A PROJECT REPORT

ON

“Capital Punishment”

For the session 2008-10

Submitted To: Submitted By:Ms. Vandana Khanna Deepak Verma Lecturer Roll No: 1208848 MMIM MBA (P)

MMIMMaharishi Markendeshwar University

Mullana(Ambala)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

On the completion of the Seminar report, I have to thanks God First.

God is supreme and it is education, his divine blessing, the unquenchable

thirst for which does even the most seemingly impossible deeds.

Group efforts make the load felt lighter. No task is possible without

assistance of some guidance. So was this seminar for the completion of

M.B.A.(P). I wish to express my appreciations to all those with whom I

worked and whose thoughts and inspection contributed towards the

completion of this project.

On this auspicious moment of submission of the Seminar it is indeed

a great privilege to express my deep regards, profound sense of gratitude

and sincere thanks to revered guide Ms. Vandana Khanna., for her

precious guidance, keen interest and constant cooperation, thus enabling us

to undertake and accomplish this study. I would also like to thank her for

her kind attitude towards me and also for having spared her precious time in

spite of her busy and tight schedule.

I am also thankful to my all faculty members of M.M.I.M. who gave

me knowledge & valuable suggestions regarding the project report.

(Deepak Verma)

PrefacePreface

I am glad to present this report on “CAPITAL PUNISHMENT”.

In this file I’m preparing the report of session 2009-10. During this I’ve

came to know about various aspects of Capital Punishment. As it’s been a

controversial matter all round the world, I’ve tried to study various aspects.

In this work, I’ve spared no pains to make it as compact reliable & perfect

as possible. Every attempt has been made to insert in this report many

references as are to be focused. I hope that this report will help everyone to

understand the structure of Capital Punishment worldwide

CONTENTS

Introduction

The Death Penalty Debate

Brutality

Dignity

Effectiveness

Human Rights

Capital Punishment in India

Other Aspects

The Alternative

“Life without parole” Vs the death penalty

The Numbers Games “death Vs deterrence

Can Capital Punishment ever be “Humane”

Research Methodologies

Questionnaire and Analysis

Findings

Suggestions

Bibliography

Annexure

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

Introduction

Capital Punishment, legal infliction of death as a penalty for violating criminal law.

Throughout history people have been put to death for various forms of wrongdoing.

Methods of execution have included such practices as crucifixion, stoning, drowning,

burning at the stake, impaling, and beheading. Today capital punishment is typically

accomplished by lethal gas or injection, electrocution, hanging, or shooting.

The death penalty is the most controversial penal practice in the modern world. Other

harsh, physical forms of criminal punishment—referred to as corporal punishment—have

generally been eliminated in modern times as uncivilized and unnecessary. In the

majority of countries, contemporary methods of punishment—such as imprisonment or

fines—no longer involve the infliction of physical pain (see Corporal Punishment).

Although imprisonment and fines are universally recognized as necessary to the control

of crime, the nations of the world are split on the issue of capital punishment. About 90

nations have abolished the death penalty and an almost equal number of nations (most of

which are developing countries) retain it.

The trend in most industrialized nations has been to first stop executing prisoners and

then to substitute long terms of imprisonment for death as the most severe of all criminal

penalties. The United States is an important exception to this trend. The federal

government and a majority of U.S. states allow the death penalty, and on average 75

executions occur each year throughout the United States.

The Death Penalty Debate

The practice of capital punishment is as old as government itself. For most of history, it

has not been considered controversial. Since ancient times most governments have

punished a wide variety of crimes by death and have conducted executions as a routine

part of the administration of criminal law. However, in the mid-18th century, social

commentators in Europe began to emphasize the worth of the individual and to criticize

government practices they considered unjust, including capital punishment. The

controversy and debate over whether governments should utilize the death penalty

continue today.

