countries in this world were making a decision to abolish the death penalty.
It seems like death penalty should be abolished based on the three points given above as we have discussed. Now, it is back to our country, should death sentence be abolished in Malaysia? I would like to point out my stand which is death penalty must not be abolished especially in Malaysia. Based on the first point which consider the aspect of economic, there have some research stated that the death penalty system is much more expensive than sentencing inmates to life imprisonment due to the maintenance of the apparatus and long judicial process. As we know, the humane' lethal injection which took 34 minutes and required two doses in the execution of death penalty is much more expensive compare with other apparatus. There have other methods of execution used around the world include hanging, shooting and beheading. Hanging which used by Malaysia is the cheapest in the maintenance among all the apparatus and materials. Thus, we do not need so worry about the burden of economic of our country.
Second, studies done across the world are usually tendency by the interest of a group. For an example, group agree with the death penalty will show the statistics about the crime rates have been reduced where the death penalty is provided for in a state but the group which against the death penalty will also conduct their study to show opposite phenomena. These reports are usually not included on other variables such as the increasing population. However, death penalty really functions in Malaysia. According to Kelang Session Court, there has much more small amount of drugs involved in cases compare to large amount of drugs involved in cases. Hence, it is a presumption that the death penalty which stated in Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 has at least deterring the person from trafficking in large amounts of drugs. This would help in limiting the amount of drugs in circulation. It may then reduce the crime rates.
In my conclusion, I think that the time has not come for death penalty in Malaysia to be abolished. Furthermore, we need to educate the public that why certain offences need carry the death penalty and some do not. This would help the government to face the dilemma or predicament which rose by the public. There is no doubt to show that nothing positive effects if death penalty provided for. On the other hand, there are also no negative effects in exercising death penalty in Malaysia. We need to understand this. Lastly, I would like to conclude that it does not jeopardy the criminal judicial system in our country if death penalty still provided for. Therefore, I am stand firmly that death sentence should not be abolished.