Caps on Capital Punishment
Malik Mumtaz Qadri — Photo by Reuters
A court in Pakistan has sentenced Mumtaz Qadri, the self admitted assassin of Salman Tasseer, to death. Though this decision has been celebrated by some liberals in Pakistan, it should not be used as a reason to advocate for expanding the use of the capital punishment. The overuse of the death penalty in the US has resulted in grave injustice by a system marred by discrimination and equipped with more effective and less brutal means of deterring citizens from committing crimes. However, when it comes to brazen terrorist attacks in Pakistan, the death penalty could be used to remedy the seemingly “untouchable” nature of extremists and deter them from their violent paths.
The first difference between the death penalty in the US and Pakistan is the type of crime that triggers its implementation. In the US, the majority of capital punishment cases result from a murder taking place. While some murders go unsolved, the work of law enforcement and well-funded prosecutors offices makes it highly unlikely that a murder can occur without someone facing punishment. Further, there is an absolute stigma in American society that rebukes a murderer and wishes to subject them to the fullest extent of the law. There are several deterrent factors that stop criminals from breaking the law in the US outside of capital punishment, and thus one could do away with the death penalty without a negative effect on crime rates.
Conversely, in Pakistan, the current discussion is based around the use of capital punishment in terrorism cases, where police and prosecutors have traditionally not done an adequate job of bringing perpetrators to justice. Many accuse Pakistan’s prosecutors of being inefficient and allowing terrorists to act without fear of a criminal prosecution. Many prosecutors answer that their lack of success is due to shoddy police work, where there isn’t enough evidence collected to meet legal standards. Further, the same societal taboo that exists in America against murders doesn’t always exist for extremists and terrorists in Pakistan, who draw limited support from the public. Thus, one can argue that the death penalty is a necessary deterrent in Pakistan rather than the US, because the criminal might not fear the public or prosecutor, but will fear the possibility of facing the guillotine or lethal injection.
Advocates for the death penalty in the US claim that while some of the criminals facing execution can be reformed, what does one do about serial killers and mass murders who are either deranged or ideologically motivated to kill? Individuals like the D.C. Sniper, who killed nearly a dozen innocent people, are used as an example for when there is no chance of reforming the individual, making the death penalty justified.
However, these are outlier cases, and the large majority of murderers in America are products of their environment, not ideologically connected to their violent act. Unfortunately, many of the individuals in Pakistan who commit terrorist acts, like the murder of Salman Tasseer, do so out of an ideological belief. This belief goes as far as to state that you should sacrifice your own life in the name of “jihad.” Thus, while one could give life imprisonment to a murderer in the US to reform the individual and address the socio-economic conditions surrounding their crime, no such hope exists from some of Pakistan’s brazen and hardened terrorists who have declared war on the state.
This leads us to the final distinction between the US and Pakistan’s use of capital punishment: the claims of innocence by the accused, or lack thereof. In the US an overwhelming majority of individuals on death row deny committing their crime. In fact, studies have been shown that, due to the amount of appeals an American inmate can file, it is cheaper for the state to imprison an individual for life than to prove they committed their crime through all levels of appeal. Thus, some argue that whenever there is an element of doubt that the accused might be innocent, the death penalty should not be used because there is a chance that the state could kill an innocent person.
On the opposite end, from the Il Ud-Din case in Colonial India to Mumtaz Qadri, individuals facing the death penalty not only publicly admit their guilt, but demand the public’s support for their heinous actions. The defense by Mumtaz Qadri’s lawyers was not that he did not kill the victim, but that he was justified in doing so because the victim provoked the action. Thus, unlike the lingering doubt that an individual is innocent in the US and should not face the death penalty, such a doubt doesn’t exist for these terrorist cases, where the killers proudly admit their guilt.
Before rejoicing at the death penalty for Mumtaz Qadri, one should also keep in mind the ways in which the death penalty in the US has led to utter injustice. Not only do African-Americans and Mexican- Americans account for 89 per cent of those executed by the state, the skin color of the victim also effects a jury’s decision to impose the death penalty. Studies have found that juries are more likely to execute an individual if their victim was white, rather than a minority. In many ways, the usage of the death penalty reflects the inequality and discrimination that exists within American society.
