Thailand taking middle path on capital punishment

[webfact]

EDITORIAL

Thailand taking middle path on capital punishment

By The Nation

 

But public revulsion over a spate of gruesome murders threatens to reverse de  facto moratorium on executions

BANGKOK: -- At a press conference last week on the arrest of eight suspects in the recent massacre of eight family members in Krabi, the national police chief said the perpetrators were inevitably destined for capital punishment.

 

After a spate of gruesome murders in recent months involving dismemberment of the victims and the execution-style shooting of a whole family including children, many citizens no doubt heartily agree with Police General Chaktip Chaijinda that the cold-blooded killers deserve to be put to death. Strong support for capital punishment in Thai society is buttressed by the argument that it acts as an effective deterrent against serious crimes, though human rights campaigners and international organisations deny this and routinely call for the death penalty to be abolished.

 

Amnesty International reports that Thai courts handed down 216 death sentences last year, leaving 427 prisoners on death row at the end of 2016 – including 24 foreign nationals. But no execution has been carried out in this country since August 2009.

 

Countries can be divided into four major groups when it comes to the issue of capital punishment – those that retain and use it, those that abolish it for all crimes, those that abolish it most cases but retain it for “exceptional” circumstances, and those that have abolished it in practice. The latter group of countries have executed no prisoners for 10 consecutive years and have a policy or established practice of not carrying out executions.

 

Thailand is categorised among the 58 countries that retain and use capital punishment, while a total of 105 countries have abolished the practice completely. Yet Thai policy appears to be shifting towards the latter group of countries who retain the punishment in law but do not in practice.

 

Last year in May, Thailand accepted recommendations from the United Nations’ Human Rights Council to review the imposition of the death penalty for offences related to drug trafficking, to commute death sentences with a view to abolishing capital punishment, and to take steps towards abolishing the death penalty.

 

It seems capital punishment is being retained here with the purpose of deterring violent crimes, though no actual executions have been carried out for almost eight years.

 

During that time, those convicted of murder or masterminding murder have simply been incarcerated on an ever-lengthening death row. 

 

Some have even had their sentences commuted to life terms after confessing to and showing remorse for their crimes. Meanwhile thanks to the Corrections Department’s system of grading inmates, those classified as “excellent prisoners” or “good prisoners” can be entitled to reduced terms and even pardons. These convicts can simply wait to be released after completing their reduced terms.

 

A number of murderers convicted in high-profile cases have already been freed. 

 

Thai authorities appear to have opted for a middle path, seeking to appease both rights advocates and those who want capital punishment to be retained. This policy has the merit of helping protect the human rights of both convicted murderers and the victims and their grieving families.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/opinion/30321237

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-07-20

[Stargeezr]

Maybe they will die of old age before they are dispatched, if they get the treatment of all before them for the

last nine years. 

Geezer

Edited July 20, 2017 by Stargrazer9889
correction

[jaltsc]

"Thai authorities appear to have opted for a middle path..."

 

There is never any follow through. As with everything else , the promise,  the threat, or the appearance that something is getting accomplished, is the payoff.

[abrahamzvi]

I really believe that criminals should be punished in a harsh manner for serious crimes such as murder, rape and the likes. However, I , at the same time, strongly believe that capital punishment is no more than legal murder,as it is my belief and conviction that no human being is allowed to take the life of another, other than in physical self protection. Serious crimes should be punished in other ways, for example by life long, excluding pardon or early release, with hard labour. Criminals should pay for their crimes and the society should be protected from them, but not, repeat not, by committing a legal crime - execution, which in my belief is simply legal murder. Further, it has been proven world wide that capital management is and has never been, a deterrent. Look at some states in the USA, where capital punishment is being exercised, and the crime rates have been increasing steadily ( Texas as one example).

[Retiredandhappyhere]

The trouble is that many criminals repeat their former crime(s) when released from jail.  Jail terms generally do not reform felons who are merely released into the community often to commit further crimes.  

 

So, either the jail system has to be drastically reformed or the death sentence for horrific crimes retained, as otherwise more innocent victims will suffer at their hands.  Which is more important, the lives of innocent victims, or the lives of die-hard criminals?

 

I think that most do-gooders would rapidly change their point of view, were the victim a member of their own family.

[abrahamzvi]

18 hours ago, Retiredandhappyhere said:

The trouble is that many criminals repeat their former crime(s) when released from jail.  Jail terms generally do not reform felons who are merely released into the community often to commit further crimes.  

 

So, either the jail system has to be drastically reformed or the death sentence for horrific crimes retained, as otherwise more innocent victims will suffer at their hands.  Which is more important, the lives of innocent victims, or the lives of die-hard criminals?

 

I think that most do-gooders would rapidly change their point of view, were the victim a member of their own family.

Haven't I suggested that the Jail term be reformed to make sure that society is protected of such criminals?