Evaluating the Death Penalty: Its Role as A Deterrent Vs Its Impact on Human Rights.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17744439

Abstract

This research investigation rigorously analyzes the death sentence as both a claimed deterrent to criminal activity and a possible infringement on essential human rights. Employing a qualitative and theoretically informed methodology based on secondary data analysis, the study assesses comparative evidence from abolitionist and retentionist regimes, including the United regimes, Japan, Saudi Arabia, and Canada. The results show that supporters of the death penalty say it stops murder and violent crime, but the evidence is not clear and the methods used are not reliable. Countries with the death penalty have not necessarily recorded low crime rates. Conversely, the nine countries that have replaced it since then, such as Canada and Norway, have experienced consistent decline in homicide rates and this demonstrates that the execution measures are not an effective method of preventing crime. The study highlights some of the most serious ethical and legal dilemmas, including wrongful conviction, psychological torment of death row inmates, and institutional imbalances that affect the poorer segment of society disproportionately. This paper compares the deterrence theory and the concept of the human right, and finds that the death penalty does not work in deterring crime, or aligns with the universal right to life and dignity. It calls for a radical re-evaluation of punitive justice regimes across the world, proposing restorative justice, legislative change and social rehabilitation as alternatives that are more humane and effective in achieving sustainable criminal justice outcomes.