Crime And Punishment
What is Crime?
Crime is the breaking of specific rules. As a result of this, the offender can be punished by the local government/authority. The difference between what a ‘crime’ lawfully is and what it isn’t is decided by the authorities.
What is Punishment?
Punishment is a consequence which a person usually faces (when having committed something extremely sinful). They may have broken a law. This should allow the offender to learn from their mistakes; the offender often has a lost. They are usually isolated in prison cells; cut off from their friends and family. The severity of the crime will depend on the punishment.
Capital Punishment
"The measure of punishment in a given case must depend upon the atrocity of the crime, the conduct of the criminal and the defenceless and unprotected state of the victim.
Imposition of appropriate punishment is the manner in which the courts respond to the society's cry for justice against the criminals.
Justice demands that courts should impose punishment befitting the crime so that the courts reflect public abhorrence of the crime."
Justices A.S. Anand and N.P. Singh, Supreme Court of
India, in the case of Dhananjoy Chatterjee
This argument fundamentally says that for people to get justice that people have to suffer for the mistakes that they have made. Also that their extremity of the punishment depending on how severe the crime that the crime that they committed was. If the crime was murder than that person should be killed as they have killed another person. In other words this arguments supports retribution:
Arguments against Capital Punishment
Therefore if any man is dangerous to the community and is subverting it by some sin, the treatment to be commended is his execution in order to preserve the common good... Therefore to kill a man who retains his natural worthiness is intrinsically evil, although it may be justifiable to kill a sinner just as it is to kill a beast, for, as Aristotle points out, an evil man is worse than a beast and more harmful.
Thomas Aquinas
This argument is talking about the value of human life. This argument talks about even the worst murderers should not be killed as you are depriving them from their value of life. Also everyone has a right to live and by killing that person you are violating that right, so technically you are murdering someone. Also Aquinas talks about that in some cases the bad act may seem like a good act.
HINDU VIEWS ON PUNISHMENT
How this differs to the arguments
Hindu beliefs on capital punishment differ to the argument for capital punishment in the sense that the argument for capital punishment is about justice and causing pain to the criminal to obtain it. This differs from the viewpoint of Hinduism because Hindus believe in ahimsa (the concept of non-violence), so they are against capital punishment. The Hindu viewpoint is similar to Thomas Aquinas’ argument against capital punishment as Aquinas Talks about how sacred life is and this is similar to the notions of Hinduism because the Vedas declares that all life is sacred and is to be loved and revered.
Crime is the breaking of specific rules. As a result of this, the offender can be punished by the local government/authority. The difference between what a ‘crime’ lawfully is and what it isn’t is decided by the authorities.
What is Punishment?
Punishment is a consequence which a person usually faces (when having committed something extremely sinful). They may have broken a law. This should allow the offender to learn from their mistakes; the offender often has a lost. They are usually isolated in prison cells; cut off from their friends and family. The severity of the crime will depend on the punishment.
Capital Punishment
- The killing of someone for a crime that they haven’t committed.
- The method that the person is killed in varies (hanging, electric chair and even the lethal injection).
- Issued for serious offences- murder, treason, fraud, rape etc.
- It is only legal in the following countries:
- Bangladesh
- Belarus
- China
- Egypt
- Iran
- Japan
- Libya
- Malaysia
- North Korea
- Saudi Arabia
- Singapore
- Syria
- USA
- An approach to justice which focuses on the needs of both the victim & offender.
- The victim must explain how much their life has been affected – the sanctions will be based on this.
- Furthermore, the offender is supposed to ‘rectify’ their mistakes – returning money, community service etc.
- No legal action is taken – should tie bonds between victim and offender.
- In Hindu society, a crime was seen as an act against the common rules of decency and morality. Punishment was viewed as part of the wrongdoer’s karma.
- The Vedas & Upanishads, the most sacred scriptures of Hinduism, view crime as a sin against the natural laws of all creation.
- The Dharmashastras, the Puranas and the Mahabharata all state that a king (or monarch in modern age), has a duty to protect his subjects and punish offenders, so that people can carry out the duties associated with their Dharmas and life statuses.
- A KING must control the sinful (those committing puapa) by appropriate punishment (danda) or else DEATH is the option.
- Danda has three different components:
- retribution ; the criminal pays for what they’ve done
- restraint; which prevents the criminal from repeating the sin
- reformation; changes the behaviour of the criminal
"The measure of punishment in a given case must depend upon the atrocity of the crime, the conduct of the criminal and the defenceless and unprotected state of the victim.
Imposition of appropriate punishment is the manner in which the courts respond to the society's cry for justice against the criminals.
Justice demands that courts should impose punishment befitting the crime so that the courts reflect public abhorrence of the crime."
Justices A.S. Anand and N.P. Singh, Supreme Court of
India, in the case of Dhananjoy Chatterjee
This argument fundamentally says that for people to get justice that people have to suffer for the mistakes that they have made. Also that their extremity of the punishment depending on how severe the crime that the crime that they committed was. If the crime was murder than that person should be killed as they have killed another person. In other words this arguments supports retribution:
- all guilty people deserve to be punished
- only guilty people deserve to be punished
- guilty people deserve to be punished in proportion to the severity of their crime
Arguments against Capital Punishment
Therefore if any man is dangerous to the community and is subverting it by some sin, the treatment to be commended is his execution in order to preserve the common good... Therefore to kill a man who retains his natural worthiness is intrinsically evil, although it may be justifiable to kill a sinner just as it is to kill a beast, for, as Aristotle points out, an evil man is worse than a beast and more harmful.
Thomas Aquinas
This argument is talking about the value of human life. This argument talks about even the worst murderers should not be killed as you are depriving them from their value of life. Also everyone has a right to live and by killing that person you are violating that right, so technically you are murdering someone. Also Aquinas talks about that in some cases the bad act may seem like a good act.
HINDU VIEWS ON PUNISHMENT
- In Hindu society, a crime was seen as an act against the common rules of decency and morality. Punishment was viewed as part of the wrongdoer’s karma.
- The Vedas & Upanishads, the most sacred scriptures, view crime as sin against the natural laws of all creation.
- The Dharmashastras, the Puranas and the Mahabharata that a king, has a duty to protect his subjects and punish offenders, so that people can carry out the duties associated with their Dharmas and life duties.
- A king must control the sinful (those committing puapa) by suitable punishment (danda) or else death is the option.
- Danda has three different components:
- Retribution: the criminal pays for what they have done
- Restraint: prevents the criminal from repeating the sin
- Reformation: changes the behaviour of the criminal
How this differs to the arguments
Hindu beliefs on capital punishment differ to the argument for capital punishment in the sense that the argument for capital punishment is about justice and causing pain to the criminal to obtain it. This differs from the viewpoint of Hinduism because Hindus believe in ahimsa (the concept of non-violence), so they are against capital punishment. The Hindu viewpoint is similar to Thomas Aquinas’ argument against capital punishment as Aquinas Talks about how sacred life is and this is similar to the notions of Hinduism because the Vedas declares that all life is sacred and is to be loved and revered.