Australia Changes its Position on the Death Penalty
On 16 February 2003 the Australian PM said in a Sunday morning television interview that the Bali bombers “should be dealt with in accordance with Indonesian law. …and if [the death penalty] is what the law of Indonesia provides, well, that is how things should proceed. There won’t be any protest from Australia”.[1]
In early March 2003 the PM told US television that he would welcome the death penalty for Osama Bin Laden. “I think everybody would”, Mr Howard said.[2]
In response to these comments:
"Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said Australia would not intervene if bin Laden was to be executed. 'I personsally have never supported the death penalty buit int he case of Osama bin Laden, I don't think that too many years would be shed if he was executed, bearing in mind all the people he's responsible for killing." [3]
These comments mark a significant change in Australia’s attitude to the death penalty and a further weakening of Australia’s commitment to international human rights standards.
Australia’s longstanding position
Australia has traditionally taken a strong principled stand against capital punishment. In 1986 diplomatic relations with Malaysia were strained when Australia protested the execution of two Australians, Kevin Barlow and Brian Chambers. The then Australian Prime Minister, Bob Hawke, went so far as to describe the death penalty as “barbaric”.
In October 1990 Australia acceded to the Second Opt...
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS Introduction: Throughout this discussion, I will debate and analyse the ideas I have collected from my research. My discussion is separated under sub headings which will allow me to form a better understanding of how capital punishment is viewed, which will help me in reaching a possible answer to my question. Firstly, I am going to be discussing two very well known case studies. Case studies: The two case studies I have picked to focus my research on are: Derek Bentley who was the last man executed in Britain along with Ruth Ellis who was the last woman executed in Britain.
Radelet, Michael L. and Borg, Marian J. “The Changing Nature of Death Penalty Debates.” Annual Sociology Review. 2000: 43-57. Academic Search Complete. Web. 17 November 2013.
Since Martin Bryant’s massacre on Port Arthur, the legal system in Australia is amended and reformed gun laws to create a more effective legislation. Gun-related deaths have since been drawn to more efficient attention in Australian psyche, whilst the issue of gun-laws on a global level still remains as a conspiracy in many countries. The massacre left the Australian nation in shock, with a heavily involved attitude on behalf of local and national police, and thousands devastated at the aftermath. The legislation of gun-laws and amendments continues to be controversial, with punishments including Bryant’s being one of popular debate, and the general ownership and use of guns causing conflict within the interrelationship of the legal system and society.
Argumentative Essay on Capital Punishment in Australia Capital punishment is barbaric and inhumane and should not be re-introduced into Australia. Although capital punishment has been abolished, the debate on this topic has never abated. When a particularly heinous crime is committed, this debate arouses strong passions on both sides. Many who advocate the abolition of capital punishment consider the death penalty to be cruel and inhuman, while those who favor of punishment by death see it as a form of just retribution for the gravest of crimes. Determining whether Queensland should re-introduce capital punishment as a sentence will be the focus of this assignment.
Canada has been a fully abolitionist country since the 10th of December 1998, and has since continued to maintain a strong anti-death penalty attitude (Amnesty, 2015). The last death penalty sentenced under Canada’s Criminal Code was given in 1962 to two convicted felons charged with first degree murder (Amnesty 2015). After the two were hanged, it brought the total number of people executed in Canada to 710, marking the end of an era (Amnesty, 2015). The death penalty has been a fiercely debated topic spanning even before 1867, Canada’s establishment. Notably however, Canada’s Prime Ministers have long opposed the death penalty starting with John Diefenbaker (Amnesty, 2015). Only the second most recent Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, has
Politically, it wasn't without cost to John Howard. Political interest groups among his conservative base raised hell, and the move met strong resistance from some in rural areas. His party's coalition partner in those areas suffered in subsequent elections. But the majority of Australians, shocked by the mass killing, backed action. Sound familiar? And the best part: it worked.
Murder, a common occurrence in American society, is thought of as a horrible, reprehensible atrocity. Why then, is it thought of differently when the state government arranges and executes a human being, the very definition of premeditated murder? Capital punishment has been reviewed and studied for many years, exposing several inequities and weaknesses, showing the need for the death penalty to be abolished.