The first significant movement to abolish the death penalty began during the era known

as the Age of Enlightenment. In 1764 Italian jurist and philosopher Cesare Beccaria

published Tratto dei delitti e delle pene (1764; translated as Essay on Crimes and

Punishments, 1880). Many consider this influential work the leading document in the

early campaign against capital punishment. Other individuals who campaigned against

executions during this period include French authors Voltaire and Denis Diderot, British

philosopher David Hume, Scottish economist Adam Smith, and political theorist Thomas

Paine in the United States.

Critics of capital punishment contend that it is brutal and degrading, while supporters

consider it a necessary form of retribution (revenge) for terrible crimes. Those who

advocate the death penalty assert that it is a uniquely effective punishment that deters

crime. However, advocates and opponents of the death penalty dispute the proper

interpretation of statistical analyses of its deterrent effect. Opponents of capital

punishment see the death penalty as a human rights issue involving the proper limits of

governmental power. In contrast, those who want governments to continue to execute

tend to regard capital punishment as an issue of criminal justice policy. Because of these

alternative viewpoints, there is a profound difference of opinion not only about what is

the right answer on capital punishment, but about what type of question is being asked

when the death penalty becomes a public issue.

A. Brutality

Early opponents of capital punishment objected to its brutality. Executions were public

spectacles involving cruel methods. In addition, capital punishment was not reserved

solely for the most serious crimes. Death was the penalty for a variety of less serious

offenses.

The allegations of brutality inspired two different responses by those who supported

executions. First, advocates contended that capital punishment was necessary for the

safety of other citizens and therefore not gratuitous. Second, death penalty supporters

sought to remove some of the most visibly gruesome aspects of execution. Executions

that had been open to the public were relocated behind closed doors. Later, governments

replaced traditional methods of causing death—such as hanging—with what were

regarded as more modern methods, such as electrocution and poison gas.

The search for less brutal means of inflicting death continues to recent times. In 1977

Oklahoma became the first U.S. state to authorize execution by lethal injection—the

administration of fatal amounts of fast-acting drugs and chemicals. Lethal injection is

now the preferred method of execution in the majority of U.S. states. However, modern

opponents of capital punishment contend that sterilized and depersonalized methods of

execution do not eliminate the brutality of the penalty.

B. Dignity

In the debate about execution and human dignity, supporters and opponents of the death

penalty have found very little common ground. Opponents of capital punishment assert

that it is degrading to the humanity of the person punished. Since the 18th century, those

who wish to abolish the death penalty have stressed the significance of requiring

governments to recognize the importance of each individual. However, supporters of

capital punishment see nothing wrong with governments deliberately killing terrible

people who commit terrible crimes. Therefore, they see no need to limit governmental

power in this area.

C. Effectiveness

Early opponents of capital punishment also argued that inflicting death was not necessary

to control crime and properly punish wrongdoers. Instead, alternative punishment—such

as imprisonment—could effectively isolate criminals from the community, deter other

potential offenders from committing offenses, and express the community's

condemnation of those who break its laws. In his Essay on Crimes and Punishments,

Beccaria asserted that the certainty of punishment, rather than its severity, was a more

effective deterrent.

Supporters of capital punishment countered that the ultimate penalty of death was

necessary for the punishment of terrible crimes because it provided the most complete

retribution and condemnation. Furthermore, they argued that the threat of execution was a

unique deterrent. Death penalty supporters contended that capital punishment self-

evidently prevents more crime because death is so much more feared than mere

restrictions on one’s liberty.

Supporters and opponents of capital punishment still debate its effectiveness. Social

scientists have collected statistical data on trends in homicide before and after

jurisdictions have abolished capital punishment. They have also compared homicide rates

in places with and without the death penalty. The great majority of these statistical

comparisons indicate that the presence or absence of capital punishment or executions

does not visibly influence the rate of homicide.

Opponents of capital punishment maintain that these studies refute the argument that the

death penalty deters crime. Many capital punishment opponents consider the deterrence

argument fully negated and no longer part of the debate. However, supporters of the

death penalty dispute that interpretation of the statistical analyses of deterrent effect.

