Amid the horrible scenes of the Ukraine air disaster and Palestinian war comes the news of another botched execution in the state of Arizona, USA. John R. Wood’s execution, carried out with a potent concoction of drugs, took about two hours, a far cry from the time actually planned by the executioners.

I cannot perceive how a nation which promotes and strives for justice and peace on a global basis can go on promoting death as a punishment in its own territory. Mr Wood’s death was described by the corrections department spokesman as being more peaceful than the terror and pain suffered by his two victims. It stuns me to understand how the execution of another human can be described in anyway but just plain ugly death.  An unnecessary one at that and a punishment which by its nature should be intended to institute reform.  How can you guide a human being to reformation by keeping him locked for months, years or even decades and then kill him in such an inhumane manner?

The death penalty carried out in the legal form is inhumane in many ways than one.  First of all it violates our human nature and natural instinct to survive. One might argue that by committing terrible crimes a person is willingly giving away his right to survive. No matter what crime is committed, two wrongs do not make a right. It is inhuman because it is the most extensive form of humiliation and torture that one can inflict on another human being – that of forcibly tying him to a gurney in front of an audience and putting him to sleep (death) by injecting lethal doses of medicine. No matter how meekly or willingly inmates go to their execution, it is still something that is abhorrently wrong. 

 It is our Creator who has given us life and no one, legally or illegally, should take away another’s life. We are supposed to promote life in every act or deed we carry out. In fact, we have been given the right and means to promote life through pro-creation. However, an unnatural death whether it is legal or not is something that goes against the very nature of our existence on this earth. Even animals do not kill to punish but to survive. What is it that distinguishes us from animals? Are we more intelligent than them because we can legally kill another human being?

I will not argue against the death penalty because it has been proved that it is not a deterrent to serious crime. I would not even venture on this reasoning simply because in this day and age, with man having achieved such a high level of intelligence, landing on the moon and reaching for the stars, death should not be on the legal agenda of any nation. In my opinion, it is a sad admission on the part of the state that there are some people who can only be reformed by the ultimate punishment. It is said to give closure to the victim’s family but it does not bring back their loved ones. It also inflicts protracted pain and sorrow on the condemned person’s relatives. In my opinion, the death penalty promotes the culture of death as a form of punishment and wires minds into resorting to killing another person sometimes to punish (revenge). It has gone as far as executing an individual who, in a fit of rage, had killed a doctor who carried out legal abortions!

On a moral ground one is allowed in extreme circumstances and in self-defence to take away the life of another to preserve his. However, the killing or execution of a common criminal in a controlled and planned manner cannot be so. What defence does the state need against an individual who is locked up for almost 24 hours every day and is under constant surveillance?

I just cannot comprehend capital punishment. In my opinion, by invoking the death penalty the state is choosing the easiest way out in its attempt to curb criminality. The death penalty as a form of punishment should not feature in our society.

Carm Vassallo

Fgura