The demands of justice for heinous crimes do not necessarily include nor imply the necessity of death penalty. Even a life taken away is not restored by taking away one or even more lives in return. In fact, death penalty is a gross injustice itself whereas some people “officially” take away or actually steal lives they did not author. No officiality could moralize what is categorically immoral — such as killing someone no matter how “softly” this is done.
Justice is an equalizer, not a terminator. Justice in principle means that what is unlawfully taken should be restored, what is illegitimately appropriated must be accordingly compensated. Death penalty is neither restoration or compensation. It is plain and simple taking away the life of someone. It does nor truly restore what heinous crime has taken away,. It does not really compensate what heinous crime has done.
Death penalty is pure and open taking away something, viz., human life. Period. It neither restores nor compensates for anything at all. That is why it can never be a demand of justice.
There is no question that heinous criminals should be heavily — not likewise heinously — penalized. There are a hundred and one ways of penalizing such big evil doers. And death penalty is not necessarily one of them. So too there are a hundred and one ways of making the much erring individuals suffer for their crime, and hopefully amend their lives. And death penalty is neither an imperative to achieve said purposes.
Drugs destroy lives. Heinous crimes jeopardize, terrify and at times even end lives. The plan of the national leadership now being floated around is that Drug Lords shall be executed but other heinous criminals will be spared. What a discrimination! What double-Standard! What hypocrisy!
What will be the next superficial idea? Execute kidnappers but spare Drug Lords? Kill Jueteng Lords but save the lives of criminals? What an irony!
7 August 2003