Capital punishment is crime's most dreaded consequence, death. Hanging was Canada's form of capital punishment up until 1976 when it was abolished. Webster's Dictionary defines capital punishments as: "The penalty of death for the commission of a crime." (Webster's, 1994, 43). The chance of capital punishment being reinstated in Canada has been very slim up until now. Recently the Canadian Alliance Party has put forth efforts to reinstate it, which has put the controversial topic back up for debate. This has divided many Canadians concerning their beliefs. Capital punishment should never be reinstated in Canada as it is a barbaric practice that is unjust. This essay will clearly demonstrate that reinstating capital punishment would be illegal as it would violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadian Bill of Rights and the United Nations Universal Deceleration of Human Rights. In addition, this paper will show that capital punishment is a cruel and barbaric punishment. Finally, this paper will examine how capital punishment does nothing to deter people from committing crimes.
Guernsey, J. B. (2010). Death penalty: fair solution or moral failure. Minneapolis, MN: Lerner Publishing Group, Inc. Retrieved February 8, 2011 from http://books.google.com/books?id=38slHSsFFrgC&pg=PA125&dq=death+penalty+in+other+countries&hl=en&ei=F6dQTZHLBsm_tgfD7rHBCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBDgU#v=onepage&q=death%20penalty%20in%20other%20countries&f=false
A contentious issue in current debate is the death penalty and its application in society. The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, occurs when a individual is punished by execution as a consequence of an offence they committed (Taylor, 2014). Although Australia does not practice the death penalty, many countries continue to employ it as a means of justice and uphold its value in society. The death penalty debate is a multifaceted issue, encompassing many aspects of society including ethics and morality, the judicial system, and politics and the economy. It will be argued that the death penalty is a morally dubious and obsolete practice that is no longer relevant in modern judiciary, as it breaches the inviolable human right to life. Ethics and morality are primary arguments for both supporting and opposing the death penalty, as some individuals believe that the death penalty is a immoral practice and others consider that it can be morally justified when prolific crimes are committed. Punishment is fundamental element to any legal system as a means of justice and ensuing that the offender is unable to commit additional crimes; however, in the case of the death penalty there can be dire consequences if the legal system is wrong. Politics and the economy are also greatly influenced by the death penalty as they determine if the practice is maintained. The death penalty breaches a number of human rights laws and some individuals support that it is immoral; however, others consider it to be justifiable due to the heinous actions of the offender.
I believe only the most heinous of criminals deserve the Death Penalty. That is, people like Charles Manson or Osama Bin Laden who would likely kill again en masse if given the chance. The early 20th century philosopher Don Marquis, in his essay “Why Ab...
The Australian Legal System has a rich and detailed history dating from 1066. Law is made in Parliament. We have four sources of law and three courts with different jurisdictions that interpret the law when giving out justice. Important doctrines act as the corner-stones of our legal system. There is a procedure in the courts for making appeals. Separation of powers exists between officials in the courts, the parliament and the Executive. Everyone in Australia is treated equally under the Rule of Law, no matter their office or status. The Law is always changing as society changes, but it can never be perfect and cannot please everyone.
...l community overwhelmingly has accepted the position that the application of the penalty of death amounts to cruel and inhumane treatment or punishment. Why? Because it Not only does the State, with all its moral virtues, have time on its hands to change its mind, but also civilised society is able to prepare, premeditate and actually take part in the taking of human’s life. In so doing, stripping the recipient of all dignity and self-respect he or she so deserves by just being human coupled with the ultimate effect of “[C]heapen[ing] the value of human life.” By having State sanctioned executions therefore, the State disregards the very fundamental concepts of the right to life and dignity of the individual, and as a consequent the very respect for the human rights of the individual (a concept being introduced around the world by most modern democracies).
Overall Australia’s human rights record is of high-quality but is blemished by few human rights violations. Australia has freedom of speech, a corruption-free legal system, legal protection against discrimination, access to secondary education, the right to vote in elections, access to clean water, privacy protection, freedo...
The Death Penalty, Human Rights and British Law Lords: Judicial Opinion on Delay of Execution in the Commonwealth Caribbean.Full Text Available By: Ghany, Hamid A.. International Journal of Human Rights, Summer2000, Vol. 4 Issue 2, p30, 14p