Capital punishment advocates note that because the death penalty is reserved for the most

aggravated murders, the deterrent effect of capital punishment on such crimes may not be

apparent in data on homicide rates in general. Supporters also urge that the conflicting

results of various studies indicate that the deterrent effect of the death penalty cannot not

be proven or disproven with any certainty. They maintain that in the absence of

conclusive proof that the threat of execution might not save some people from being

killed, capital punishment should be retained.

D. Human Rights

A unique facet of the modern debate about capital punishment is the characterization of

the death penalty as a human rights issue, rather than a debate about the proper

punishment of criminals. Modern opposition to the death penalty is seen as a reaction to

the political history of the 20th century, most notably the Holocaust—the systematic

mass killing of Jews and others during World War II (1939-1945). All the major nations

in Western Europe utilized capital punishment prior to World War II. After the defeat of

the National Socialist (Nazi) and Fascist governments of Germany and Italy, those two

nations became the first major powers in Europe to abolish capital punishment. The

postwar movement to end capital punishment, beginning in Italy and Germany and then

spreading, represented a reaction to totalitarian forms of government that systematically

violated the rights of the individual (see Totalitarianism).

The human rights focus on the death penalty has continued, especially in settings of

dramatic political change. When people view capital punishment as a human rights issue,

countries that are becoming more democratic have been eager to abolish the death

penalty, which they associate with the former regime and its abuses of power. For

example, a number of Eastern European nations abolished capital punishment shortly

after the collapse of communist regimes there in 1989. Similarly, the multiracial

government of South Africa formed in 1994 quickly outlawed a death penalty many

associated with apartheid, the official policy of racial segregation that had been in place

since the late 1940s.

Capital Punishment in India

Between 1975 and 1991, about 40 people were executed. Since 1995 only one execution,

that of Dhananjoy Chatterjee in August 2004, has taken place. The number of people

executed in India since independence in 1947 is a matter of dispute; official government

statistics claim that only 55 people had been executed since independence, but the

People's Union for Civil Liberties cited information from Appendix 34 of the 1967 Law

Commission of India report showing that 1,422 executions took place in 16 Indian states

from 1953 to 1963, and some have suggested that the total number of executions since

independence may by as high as 4,300.

The Supreme Court of India ruled in 1983 that the death penalty should be imposed only

in "the rarest of rare cases." Capital crimes are murder, gang robbery with murder,

abetting the suicide of a child or insane person, waging war against the government, and

abetting mutiny by a member of the armed forces. In recent years the death penalty has

been imposed under new anti-terrorism legislation for people convicted of terrorist

activities. Recently, the Indian Supreme Court in Swamy Sharaddananda v. State of

Karnataka made imposing the death penalty even harder. The judgment holds that the

“rarest of the rare” test prescribed in Bachchan Singh’s case was diluted in the Machchi

Singh case. The judgment then goes on to say that the “rarest of the rare” must be

measured not only in qualitative but also in quantitative terms. Thus, given that the

general crime levels have been worsening since Machchi Singh’s case was decided, the

categories of “rarest of the rare” should also change. Therefore, all the categories

specified in Machchi Singh need not fit in with “rarest of the rare” today – a lot of the

categories are no longer as rare. It remains to be seen post this judgment how Courts will

apply the "rarest of the rare" formulation.

About 40 mercy petitions are pending before the president, some of them from 1992. At

least 3 are women. Many more are on death row after having been sentenced to die by

lower courts, but on appeal most of them are likely to be commuted to life imprisonment

by the State High Courts or the Supreme Court of India.

It appears that judges in the lower courts are also getting increasingly averse to use

capital punishment. For example in 2007 several high profile cases involving pre-

meditated cold blooded murders, rape and murder of minors during rioting, terrorist

bombings, etc. have not attracted the death penalty. But activists reveal a flaw, that due to

the absence of sentencing guidelines in what constitutes "rarest of the rare", in some less

gruesome murders, the lower courts have awarded death sentences possibly due to poor

defence presented by the lawyers of the economically backward.

