Body Count Politics: Quantification, Secrecy, and Capital Punishment in China

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 706-727
Author(s):  
Tobias Smith

As quantification has become socially ubiquitous, the disclosure of numerical data emerges as a key feature of legal reform and global governance. Scholars document how seemingly value-neutral statistical indicators shape, and are shaped by, institutional interests. Although less attention has been paid to cases where states resist numerical disclosure, prohibitions on the disclosure of such indicators also produce social effects. This article extends scholarship on the governance effects of quantification to include secrecy by exploring the case of capital punishment data in China, which is reportedly the world’s leading executioner state. Amid a major death penalty reform effort, China steadfastly refuses international calls to publicly disclose relevant statistics. I analyze capital cases and draw on seventy-three interviews with legal insiders in China’s death penalty system to identify the impact of state efforts to conceal capital punishment indicators while undertaking reforms in three areas: transparency; legal representation; and criminal procedure. I show how tension between the disclosure and nondisclosure of death penalty numbers does not simply suppress data; it also shapes and becomes data, influencing both policy and action in the legal sphere in ways that are seemingly far removed from quantification.

Author(s):  
Daniel Pascoe

As with Chapters 3 and 4, the case study on Malaysia begins with a thorough description of the country’s death penalty laws and practice, and Malaysia’s publicly known clemency practice over the period under analysis (1991–2016). Thereafter, for both the Malaysian (Chapter 5) and Indonesian (Chapter 6) cases, the potential explanatory factors for clemency incidence are more complex than for Thailand and Singapore, given these two jurisdictions’ more moderate rates of capital clemency and fluctuating political policies on capital punishment over time. Available statistics suggest that Malaysia’s clemency rate is moderately high, at between 55 and 63 per cent of finalized capital cases. Malaysia is a federal state where pardons are granted by the hereditary rulers or appointed state governors in state-based cases, or by the Malaysian king (Yang di-Pertuan Agong) in federal and security cases, all on the advice of specially constituted Pardons Boards. Chapter 5 presents the following two explanations for Malaysia’s restrictions on death penalty clemency: prosecutorial/judicial discretion and detention without trial in capital cases, and the Federal Attorney-General’s constitutional role on the State and Federal Pardons Boards. As to why Malaysia’s clemency rate has not then fallen to the miniscule level seen in neighbouring Singapore (with both nations closely comparable, as they were once part of the same Federation of Malaya), Chapter 5 points to the relevant paperwork placed before each Pardons Board, the merciful role played by the Malay monarchy, and the impact of excessively long stays on death row before clemency decisions are reached.


Author(s):  
Anthony Walsh ◽  
Virginia L. Hatch

This article explores the emotions behind the retributive urge as it applies to the death penalty in the United States. It is argued that the retributive urge is so strong because it engages the most primitive of our emotions, and that these emotions served adaptive purposes over the course of human evolution. Many scholars offended by the retributive instinct insist that we must put emotions aside when discussing the death penalty, even as jurors in death penalty cases, and rely on our rationality. To ask this is to ask what almost all normal people find impossible because the emotions evoked in capital cases (disgust, anger, sympathy for the victim, desire for justice) evolved for the purpose of maintaining group stability and survival by punishing freeloaders. Modern neuroscience has destroyed the traditional notion that rationality and emotion are antagonists. Brain imaging techniques show that they are fully integrated in our brain wiring, and both are engaged in decision making, but when reason and emotion yield conflicting judgments, the latter almost always triumphs. The evolutionary rationales for why emotions conducive to punitive responses for wrongdoers exist are examined.


1974 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 415-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Stricker ◽  
George L. Jurow

Questionnaires concerning attitude toward capital punishment, liberalism-conservatism, and the assignment of penalties in 13 capital cases were administered to 190 college students. All scales correlated significantly with each other, with Ss who were opposed to capital punishment less likely to assign the death penalty in specific cases. Factor analysis showed separate factors for murderers, assassins, attitudes and demographic data. The relationship of these findings to the Witherspoon case is discussed.


2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 143-157
Author(s):  
Xu Huijun

Whether a death sentence is fair or not is an fundamental question for a country’s criminal justice system, yet in practice, similar cases still occasionally receive differing judgments. In response to this problem, this paper has proposed to take sentencing evidence as the breakthrough for the balanced application of death penalty. This paper begins by analysing written judgments from 40 cases, which involve 69 individuals and have been sampled from all those archived under the Gazettes section by the Beidafabao,1 Peking University Centre for Legal Information. This analysis provides considerable insight into the type of sentencing evidence admitted in capital cases, as well as the impact that principal evidence has on where death sentences are imposed. Next, in accordance with the basic problems of evidence law, this paper separates out sentencing evidence of capital cases from conventional theories that confuse it with convictions. Taking sentencing evidence as the core, the objective of the empirical analysis and theoretical discussion is to establish guidelines as well as a policy analysis for capital cases in China in the future.


2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 115
Author(s):  
Wojciech Kwiatkowski

THE ISSUE OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN THE UNITED STATES Summary This article describes the issue of capital punishment in the United States, including the history of the death penalty as administered in the USA and the main court rulings on this matter (e.g. the definition of categories of exemption or restrictions on the methods or conditions of execution). The article also describes numerous efforts (mostly on the grounds of court rulings) to improve the quality of legal representation and enhance the fairness of capital trials and appeals for defendants facing the death penalty. The article concludes with statistics which show that states with capital punishment on the statute book do not generally have lower murder or crime rates and that since 1973 138 persons sentenced to death have been acquitted in outcome of the discovery and proof of miscarriage of justice.


