Criminals don’t fear death penalty — they fear police efficiency: Robert Badinter, former Minister of Justice, France

Robert Badinter is former Minister of Justice, France, and an international authority on crimes and death punishment. Badinter explained why he thinks death penalty doesn’t work, punishment versus policing — and why life imprisonment is the toughest sentence:

You say there should be no death penalty — why?

How can someone be in favour of death penalty? It is a useless and inhuman punishment.

In a civilised world, especially in a democratic country, there should be no such punishment, as in a democracy the first right of a person is the Right to Live.
Every state should protect this right.

But doesn’t death penalty deter criminals?

Contemporary history proves there is no relationship whatsoever between the presence and absence of death penalty with respect to rate of crimes. Various studies conducted before the abolition of capital punishment give a clear signal towards this.

Take Europe — it wasn’t a pleasant continent in past centuries. Largely driven by colonialism, Europe resorted to capital punishment. However, atrocities committed in the first part of the 20th century led to a moral growth and brought realisation among many in Europe to value human life — this led many European nations to abolish this cruel punishment.

Interestingly, all the nations which abolished death penalties were democratic countries where public opinion at large was in favour of crushing this punishment. Most importantly, nowhere after abolishing it has there been a way back to re-establish this because of a rise in crimes. The idea that death penalty prevents criminals is false — what prevents criminals is not the threat of death but rather the threat of getting arrested. Criminals can’t operate if policing is efficient.

The problem is the efficiency of police.

India’s witnessed heinous crimes like 2012's Nirbhaya gangrape-murder — is justice ensured if such criminals live?

Everyone has a Right to Live. This cannot have any exceptions. Death penalty is not given for petty offences, it’s always for heinous crimes. But while looking at a crime, you don’t take into consideration the childhood conditions of a convict, his background and prejudices — we just look at the act a person has committed, which, in my opinion, is not fair. It’s a short-sighted shame for humanity. We decide a man should die because of an act, without any consideration that he be given a chance to improve.

I’d say revenge is no justice. Justice has to take into consideration fundamental values. Human justice is poisoned by all the inequalities of society. Taking the life of a person is not a solution — the number of such crimes will not decrease by keeping death penalty as a punishment.

What are some alternatives?

Life sentence should take over from capital punishment. Apart from suppressing the risk of taking a person’s life, it also allows someone to change for the better. You can try to bring back a man to humanity.

Moreover, i feel life sentence is a bigger penalty than death. In capital punishment, in seconds, a person loses his life — a person sentenced for life has to live with his crime lifelong.