Such inequalities exist in Pakistan’s society as well, with divisions based on gender, class, ethnicity, and religious belief. Thus, there is a potential for the death penalty to be used against the nation’s minorities. However, there have also been hundreds of brazen terrorist attacks against innocent citizens that show no sign of slowing down. Capital punishment, when administered in such terrorism cases where a defendant publicly admits his guilt, may deter future attacks against Pakistan’s people. But one must limit their advocacy for the use of this brutal punishment where the stakes are life and death, and the society is plagued by discrimination and inequality.
The writer holds a Juris Doctorate in the US and is a researcher on comparative law and international law issues.
Seriously??? Do you really think that this is the time to debate the death penalty? The real problem in Pakistan can only be resolved by widely implementing death punishment for extremists across the board – this is how wild west was tamed (even though the problem was not extremism, but anarchy is anarchy, regard of the cause). Wake up Pakistan, time to act.
I should praise the way the writer of this article tried to convince the public that death penalty in such situation is not the solution. I wonder if the writer of this article ever raised his voice for those innocent people who got the death penalty for the crime they never committed. In Qadri case the crime not only was committed but also the criminal accepted the responsibility of doing so. I think writer wants to give license to all those fanatic people out there to go and kill whoever they think (in their own ideology) working or doing anything bad against Muslims in general and for Islam in particular. I thought our Media was free and now can work freely in expressing its opinion with out any internal or external pressure.
Death sentence is just the right punishment for such animals. But I think their supporters should also not be spared, they are the ones who encourage these blind jihadists to commit such acts and they should also be punished.
Murder has a punishment in our law and it is the gallows. Case closed. But there are people creating these assassins. They are sitting on pulpits and issuing death warrants against anyone who dares speak freely. Grab them before another Qadri strikes.
He committed a murder, he gets a punishment. Good work by the Court. The murder is clear so why even give him a chance to appeal? This guy should be hanged ASAP
Why we have to compare the United States ith the Islamic republic of Pakistan? Does any thing work in Pakistan? Our siciety is so corrupt and lawless that only public hanging will wr better than any other humane way of punishing these mass murderers and coward exremist elements. If we have some one who committed a murder of another human being whome he supposed to guard,he is admitting his crime, we should not hesitate to pull dirt n him period.
People like me are in in no mood to judge the legality of such verdict. A proud murderer should be given an exemplary punishment. Case closed.
Well said!
I agree with you and such brutal murderers should be hanged in public so that anybody else should think twice before committing any crime
Is it me only who didn't get the idea of comparing Pakistan & US laws….Like few people said that you were finding words to say that Qadri shouldnt be hanged. Playing with the words will not help.. Right is right, if Qadri has killed, he should be hanged simple is that…. Islam doesnt teach intolerance only few religious fanatics…
I completely agree with Kashif, it is like comparing apples and oranges.
author simply does not want mumtaz to be hanged… he has total sympathy with this terrorist and failed to find the right words to generate some kind of sympathy for him… this was just an covert attempt to create some kind of movement against capital punishment so that his favorite terrorist is saved…otherwise there is a list of people whom the death penalty is awarded, author never stood out for them or even mentioned any of them in this article… how sick is that…
You've clearly read an entirely different article to the rest of us
Media should not project the punishment at all, since many others also awarded death punishment without any media coverage. Our bias media project such cases and present them in disguise of religious hero who killed others pretending to be the most faithful to his beliefs.
mumtaz qadri, should be hanged without any delay…
I will only believe when it's done.Don't forget that Salman Tasir's son was not kidnapped for fun.
You may hang this man. But the problem will not go away unless you tackle the real villains who brainwash such gullible people to carry out heinous acts in the name of religion.
The author is out of his minds to compare US laws with Pakistan's non existent laws. It would be wiser if he compares Pakistan's laws with Afghanistan or Iraq or Somalia.
All criminals are sick. They all need treatment, not punishment. If a government cannot afford to provide treatment that doesn't change the fact that all criminals need treatment, not punishment. Maybe it is too early to make such a statment, but we are all evolving.
The decision to sentence Qadari with capital punishment will determine whether Pakistan to become a further intolerant society, where religion has become hostage to bigots. We need to learn from Prophet Mohammad's (PBUH) own example where he forgave his Makkan persecutors who even forced him to migrate to Madenia.
I salute to the judge of Anti terrorist Court. God bless him for saving Pakistan from the flood of intolerance in the name of religion
Saeed, Australia