68 Pro Death Penalty Quotes by Judges
There is as
much moral cowardice in shrinking from the execution of a murderer as there is
in hesitating to blow out the brains of a foreign invader. "Some
men, probably, abstain from murder because they fear that if they committed
murder they would be hanged. Hundreds of thousands abstain from it because they
regard it with horror. One great reason why they regard it with horror is that
murderers are hanged." Sir James Fitzjames Stephen, a great Jurist, who was concerned with the drafting of I.P.C. (Indian Penal Code) is very important to mention - “No other punishment deters man so effectually from committing crimes as the punishment of death. This is one of those propositions which is difficult to prove simply because they are in themselves more obvious than any proof can make them. In any secondary punishment, however terrible, there is hope, but death is death, its terrors cannot be described more forcibly.” These views are very strong answers to the people who oppose death punishment with the arguments that it does not serve penological purpose. |
|
Our
sovereignty has been taken away by the European Court of Justice...Our courts
must no longer enforce our national laws. They must enforce Community law...No
longer is European law an incoming tide flowing up the estuaries of England. It
is now like a tidal wave bringing down our sea walls and flowing inland over
our fields and houses—to the dismay of all. [Introduction to The European Court of Justice: Judges or Policy
Makers? (London: Bruges Group, 1990)] |
|
“If our criminal law is to be respected, the public conscience has to be satisfied, and it will not be satisfied if gross violence, and sometimes bestial crime, is not punished in a way that will satisfy the public. There are old people who go trembling to their doors at night.” “They are sentenced because it is society’s method of showing that if that conduct or those acts are persisted in certain consequences which must be unpleasant and must be punitive will result. I have never yet understood how you can make the criminal law a deterrent unless it is also punitive. The two things seem to me to follow one on the other.” [Speech in the House of Lords, 28 April 1948] “There is one other consideration which I believe should never be overlooked. If the criminal law of this country is to be respected, it must be in accordance with public opinion, and public opinion must support it. That goes very nearly to the root of this question of capital punishment. I cannot believe or the public opinion (or would I rather call it the public conscience) of this country will tolerate that persons who deliberately condemn others to painful and, it may be, lingering deaths should be allow to live…” [Speech in the House of Lords, 28 April 1948] “I know that in uttering this sentiment I shall not have the sympathies
of everyone but, in my humble opinion, I believe that there are many, many
cases where the murderer should be destroyed.” [Speech in the House of Lords, 28 April 1948]
“The supreme crime should carry the supreme penalty.” [Speech in the House of Lords, 10 July 1956]
“My sentiments are more in favour of the victim than they are of the
murderer. There is a tendency nowadays when any matter of criminal law is
discussed to think far more of the criminal than his victim.” [Speech in the House of Lords, 10 July 1956]
“Is this the time to remove what rightly or wrongly the police and
prison service believe to be their main protection against attack? We have to
remember that our police are armed with a short baton, the only weapon they
have against these gunmen and other people who do not hesitate to shoot and
take the lives of policemen. If this (Death Penalty Abolition) bill passes I am
sure it will encourage resignation from the police forces and make recruitment
more difficult.” [Speech in the House of Lords, 10 July 1956]
Lord Goddard recalled a brutal assault on a wife in which the accused said, “If it was not that I would swing for you, I would do you in.” He went on, “That is the sort of thing the death penalty prevents. I do not want to joke in this matter, but would be the effect on such people if they knew that they would be sent to a sanatorium or some other comfortable place if they committed murder?” [Speech in the House of Lords, 10 July 1956]“I believe the fear of the rope, as it is generally called among certain
classes, is a very great deterrent.” [Speech in the House of Lords, 10 July 1956]
“If this bill passed, judges will not be able to give any greater
punishment for deliberate murder than they can give now for burglary, for
breaking into a church (sacrilege), or for forging a will.” [Speech in the House of Lords, 10 July 1956]
The
Lord Chief Justice recalled the case when a bandit caught after a chase in
London fired low at a young constable. “He fired low
because he knew what the consequences would be if he murdered the policeman.