The death penalty is carried out by hanging. After a 1983 challenge to this method, the

Supreme Court ruled that hanging did not involve torture, barbarity, humiliation or

degradation.

At least 100 people in 2007, 40 in 2006, 77 in 2005, 23 in 2002, and 33 in 2001 were

sentenced to death, according to Amnesty International figures. No official statistics of

those sentenced to death have been released. In December 2007, India voted against a

United Nations General Assembly resolution calling for a moratorium on the death

penalty.

Other Aspects

A. The alternatives

What are the realistic alternatives to the death penalty?

Any punishment must be fair, just, adequate and most of all, enforceable. Society still

views murder as a particularly heinous crime which should be met with the most severe

punishment. Whole life imprisonment could fit the bill for the worst murders with

suitable gradations for less awful murders. Some 44 people are serving whole life tariffs

in the UK.

In modern times, we repeatedly see murderers being able to "get off" on the grounds of

diminished responsibility and their alleged psychiatric disorders or by using devices such

as plea bargaining. This tends to remove peoples' faith in justice which is very dangerous.

Are there any other real, socially acceptable, options for dealing with murderers? One

possible solution (that would enrage the civil liberties groups) would be to have

everyone's DNA profile data-based at birth (not beyond the wit of modern computer

systems), thus making detection of many murders and sex crimes much easier. If this was

done and generally accepted as the main plank of evidence against an accused person and

a suitable, determinate sentence of imprisonment passed, involving a sensible regime

combining both punishment and treatment, it would considerably reduce the incidence of

the most serious and most feared crimes. The reason for this is that for most people, being

caught is a far greater deterrent than some possible, probably misunderstood punishment,

e.g. "life imprisonment." Surely this has to be better than the arbitrary taking of the lives

of a tiny minority of offenders (as happens in most countries that retain the death penalty)

with all the unwanted side effects that this has on their families and on the rest of society.

It is clear that certainty of being caught is a very good deterrent - just look at how people

observe speed limits when they see signs for speed cameras and yet break the speed limit

as soon as the risk is passed.

B. "Life without parole" versus the death penalty

Many opponents of capital punishment put forward life in prison without parole as a

viable alternative to execution for the worst offenders, and surveys in America have

shown that life without parole (LWOP) enjoys considerable support amongst those who

would otherwise favour the death penalty.

However, there are drawbacks to this:

It is argued by some that LWOP is in fact a far more cruel punishment that death. This

proposition was put forward in a UK parliamentary debate by the philosopher John Stuart

Mill in the 19th century. It is interesting to note that no less than 311 prisoners serving

life sentences in Italy petitioned their government in 2007 for the right to be executed.

They cited LWOP as a living death where they died a little every day. In the USA, as of

January 2008, there are over 2,200 people serving whole life sentences who were under

18 at the time they committed the crime, as US law no longer permits the execution of

minors. One might be forgiven for asking what is the point of locking a person up to the

day they die and one might wonder if it is indeed a far worse punishment than death.

Death clearly permanently incapacitates the criminal and prevents them committing any

other offence. LWOP cannot prevent or deter offenders from killing prison staff or other

inmates or taking hostages to further an escape bid - they have nothing further to lose by

doing so and there are instances of it happening in the USA.

However good the security of a prison, someone will always try to escape and

occasionally will be successful. If you have endless time to plan an escape and everything

to gain from doing so, it is a very strong incentive.

C. The Numbers Game "death versus deterrence”

If we are, however, really serious in our desire to reduce crime through harsher

punishments alone, we must be prepared to execute every criminal who commits a capital

crime irrespective of their sex, age (above the legal minimum) alleged mental state or

background. Defences to capital charges must be limited by statute to those which are

reasonable. Appeals must be similarly limited and there can be no reprieves. We must

carry out executions without delay and with sufficient publicity to get the message across

to other similarly minded people. This is similar to the situation which obtains in China

and would, if applied in Britain, undoubtedly lead to a large number of executions to

begin with until the message got through. I would estimate at least 2,000 or so in the first

year if it were applied for murder, aggravated rape and drug trafficking. This amounts to

more than 7 executions every day of the year Monday through Friday.

