Why the death penalty is incompatible with democracy
Professor Eric Heinze has written for The Conversation arguing that the death penalty is in itself incompatible with democracy. This is following the execution of Kenneth Eugene Smith on 25 January for murder in Alabama, using the untested method of nitrogen asphyxiation.
The execution of Kenneth Eugene Smith on 25 January for murder in Alabama, using the untested method of nitrogen asphyxiation, was the spur for this article which argues the death penalty is in itself incompatible with democracy.
Professor Eric Heinze, Professor of Law, Queen Mary University of London discusses the democratic case against the death penalty.
He says: “In a proper democracy, no citizens can have the right wholly to deprive any other citizen of those opportunities, not even by majority decision. And when we put a fellow citizen to death – however hideous this person may otherwise be – we commit this violation. There are many things a democracy can legitimately do by majority vote, but not disenfranchise another citizen – which the death penalty obviously does.”
“My concern is not merely that capital punishment violates a given person but that it violates democracy itself. So this is the crucial point: I’m not arguing for the value of benevolence, or the values of civilisation, or the values of compassion. I fully concede that some people may merit little benevolence, may have little place in civilisation and deserve little compassion. In a word, my appeal here is not about charity or woolly sentiment….”
“Once we accept that we live in a democracy, what we must never accept are norms or practices that would undermine the very conditions by which it exists as a democracy.”
Read the full article on the Queen Mary website.