When he was arrested his first question was, ‘Is the copper dead?’ That is what
he was afraid of…These instances make me say with all the earnestness I can
command: do not gamble with the lives of the police.” [Speech
in the House of Lords, 10 July 1956]
“Are these people to be kept alive?” [Speech in the House
of Lords, 10 July 1956]
“I should shrink from the very idea of saying that the sentence of
murder should be life imprisonment in the full sense.” [Speech in the House of Lords, 10 July 1956]
“Your lordships can be assured that the only people hung are those
guilty of cruel, deliberate murder without mitigation…I put my views strongly
because from experience, one gets to feel strong views in these matters and
should not be afraid to express them. When a man deliberately murders another
he is committing the supreme crime, and should pay the supreme penalty.” [Speech in the House of Lords, 10 July 1956]
|
|
Law is the safest helmet; under the shield of the law no one is deceived. The King himself should be under no man, but under God and the Law. Those who consent
to the act and those who do it shall be equally punished. The intention ought to be subservient to the laws, not the laws to the intention. |
|
|
|
“Murder is
the unlawful killing or causing death of one human being by another human being
with the intention of doing so. An accidental killing or causing of death is
not murder because, in such a case, the intention to cause death was absent.
The intention to kill, therefore, is of the essence of the offence.”
“It is more
than ever essential in this present day and age that the rule of law should be
preserved inviolate: that those who respect and obey it shall live in freedom
and security under it; that those who flout it and seek to set it at nought
shall be brought to book and punished.”
“You have been told that it was better that 10 guilty men should go free rather than one innocent man should be convicted. Of course it would be better, but that is not good enough. That such a situation should be allowed to exist and to grow and to develop in stature would, in my opinion, constitute a grave reflection on the administration of the criminal jurisprudence of any civilized country. It is, gentlemen of the jury, more than ever necessary in this present day and age that the rule of law should be proclaimed aloud for all to hear: that those who offend against it shall be punished; and those who observe and obey it shall be allowed to live in freedom and security under it.” “Each of you has been convicted of the murder of Dutton and his two assistants. The evidence was established that these murders were committed in circumstances of such utter brutality, ruthlessness and savagery as defies description…The time has now come for you to pay the penalty for your dreadful acts. If ever the punishment fitted the crime, this case may be said with fairness and, I think propriety, to provide the outstanding instance. The sentence of the Court upon you is that you will be taken from this place to a lawful prison and taken to a place to be hanged by the neck until you are dead. And may the Lord have mercy on your soul.” [Pulau Senang was a penal experiment where prisoners were allowed to roam freely on the island. It was thought that detainees could be reformed through manual labour. The settlement started on 18 May 1960, when 50 detainees arrived with Superintendent Daniel Dutton. Over the next three years, the number of detainees rose to 320, and they transformed the island into an attractive settlement. Believing that through hard work, the detainees could be reformed. Dutton removed arms from the guards. On 12 July 1963, a group of some 70 to 90 detainees rioted and burned down most of the buildings. They hacked Dutton to death and killed two other officers. 58 people were accused of rioting and murdering Dutton and officers Arumugan Veerasingham and Tan Kok Hian. Because of the large number of the accused, a special dock had to be constructed for them. The case went to trial on 18 November and lasted an unprecedented 64 days. On 12 March 1964, the seven-member jury found 18 of the accused guilty of murder, 18 guilty of rioting with deadly weapons and 11 guilty of rioting. The remaining 11 accused were acquitted. Those found guilty of murder were sentenced to death, while those found guilty of rioting with deadly weapons were sentenced to three years of imprisonment; the rest to two years of imprisonment. Most of those involved in the rioting were members of secret societies who were detained without trial and had no hope of leaving the island. As a result of the riots, the penal experiment came to an abrupt end.] |
|
“There are cases where mercy and humanity to the few would be injustice and cruelty to the many.” |