Are we, as a modern western society, willing to do this or would we shy away from it and

return to just carrying out the occasional execution to show that we still can without any

regard for natural justice? These events will be seized upon by the media and turned into

a morbid soap opera enjoyed by a (large?) proportion of the population. (Note the

popularity in the American media of capital murder trials there.) It is doubtful whether

executions carried out on this basis will deter others from committing crimes.

For capital punishment to really reduce crime, everyone of us must realise that we will

personally and without doubt be put to death if we commit particular crimes and that

there can be absolutely no hope of reprieve. One wonders if as many people would be

willing to vote for this scenario in a referendum when they realised the full consequences

of their action. I have no doubt that if we were to declare war on criminals in this fashion,

we would see a rapid decline in serious crime but at what cost in human terms? There

will be a lot of innocent victims - principally the families of those executed

D. Can capital punishment ever be "humane"?

I have never personally believed that any form of death, let alone execution, is either

instant or painless, so which method of capital punishment should a modern "civilised"

society use? Should our worst criminals be given a completely painless death even if the

technology exists to provide one, or should a degree of physical suffering be part of the

punishment? Whatever method is selected should have some deterrent value whilst not

causing a deliberately slow or agonising death.

British style, hanging is an extremely quick process that is designed to cause instant and

deep unconsciousness and also benefits from requiring simple and thus quick preparation

of the prisoner. It also seems to have substantial deterrent value.

Lethal injection may appear to be more humane than other methods to those who have to

administer and witness it, but it is also a very slow process. It is essential that the catheter

actually goes into a vein rather than through it or round it if the prisoner is to die a pain

free death. If it doesn’t, then the person may suffer a great deal of pain but will be unable

to communicate this due to the paralysing effects of the second drug. The biggest single

objection to lethal injection is the length of time required to prepare the prisoner, which

can take from 20 to 45 minutes depending on the ease of finding a vein to inject into.

The gas chamber seems to possess no obvious advantage as the equipment is expensive to

buy and maintain, the preparations are lengthy, adding to the prisoner's agonies, and it

always causes a slow and cruel death. It is also dangerous to the staff and witnesses.

Electrocution can cause a quick death when all goes well, but seems to have a greater

number of technical problems than any other method, often with the most gruesome

consequences. (This may in part be due to the age of the equipment - in most case 70-90

years old!)

Shooting by a single bullet in the back of the head seems greatly preferable to shooting

by a firing squad in that it is likely to cause instant unconsciousness followed quickly by

death rather than causing the prisoner to bleed to death, often whilst still conscious.

It is easy to condemn capital punishment as barbaric, but is spending the rest of one's life

in prison so much less cruel to the prisoner or is it merely a way of salving society's

conscience and removing the unpleasantness for the staff and officials?

Research Methodology

Research is a procedure of logical and systematic application of the fundamentals of

science to the general and overall questions of a study and scientific technique which

provide precise tools, specific procedure and technical rather than philosophical means

for getting and ordering the data prior to their logical analysis and manipulation.

Different type of research design is available depending upon the nature of research

project, availability of capable manpower and circumstances.

Objectives of Research

The purpose of research is to discover answer to questions through the application of

scientific procedures. Through each research study has its own specific purpose, we may

think of research objectives as falling into a number of following broad groupings:

1. To gain familiarity with a phenomenon or to achieve new insights into it;

2. To portray accurately the characteristics of a particular individual, situation or a

group;

3. To determine the frequency with which something occurs or with which it is

associated with something else;

4. To test a hypothesis of a causal relationship between variables.

Research Design :

The research design is the blueprint for the fulfillment of objectives and answering

questions. It is a framework which determines the course of action towards the collection

and analysis of required data. It is a master plan specifying the method and procedures for

collecting and analyzing needed information. Descriptive Research is used in this study,

as the main aim is to describe characteristics of the phenomenon or a situation.

