Following the brutal and increasingly controversial execution of Saddam Husein in Iraq last week, many have debated over “Corporal Punishment” or physical punishment, as flogging, inflicted on the body of one convicted of a crime.
Italy, specifically, has proposed a global ban on execution to the UN. In the past, they have unsuccessfully had similar talks in 1994 and again a year later. According to BBC, “The leader of the current centre-left coalition [Prime Minister Romano Prodi] has said no crime can justify one person killing another.”
Now I don’t completely understand how Italy will try to even propose this ban for the third time, not to its own Italian people, but worldwide. Each nation and states within most nations have the right to their own government, therefore managing their own laws. The United States for example, will be against this proposal to a high extreme, not only because they are responsible for a big chuck of Saddam’s execution, but also because many states have the death penalty. These states strongly defend their right to have their own state laws without federal interference.
First of all, a global ban on execution is completely impossible due to the many nations, rogue or not, in the world that will be opposed because it effects their leadership, culture, religious beliefs, etc. Maybe Italy is trying to get a ban for UN nations, which would seem more possible, but still way out of reach. It is just like saying the UN is federal law, and all the countries under the UN are federally governed states. There will be much opposition, needless to say.
More from BBC:
“The Iraqi government has said that Italy has no right to criticise Saddam Hussein’s execution when, at the end of World War II, the fascist dictator, Benito Mussolini, was killed by partisans and left hanging by his feet in a Milan square to the derision of crowds.
Mussolini’s granddaughter, Alessandra, a right-wing MP, joined in the argument, saying she found the killing of Saddam Hussein disgusting and shameful.”
3 Comments so far
Leave a comment
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
I support this fully. Not only is capital punishment barbaric and immoral, the biggest argument against it is, we don’t know for sure the guys innocent. No matter how fool proof the case may look, he MIGHT still be innocent. You run the risk of killing innocents. Ban it, and move on.
Comment by Comrade Alastair (SocialistUtopia) January 8, 2007 @ 10:17 pmNo there is no “he MIGHT still be innocent.” In US courts, you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is one juror who isn’t convinced and thinks he is innocent, either the other jurors convince him or vise versa. If a verdict is not reached, a new jury is called in. Only with hard evidence are people proven guilty, not just because some witness saw you kill a mass of people a long time ago. And once proven innocent, you cannot be tried for the same case again. I am against this ban but also somewhat against capital punishment. This global ban is so radical, it is like putting a global ban on alcohol. You may be against alcohol, but lets face it, everyone has the right to it. And you can’t regulate countries all over the world like this either, it would be impossible. I don’t believe there is ANY global ban on ANYTHING, its just impossible.
Comment by Toma January 9, 2007 @ 5:08 pmUm… “in US courts you are guilty beyond reasonable doubt”? Thats a bit naive, and somewhat uninformed too. A study a group of students did a while ago from some university or another (can’t remember the exact details, but I could find them and verify this) found that several prisoners on deathrow WERE INNOCENT. With the new evidence they discovered, these prisoners were retrialled and found innocent. The point I’m making is that these guys were due to be killed soon, and that if these STUDENTS hadn’t found this evidence innocent men would now be dead. And once they’re dead, there isn’t a hell of a lot you can do about it. If the highest punishment was life in prison, if a prisoner is innocent, they have a chance to be freed.
And you claim that the jury system (used by most of the world, not just the US) is infallible?! In a case in the 70s when some black rights activists (all of them black) were murdered by the KKK, there was a case with enormous evidence, beyond any reasonable doubt, put forward that the Dragon of the KKK, their leader, had ordered and masterminded the killings. Every single jury member found him guilty, except for one, a white woman who said “I could never convict a preacher” (the KKK dragon was a priest). The Dragon died of old age, still free.
So consider the facts before you make good judgements on the court and criminal systems of the US, and the world.
Comment by Comrade Alastair (SocialistUtopia) January 11, 2007 @ 8:46 pm