The death penalty violates the most fundamental human right – the right to life.

It is the
ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.

The death penalty is discriminatory. It is often used against the most vulnerable in society,
including the poor, ethnic and religious minorities, and people with mental disabilities. Some
governments use it to silence their opponents. Where justice systems are flawed and unfair
trials rife, the risk of executing an innocent person is ever present.

When the death penalty is carried out, it is final. Mistakes that are made cannot be unmade.
An innocent person may be released from prison for a crime they did not commit, but an
execution can never be reversed.

If you kill someone else, don’t you deserve to die, too – “an eye for an eye”?

No. Executing someone because they’ve taken someone’s life is revenge, not justice. An
execution – or the threat of one –inflicts terrible physical and psychological cruelty. Any
society which executes offenders is committing the same violence it condemns.

Human rights – including the most basic right to life – are universal and endorsed by the vast
majority of countries in the world. To date, 140 countries have abolished the death penalty in
law or in practice, demonstrating that the desire to end capital punishment is shared by
cultures and societies in almost every region in the world.

Today, two-thirds of countries in the world have either abolished the death penalty outright, or
no longer use it in practice. Although there have been a few steps backwards, these must be
weighed up against the clear worldwide trend towards abolition. In 2015 alone, Fiji,
Madagascar and Suriname all turned their backs on the death penalty once and for all.
Burkina Faso, Mongolia and South Korea are on their way to doing the same. Europe remains
virtually free of the death penalty. And the USA, historically one of the nations most reluctant
to give up the death penalty, is slowly turning against capital punishment.

John J. Donohue III, JD, PhD, Professor of Law at Stanford University, stated the
following in his Aug. 8, 2015 article “There’s No Evidence That Death Penalty Is a
Deterrent against Crime,” available at theconversation.com:

“[T]here is not the slightest credible statistical evidence that capital punishment
reduces the rate of homicide. Whether one compares the similar movements of homicide in
Canada and the US when only the latter restored the death penalty, or in American states that
have abolished it versus those that retain it, or in Hong Kong and Singapore (the first
abolishing the death penalty in the mid-1990s and the second greatly increasing its usage at
the same), there is no detectable effect of capital punishment on crime.

H. Lee Sarokin, LLB, former US District Court and US Court of Appeals Judge, wrote in
his Jan. 15, 2011 article “Is It Time to Execute the Death Penalty?” on the Huffington Post
website:

Statistics demonstrate that states without the death penalty have consistently lower
murder rates than states with it, but frankly I think those statistics are immaterial and
coincidental. Fear of the death penalty may cause a few to hesitate, but certainly not enough
to keep it in force.”
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), in its Apr. 9, 2007 website presentation titled
“The Death Penalty: Questions and Answers,” offered the following:

“The death penalty has no deterrent effect. Claims that each execution deters a certain
number of murders have been thoroughly discredited by social science research.
People commit murders largely in the heat of passion, under the influence of alcohol or drugs,
or because they are mentally ill, giving little or no thought to the possible consequences of
their acts. The few murderers who plan their crimes beforehand — for example, professional
executioners — intend and expect to avoid punishment altogether by not getting caught.
Some self-destructive individuals may even hope they will be caught and executed.”

Innocence
The death penalty carries the inherent risk of executing an innocent person. Since 1973, at
least 199 people who had been wrongly convicted and sentenced to death in the U.S. have
been exonerated.

Look no further than the tragedy of George Stinney Jr., a 14-year-old African American boy in
1944 South Carolina, was convicted and executed for the murders of two white girls. Decades
later, overwhelming evidence, including testimony from his siblings and the lack of a proper
defense, cast serious doubt on his guilt. In 2014, his conviction was finally vacated due to a
lack of due process.This case exemplifies the horrifying possibility of executing an innocent
person under capital punishment. Here we have a case where the death penalty
demonstrably failed to prevent crime, and instead, resulted in the irreversible loss of an
innocent life. Stinney's case is not an isolated incident. The risk of error, racial bias, and the
finality of the punishment all argue against the morality of the death penalty. It reminds us that
true justice requires a focus on rehabilitation and prevention, not irreversible punishment with
questionable effectiveness.

Death penalty does not prevent crime

Esteemed judges and audience, the affirmative argues that capital punishment is morally
acceptable, especially in light of repeat crimes. While we all share a deep desire for justice
and safety, the death penalty fails to deliver on that promise.

Numerous studies, including the National Research Council's review, found no conclusive
evidence that the death penalty reduces murder rates. In fact, murder rates in death penalty
states are often comparable or even higher than those in states without it.

Criminals committing heinous acts are often fueled by emotions or desperation, not a rational
fear of punishment. The death penalty, a slow and uncertain process, is unlikely to be a
deterrent in the heat of the moment. Life imprisonment, on the other hand, offers a clear and
undeniable consequence for criminals to consider. Life imprisonment offers a guaranteed
punishment, while executions can be delayed for years or even decades due to appeals.

Furthermore, focusing solely on punishment ignores the root causes of crime. Poverty, lack of
opportunity, and mental health issues all play significant roles. Resources currently spent on
lengthy capital punishment trials could be better used on social programs that demonstrably
reduce crime rates.

The death penalty is a flawed system prone to error. Innocent people have been sentenced to
death, and executions are irreversible. We risk taking a life that may later be proven innocent.
Can we truly call that justice?

Our focus should be on a justice system that deters crime, protects society, and delivers fair
and just punishment. Capital punishment fails on these counts. Thank you.