DEVIL’S ADVOCATE SERIES: ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
Abdul - Kadir O. Etuazim
September 18, 2006
I hate to ever use the word devil because it provides an umbrella for umbrage, vilification and opportunity to conflate issues. The invocation of the word generally triggers a mental picture of evil in living colors. However, devil’s advocacy, when used dispassionately, is a tool to advance the cause of forging understanding and clarity. This is achieved by wading into both sides of any argument and acknowledging substantive points on either side, when identified.
Above jells with the concept of being a Conlib. (Please go to:www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=1439 for details on Conlib) History is replete with supposed devil’s advocates leading changes. Deliberate trips on roads less traveled or calculated focus on areas deemed to be concluded and cast in concrete might result in new paradigms.
From my constitutional law class days to the present, I enjoy listening to debates between the protagonists and opponents of capital punishment for murderers. Like most discussions, some people broach the issue with passion, others with near infallibility of convictions and there are those whose big dog in the fight is the need to be viewed as foot soldiers of a just cause. Probing further, there are those who are driven by personal empathy and some that are galvanized by absolute positivism. As usual, the views of all sides need to be treated with respect and not necessarily tolerance.
There should be an obvious area of agreement – a life had unlawfully been taken. Going beyond this leads to the slippery slope of legal defenses and, at times, opinions that are in diametric opposition to common sense. This incomprehensibility to the dictates of common sense tend to be exacerbated by personal affliction, and rightly so too. In effect, expecting victims to rationalize in their moments of grief would amount to insensitivity of unparalleled proportion.
The Igbos of Nigeria say, “One who is bereaved mourns in any manner perceived to be appropriate”. Questioning the decision of any one who is bereaved on how to mourn is the ultimate lack of respect. It takes dexterous balancing acts to empathize and at the same time attempt to lead the victim(s) out of pains towards the realm of reason and logic. How it feels when a loved one is lost is something that cannot be explained in words. This I know from experiences.
Stemming from the above is a question “Are there alternatives to the argument that capital punishment is unjust and barbaric etc?” This query is relevant because the ways some arguments against capital punishment are presented tend to, inadvertently, degrade the victims’ rights to life. The Igbos also articulate “The remains in a casket appear to be more human if they belong to a relative.” A bystander may not have first hand experiences to place a lifeless body in human context like a relative can do with ease. Man is not – ordinarily – as unforgiving as we think. Displays of genuine understanding do, generally, work wonders to alter our natural instincts of an eye for an eye.
Crossing over to the arguments of the protagonists that imposing death penalty is the only avenue to justice and closure raises many questions on the religious front. Justice is best when delivered by the Almighty. Forgiveness is a recurring theme in most, if not all, world religions. As believers in whatever religion or faith, would it not be wonderful for us to choose very painful events and moments to manifest our total submission to God or a Superior Being? Those who say it is difficult to attain such spiritual level have a point.
However, there are some instances when man transcended the depths of despair and the chambers of revenge, a poignant case being developments in post-apartheid South Africa. Blacks, Colored, and Whites that suffered the ferociousness of the evil, white-dominated, apartheid regime displayed equanimity at the end of the day by agreeing to the establishment of only the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. There was no bloodletting or imprisonment to punish the perpetrators of the well-documented crimes against humanity. Insisting on due process was one of the alluring, but never chosen, juicy avenues to seek closure and justice.
Above jells with the concept of being a Conlib. (Please go to:www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=1439 for details on Conlib) History is replete with supposed devil’s advocates leading changes. Deliberate trips on roads less traveled or calculated focus on areas deemed to be concluded and cast in concrete might result in new paradigms.
From my constitutional law class days to the present, I enjoy listening to debates between the protagonists and opponents of capital punishment for murderers. Like most discussions, some people broach the issue with passion, others with near infallibility of convictions and there are those whose big dog in the fight is the need to be viewed as foot soldiers of a just cause. Probing further, there are those who are driven by personal empathy and some that are galvanized by absolute positivism. As usual, the views of all sides need to be treated with respect and not necessarily tolerance.
There should be an obvious area of agreement – a life had unlawfully been taken. Going beyond this leads to the slippery slope of legal defenses and, at times, opinions that are in diametric opposition to common sense. This incomprehensibility to the dictates of common sense tend to be exacerbated by personal affliction, and rightly so too. In effect, expecting victims to rationalize in their moments of grief would amount to insensitivity of unparalleled proportion.
The Igbos of Nigeria say, “One who is bereaved mourns in any manner perceived to be appropriate”. Questioning the decision of any one who is bereaved on how to mourn is the ultimate lack of respect. It takes dexterous balancing acts to empathize and at the same time attempt to lead the victim(s) out of pains towards the realm of reason and logic. How it feels when a loved one is lost is something that cannot be explained in words. This I know from experiences.
Stemming from the above is a question “Are there alternatives to the argument that capital punishment is unjust and barbaric etc?” This query is relevant because the ways some arguments against capital punishment are presented tend to, inadvertently, degrade the victims’ rights to life. The Igbos also articulate “The remains in a casket appear to be more human if they belong to a relative.” A bystander may not have first hand experiences to place a lifeless body in human context like a relative can do with ease. Man is not – ordinarily – as unforgiving as we think. Displays of genuine understanding do, generally, work wonders to alter our natural instincts of an eye for an eye.
Crossing over to the arguments of the protagonists that imposing death penalty is the only avenue to justice and closure raises many questions on the religious front. Justice is best when delivered by the Almighty. Forgiveness is a recurring theme in most, if not all, world religions. As believers in whatever religion or faith, would it not be wonderful for us to choose very painful events and moments to manifest our total submission to God or a Superior Being? Those who say it is difficult to attain such spiritual level have a point.
However, there are some instances when man transcended the depths of despair and the chambers of revenge, a poignant case being developments in post-apartheid South Africa. Blacks, Colored, and Whites that suffered the ferociousness of the evil, white-dominated, apartheid regime displayed equanimity at the end of the day by agreeing to the establishment of only the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. There was no bloodletting or imprisonment to punish the perpetrators of the well-documented crimes against humanity. Insisting on due process was one of the alluring, but never chosen, juicy avenues to seek closure and justice.
Print
Email