|
The head of the
criminal division in the High Court of Uganda, Justice Lameck Mukasa, has said
the number of offences attracting a death penalty should be reduced. |
|
Tuesday 27 March 2012 in Abuja — THE Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Dahiru Musdapher, and Attorney General of the Federation AGF), Mohammed Adoke, has taken different positions over retention or abolition of death penalty in the country. While the CJN disagreed on the abolition of death penalty, saying it must be retained in the constitution, in spite of mounting pressure against it, the AGF was undecided, saying he could not say whether it is good or bad. The number-one Nigerian judge stressed that in a constitutional democracy, neither the legislature nor the judiciary is supreme over the constitution, adding that unless the National Assembly amends the law, there is nothing anybody can do about it. Justice Musdapher stated this yesterday in Abuja at a one-day programme organised by an NGO, Lawyers Without Borders based in France, which canvassed for the abolition of death penalty in Nigeria. Musdapher, who was represented by Special Assistant, Hadiza Sontali Sa'eed, held that it is not the responsibility of the judiciary to abolish death sentence in Nigerian laws, but the work of the legislature. 'The constitution specifically provides for death penalty in section 33.1 that every person has a right to life, and no one shall be deprived intentionally of his life, save in execution of the sentence of a court in respect of a criminal offence of which he has been found guilty in Nigeria,' he said. He noted that the Supreme Court had in a plethora of cases, upheld the constitutionality of death sentence in Nigeria “When a constitution is adopted, the judiciary is obliged to uphold its provisions. The task of the court is to protect the provisions of the constitution and ensure that the legislature fulfill its obligation”. |
|
Justice, when equal scales she holds, is blind; nor cruelty, nor mercy, change her mind; when some escape for that which others die, mercy to those to these is cruelty. |
|
Lord Kilmuir opposed
Sidney Silverman's 1956 private member's bill to abolish capital punishment. He
described it as "an unwise and dangerous measure,
the presence of which on the statute book would be a disaster for the country
and a menace to the people". |
|
“The murder of a person is as illegal from the point of view of shariah (Islamic law) as it is in Sudanese criminal law,” the judge, Sayed Ahmed al-Badri, said when announcing the sentence of the four men who murdered John Granville and the driver.
“Islamic law condemns murder, regardless of the nationality or religion (of the victim.” |
|
In Warner’s corner is justice
minister and former high court judge Herbert Volney who would like to see
capital punishment become a spectacle for the public to witness, as was the
case in the colonial and slave eras. |
|
Sunday 18 November 2012 - Yet the lack of legal aid is no reason to stop executions, according to Justice Geri Raymondo Legge, president of Lake State’s Appeal Court. During a previous appointment in Wao, he oversaw 17 executions in 14 months. “In the absence of a lawyer I am the advocate of the accused,” he says. “I am advocate for the plaintiff, the defendant and judge. It is not a perfect system.” Still, he adds, South Sudan needed the death penalty because its people were inclined to violence. “If you remove the death penalty your life is in danger. Our people are aggressive. The purpose of this is a deterrent to stop them killing.” |
|
“Let us have no remarks, but a fair trial, in God’s name.” – rebuking William Williams who defended Algernon Sidney. |
|
“Only a referendum can abolish capital punishment in Belarus, this is written in the Constitution. Please be reminded that more than 80 per cent of the Belarusians voted for retention of capital punishment at referendum in 2004.”
|
|
Monday 25 July 2011 - Quoting a book, Kenya's Justice David Musinga said an opinion poll showed 75 per cent of Ugandans wanted the retention of the death sentence and the same case applied to Kenya. “Our MPs would want to side by the wishes of the general populace. Unless the message (repeal of death penalty) is taken across the countryside, it looks it’s not possible to achieve it here,” Mr Justice Musinga said. |
|
Speaking to The Irish Times , the judge said: “The Government should look at it. Then if the people want it they should have it.”
“I am not totally in favour of it. But it should be revisited,” the former judge said. “It would have to be for specific offences. If people arm up and go out to rob and decide to take out anyone who gets in their way, they should pay the price. It should be a matter for each individual case.” |