Time Schedule :

The collection of data was done during the month of April 2009.

Data Collection :

The source of data includes primary and secondary data sources.

Primary Sources : Primary data has been collected directly from sample

respondents through questionnaire and with the help of interview.

Secondary Sources : Secondary data has been collected from standard textbooks,

Newspapers, Magazines & Internet

Sample Design :

Sample design is definite plan determine before any data is actually obtaining for a

sample from a given population. The researcher must decide the way of selecting a

sample. Samples can be either probability samples or non-probability samples.

Target Population : General Public

Sample Unit : Individual

Sampling Technique : Convenient Sampling

Sample Size : 100 Respondents

Questionnaire and Analysis

Q.1. Should Capital Punishment be imposed by the law?

60

40

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Openion

Yes

No

Q.2. What method should be adopted ?

10

20

30

20 20

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Opinion

Hang till death

Lethal Injection

Electrocution

Shooting

Other

Q.3. What should be the alternative punishment?

Life Imprisonment

70%

30%

Life Imprisonment

Other

Q.4. Are you agree with the statement “Death penalty deters crime”?

45%

33%

22%

Yes

Partially

No

Q.5. “Capital Punishment degrading to the humanity to the person

punished” – do you agree with the statement?

33%

67%

Yes

No

Q.6. Do you find any disparity in application of Capital Punishment in

our country?

38%

62%

Yes

No

Q.7. A lenient action towards wrongdoers encourage them for

committing crime?

77%

23%

Yes

No

Findings

After collecting the data from various sources (primary and secondary) and analyzing the

tabulated data, making interpretations I could reach at the following findings :

Most of the respondent shows their content towards the implication of Capital

Punishment in India.

Electrocution should be adopted for the death penalty.

The persons (40%) who oppose death penalty, favours Life Imprisonment as an

alternative.

Most of the respondents consider that there is no disparity in execution of Capital

Punishment in our country.

77% people believe that a lenient behaviour by the law towards criminals,

encourage them to commit crime in future.

Suggestions

On the basis of findings, I’ve reached at some suggestions :

Not to have the death penalty and the genuine problems it causes and continues to

accept the relatively high levels of murder and other serious crimes that we

presently have.

Reintroduce capital punishment for just the "worst" murderers which would at

least be some retribution for the terrible crimes they have committed and would

permanently incapacitate them. It would also save a small amount of money each

year which could, perhaps, be spent on the more genuinely needy. This option is

unlikely to reduce overall crime levels.

Reintroduce the death penalty in the really strict format outlined above and see a

corresponding drop in serious crime whilst accepting that there will be a lot of

human misery caused to the innocent families of criminals and that there will be

the occasional, if inevitable, mistakes.

Bibliography :

Primary Sources :

Sample Survey

Sample Size : 50

Method : Survey done individually

Secondary Sources

Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007.

India Together (2 April 2005)

Times of India (10 March 2005)

http://www.capitalpunishmentu.org/thoughts.html

ANNEXURE

I Name : _______________________________

II Age : _______________________________

III Profession : _______________________________

IV Address : _______________________________

_______________________________

Q.1. Should “Capital Punishment” be imposed by the law?

Ans : a) Yes b) No

Q.2. In case ‘Yes for Q. 1’, What method should be used?

Ans. a) Hang till death b) Lethal injection

b) Electrocution c) Shooting

e) Other

Q.3. In case ‘No for Q. 1’, What should be alternative punishment?

Ans. a) Life Imprisonment b) Other

Q.4. Are you agree with the statement “Death penalty deters crime”?

Ans. a) No b) Partially c) Fully

Q.5. “Capital Punishment degrading to the humanity to the person

punished” – do you agree with the statement?

Ans. a) Yes b) No

Q.6. Do you find any disparity in application of Capital Punishment in

our country?

Ans. a) Yes b) No

Q.7. A lenient action towards wrongdoers encourage them for

committing crime?

Ans. a) Yes b) No