By Azmi Sharom
For many years now Malaysia has had the mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking. This means that if a person is found guilty of trafficking then the judge has no choice but to impose the death penalty.
Now the government is making efforts to amend the Dangerous Drugs Act so that the death penalty for this offence is no longer mandatory.
In other words, the judge has a discretion and could, for example, imprison the offender instead.
Now the government is making efforts to amend the Dangerous Drugs Act so that the death penalty for this offence is no longer mandatory.
In other words, the judge has a discretion and could, for example, imprison the offender instead.
This is in my opinion a good development. According to international laws and standards, the death penalty can be imposed. However, it is limited only to the most serious offences, and if we look at the decisions of international law bodies, this means crimes that actually cause death.
For example, armed robbery and kidnapping by itself does not warrant the death penalty if a human life is not lost in the process.
For example, armed robbery and kidnapping by itself does not warrant the death penalty if a human life is not lost in the process.
Furthermore, a mandatory death penalty is definitely against international standards as it means that the court has no choice in the matter and the accused has limited or no recourse to appeal the sentence.
However, we do not yet know what these amendments look like, so we can't judge just how far the changes in the law will be.
What I am hoping is that the judge will be given a true discretion. This means that he or she can take into account a variety of factors before deciding what punishment should be imposed.
However, we do not yet know what these amendments look like, so we can't judge just how far the changes in the law will be.
What I am hoping is that the judge will be given a true discretion. This means that he or she can take into account a variety of factors before deciding what punishment should be imposed.
A better proposal should be for our Malaysia to abolish the death penalty.
Execution is irreversible and we know that mistakes had been made by authorities before.
The death penalty does NOT deter criminals. Au contraire, Canada saw a 44% drop in murders after it abolished the death penalty.
Executing someone is the same as inhumane cold-blooded murder, masked behind a hypocritical mask of legality. It's silly argument to say the criminal must pay. That's the old biblical 'an eye for an eye' barbarism.
Malaysia must step out of this gross barbarism of 'an eye for an eye' mentality and join the enlightened world where 103 nations have abolished capital punishment.
An eye for an eye is stupid policy for stupid lawmakers and politicians.Take for instance the hudud law.Polygamy have been practiced by self proclaimed religious gurus and politicians.These religious pariahs have broken all the laws that can be prosecuted under the hudud law.Engaging in illegal sex by bedding married and single women,going to hen houses and having mistresses,young enough to be their grand daughters.
ReplyDeleteHudud law is meant for all Muslims.It includes ministers,lawmakers and fake religious gurus.However,the departments overlooking these policies only go after the ordinary folks.
And the mandatory death sentences.There are some politicians and well connected people who have been found guilty of murder getting off scotch free.So what laws are the courts going to follow?The laws of the kangaroo courts?
I do not support completely abolishing the death penalty.
ReplyDeleteThat leaves a very unsatisfactory outcome in some deadly crimes which are extremely heinous, with a perpetrator who enjoyed committing it, and has no regrets whatsoever.
This leaves the perpetrator happily walking the earth alive , though he may be in a prison cell, a most unsatisfactory outcome compared to the grief of the victims' loved ones.
To top it all, many liberal countries have misguidedly placed caps on the length of "life" prison terms, which means a nasty, unrepentant and youthful killer could be free while still relatively young , in his forties or fifties to enjoy the rest of his life...
in place of capital punishment for heinous crimes the law can legislate for real-term life imprisonment, ie. without parole (ie. no cap) - let the criminals repent forevermore in their lonely cells
DeleteBe a forever financial drain, both in custody watch & possible medical cares till he/she going kaput?
DeleteIike that heinous Norway killing rampage of right-wing extremist, Anders Behring Breivik, who is enjoying life now in a modern settings, cosy 'cell'???
What's the right thing to do?
Political-correctness?
Follow the heart?
hall mark of a civilised society is not to usurp your divinity's prerogative
DeleteWakakakaka...divinity's prerogative????
DeleteApa tu???
Lagi juga pagi seorang atheist!!
The Order of Nature means Laws of the Jungle le.
Civilised is just a BIG word used by breeding hearts when the pains r NOT been inflicted upon them!
Civilised society - Utopia not inhabited by earthly human mah.
that's you belief hence you should obey it, wakakaka. I do not need to because most atheists are already highly civilised, being so without fear of the unknown or divine
DeleteU buat nyanyuk lagi ke??
DeleteFor a 'claimed civilised atheist' WHY then put yr 'faith (????!!!)' in divinity's prerogative le?
Unless yr definition of divinity's prerogative has other non divinity conjecture.
Wakakakaka... not nyanyuk but confused lah!
There is a fundamental nihilism (denial of all beliefs and values)
Deleteamong many atheists, which have in turn led to gigantuan monstrous acts if and when they attain power.
It is not surprising that some of the most heinous acts of mass, industrial scale murder have been committed by atheists.
Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot...totaly unrepentant, completely mercilless mass killers.
They feared no repercussions for their actions, secure in worldly absolute power, because they did not fear anything after death.
absolutely agree, the death penalty should be abolished, Islam being ever merciful and compassionate, we should lead the way...
ReplyDeleteimagine the pain, the anguish, the sadness, the trauma that family members, sons and daughters and friends have to endure while waiting for their love one have his or her future snuffed out...never an eye for an eye, the devil's advocate
When Canada officially dropped its death penalty, it had already stopped executing anybody for decades.
ReplyDeleteThe 44% drop in murders had more to do with improvements in the socio-economic situation and police-community cooperation to reduce violent crime.
Today Canada is a squeaky clean and very safe society , even most (but not all) of its inner city areas.
Hardly anything to do with Death Penalty or Lack off.
you're wrong. Canada's abolishment of the death penalty proves that capital punishment has nothing to do with being a deterrence to crime. Rather crime was reduced by what you mentioned, to wit, improvements in the socio-economic situation and police-community cooperation to reduce violent crime
DeleteNot until religio-bigotry rises even in an improved socio-economic environment!
DeleteSome criminals are just not fit to live in our society. Don't waste our taxpayers money to feed them. They are so many hungry people. Just walk the streets of Kuala Lumpur after midnight. It is many times better to feed the homeless and the penniless. Having said that it is not easy for a judge to send criminals to the executioners. His conscience and compassion shall always be the most important factor in his decision/judgement.
ReplyDeletenot for you to decide their fates
Delete