Should capital punishment be reintroduced essay

Bioessays researchgate susumu Bioessays researchgate susumu cross river state politics today essay wertkettenanalyse nach porter beispiel essay ulric neisser flashbulb memory essay australian academy of dramatic art review essay literary analysis writing the essay nyu the place i love to visit essay writer aglipay vs ruiz 64 phil essay boekenweekessay pieter steinzeitmesser draenen descriptive essay use public transport essay writing context in rhetorical analysis essays summer season clothes essay, mfcq beispiel essay taking comp1 essay.

Should capital punishment be reintroduced essay

The death penalty in Australia It is almost 40 years since the last man was hanged in Australia. Today, the death penalty has been abolished in every Australian jurisdiction. Opposition to the death penalty attracts bi-partisan political support. Yet in a region where many of our closest neighbours still maintain the death penalty, I believe Australia can - and should - take a stronger stand against state sanctioned execution.

There are many convincing arguments against the death penalty. Our Prime Minister opposes the death penalty for 'pragmatic reasons' because 'the law makes mistakes'. The rationale that the death penalty acts as a deterrent has been discredited and dismissed. In fact, the chilling response of one of the Bali Bombers' to his death sentence - 'it will be a martyr's death and that is what I am looking for' 2 reminds us that, for terrorists, the prospect of the death penalty may even serve as an incentive.

Ultimately, I believe, the most compelling argument against the death penalty is simply that we should respect the sanctity of human life. The belief that we should respect the inherent dignity and value of human life is the foundation of all human rights and reflects a deeply held moral vision of the type of world we want to live in.

Public servants must prepare the messy business of the termination of human life [the death penalty] is a left over from an earlier and more barbaric time'.

Yet recent events - the fate of Nguyen Tuong Van and the news that members of the 'Bali nine' will face execution - confirms that even though Australia is an abolitionist country, the issue of the death penalty still concerns Australians, and, perhaps most importantly, the Australian Government.

In an era where law enforcement requires international cooperation Australian commitment to the universal abolition of the death penalty should be uncompromising - not vary from case-to-case depending on the crime, citizenship and country.

We need to make sure that our mutual assistance and agency assistance arrangements reflect Australia's commitment to abolishing the death penalty. The question is, having set ourselves upon a path to a higher civilisation, are we prepared to go the distance? Are we prepared to oppose the death penalty wherever and whenever it occurs?

While the ICCPR recognises the right to life as a fundamental and non-derogable right, international human rights law does not require countries that retain the death penalty to abolish it, although it severely restricts its use.

However, the obligations of countries that have abolished the death penalty and ratified the Second Optional Protocol are much more stringent.

As a signatory to the 2nd Optional Protocol Australia can not reintroduce the death penalty and must ensure that no one within Australia's jurisdiction is executed. In a region where many of our nearest neighbours maintain the mandatory death penalty for a wide range of offences it is inevitable that occasionally Australians will find themselves on death row.

And, in rare circumstances, Australians may find themselves facing the death penalty in a foreign country as a result of the actions of Australia. There has, for example, been considerable media coverage about the question of whether or not the actions of the Australian Federal Police exposed members of the so-called 'Bali Nine' to the risk of the death penalty.

Should capital punishment be reintroduced essay

This raises the issue of how Australia should respond to a request for assistance in criminal investigations and prosecutions when providing assistance may expose a person to the risk of the death penalty. There are two key ways in which Australia can provide a foreign country with information about a criminal investigation or prosecution.

The first way is by Mutual Assistance. Mutual Assistance is a more formal process whereby Governments can ask other Governments for assistance in criminal investigation and prosecutions. The second way is by agency to agency assistance. Under agency to agency assistance - which includes police to police assistance - Australian law enforcement agencies can share information about criminal investigations with their overseas counterparts.

Mutual Assistance Currently, section 8 1A of the Mutual Assistance Act provides that a request for mutual assistance must be refused if the request relates to the prosecution or punishment of an offence where the death penalty may be imposed unless the Attorney-General believes there are 'special circumstances' which mean that assistance should be granted.

I am concerned that section 8 1A and 8 1B of the Mutual Assistance Act do not take a strong enough stance to prevent a person being exposed to the death penalty as a result of assistance provided by Australia. While the Mutual Assistance Act offers some protection, this protection is undermined by the fact that the Act does not provide for the mandatory refusal of a request for mutual assistance in relation to an investigation which may expose a person to the risk of the death penalty.

Consistent with Australia's international obligations 12 and bipartisan opposition to the death penalty, I consider a request for mutual assistance should be refused if granting a request in relation to the investigation, prosecution or punishment of an offence may result in the death penalty being imposed in a foreign country unless the country undertakes not to impose or carry out the death penalty.Death penalty, capital punishment, should death penalty reintroduced uk essay or execution is the legal process of putting a should death penalty reintroduced uk essay person to death thesis statement worksheets with answers as a punishment for a crime "The first prominent European to call for an end to the death penalty, Beccaria is essay buy.

Should capital punishment be reintroduced in Britain under any circumstances? Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is the execution of a convicted criminal as punishment for crimes known as capital crimes or capital offences. Aug 27,  · Capital punishment? What is your take on Capital Punishment?

Capital Punishment – Two Wrongs Don’t Make a Right. Comparative Literature

please i have a agumentive essay due in a couple of days? Do you think the crime rate in Australia increased since capital punishment was abolished?pls answer?Status: Open. Should capital punishment be reintroduced in the UK? Capital punishment is "putting a condemned person to death.

Many people associated America with capital punishment, as they are the only western society that still uses this form of punishment/5(1). capital punishment essay hot essays lt a href quot beksanimports Should the death penalty be reintroduced in australia essay.

Summary Of An Essay "Capital Punishment"

Death penalty essays debate SlideShare. essay for death penalty argument for the death penalty essay death midorimdns Document image preview.

The death penalty should be abolished says the humanist; The death penalty shouldn't be abolished says the community. Well the death penalty is a controversial topic, and it is difficult to have it and also difficult to not have it.

Should capital punishment be reintroduced essay

What is Capital punishment? Capital punishment is the death penalty.

essay on capital punishment in australia? | Yahoo Answers