2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nick Petersen

While prior research has uncovered racial disparities in the administration of death sentences, little attention has been devoted to earlier stages in the capital punishment processes. To understand the locus of racial bias within death penalty institutions, this study examines the entry of homicide cases into Los Angeles County’s criminal justice system during a 5-year period. This two-part analysis seeks to answer the following research questions: (1) Does victim/defendant race influence homicide clearance and death penalty charging decisions? and (2) if so, does the likelihood of clearance mediate the effect of victim race on death penalty charges? Logistic regressions indicate that cases involving Latino victims are less likely to be cleared. Moreover, cases with Black and Latino victims are less likely to be prosecuted with a death penalty–eligible charge. Racial disparities accumulate across these stages, with clearance patterns influencing subsequent death penalty charging decisions. Results underscore the cumulative nature of racial within criminal justice institutions. By linking police and prosecution outcomes, these findings also highlight the interrelationship between criminal justice agencies.


2009 ◽  
Vol 57 (6) ◽  
pp. 928-949
Author(s):  
Jamie L. Flexon ◽  
Lisa Stolzenberg ◽  
Stewart J. D’Alessio

On March 1, 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the execution of offenders under the age of 18 at the time of their criminal offense was unconstitutional. Although many welcomed this decision, some individuals still remain concerned that the elimination of the specter of capital punishment will inevitably increase homicidal behavior among juveniles by reducing the prospect of deterrence. Using monthly data from the Supplemental Homicide Reports and a multiple time-series research design, the authors investigate the impact of the Roper v. Simmons decision on homicides perpetrated by juveniles in the 20 states affected by the law. Maximum likelihood results reveal that the repeal of the juvenile death penalty has had no effect on juvenile homicidal behavior.


2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 193
Author(s):  
Mei Susanto ◽  
Ajie Ramdan

ABSTRAKPutusan Nomor 2-3/PUU-V/2007 selain menjadi dasar konstitusionalitas pidana mati, juga memberikan jalan tengah (moderasi) terhadap perdebatan antara kelompok yang ingin mempertahankan (retensionis) dan yang ingin menghapus (abolisionis) pidana mati. Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini adalah bagaimana kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam putusan a quo dikaitkan dengan teori pemidanaan dan hak asasi manusia dan bagaimana kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam RKUHP tahun 2015 dikaitkan dengan putusan a quo. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian doktrinal, dengan menggunakan bahan hukum primer dan sekunder, berupa peraturan perundang-undangan, literatur, dan hasil-hasil penelitian yang relevan dengan objek penelitian. Penelitian menyimpulkan, pertama, putusan a quo yang memuat kebijakan moderasi pidana mati telah sesuai dengan teori pemidanaan khususnya teori integratif dan teori hak asasi manusia di Indonesia di mana hak hidup tetap dibatasi oleh kewajiban asasi yang diatur dengan undang-undang. Kedua, model kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam RKUHP tahun 2015 beberapa di antaranya telah mengakomodasi amanat putusan a quo, seperti penentuan pidana mati di luar pidana pokok, penundaan pidana mati, kemungkinan pengubahan pidana mati menjadi pidana seumur hidup atau penjara paling lama 20 tahun. Selain itu masih menimbulkan persoalan berkaitan dengan lembaga yang memberikan pengubahan pidana mati, persoalan grasi, lamanya penundaan pelaksanaan pidana mati, dan jenis pidana apa saja yang dapat diancamkan pidana mati.Kata kunci: kebijakan, KUHP, moderasi, pidana mati. ABSTRACTConstitutional Court’s Decision Number 2-3/PUU-V/2007, in addition to being the basis of the constitutionality of capital punishment, also provides a moderate way of arguing between retentionist groups and those wishing to abolish the death penalty (abolitionist). The problem in this research is how the moderation policy of capital punishment in aquo decision is associated with the theory of punishment and human rights and how the moderation policy of capital punishment in the draft Criminal Code of 2015 (RKUHP) is related with the a quo decision. This study is doctrinal, using primary and secondary legal materials, in the form of legislation, literature and research results that are relevant to the object of analysis. This study concludes, firstly, the aquo decision containing the moderation policy of capital punishment has been in accordance with the theory of punishment, specificallyy the integrative theory and the theory of human rights in Indonesia, in which the right to life remains limited by the fundamental obligations set forth in the law. Secondly, some of the modes of moderation model of capital punishment in RKUHP of 2015 have accommodated the mandate of aquo decision, such as the determination of capital punishment outside the main punishment, postponement of capital punishment, the possibility of converting capital punishment to life imprisonment or imprisonment of 20 years. In addition, it still raises issues regarding the institutions that provide for conversion of capital punishment, pardon matters, length of delay in the execution of capital punishment, and any types of crime punishable by capital punishment. Keywords: policy, criminal code, moderation, capital punishment.


2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
R Ahmad Muhammad Mustain Nasuha

This study aims the death penalty in Indonesia. We know where the death penalty is contrary or not in terms of the constitution and Islamic law, then we can conclude that if the legal implementation of the death penalty in Indonesia continue to be done or should be abolished. Based on research and the analysis conducted, conclude that Indonesia According to the Indonesian Constitution that the death penalty in Indonesia is constitutional. Constitutional Court Decision No. 2-3 / PUU-V / 2007 states that the imposition of the death penalty was constitutional. Any law governing capital punishment is not contrary to the Constitution of the State of Indonesia. However the legislation in Indonesia death penalty is still recognized in some legislation. There are three groups of rules, namely: Criminal Dead in the Criminal Code, Criminal die outside the Criminal Code, Criminal die in the Draft Bill. According to Islamic law that the death penalty could be applied to some criminal act or jinazah, either hudud qishahs, diyat or ta'zir among others to: Apostate, Rebel, Zina, Qadzaf (Allegations Zina), Steal (Corruption), Rob (Corruption), Murder.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document