Op-Ed Contributors

Death to the death sentence

By Lin Wei (China Daily)
Updated: 2010-04-28 07:49

The overuse of capital punishment to satisfy the public hides the measure's failure to deter nonviolent crimes

With death sentences handed down recently in corruption cases, an old issue is once again a hot topic for debate: Should capital punishment be abolished in economic, nonviolent crimes?

On one side of the debate are the jurists, who for the most part are leaning toward abolishing capital punishment. The majority of them believe that depriving an individual of his or her life for a nonviolent offence is near useless in preventing new economic crimes.

On the other side is the general public, who are overwhelmingly in support of capital punishment for corrupt officials and infamous smugglers, according to many recent online surveys.

According to the surveys, many people are disgusted with corrupt officials. In the surveys, they insisted that capital punishment be used as a tool to fight graft.

Deciding on what side to take is tricky. In China, like in many countries, the public is extremely hostile to corruption, but unlike many countries the public in China has an emotional, growing voice, especially in the online realm. And the sentiment of the public is essential for a just society.

Though it's difficult for scholars and jurists to win the support of the public, and though there is a massive gap on what to do about corrupt officials, capital punishment should be limited and eventually abolished. Capital punishment is a measure that is simply not strong enough to deter corrupt officials such as Wen Qiang, the former deputy police chief of Chongqing municipality. Jurists and the government, though they respect public opinion in pursuing justice, should not be swayed by irrational public emotions and use capital punishment without restraint.

Without a doubt, it should be carved in the heart of every jurist that, to be really effective, the law must align with the values of the people and reflect their opinions. Without a majority of the public on their side, it is almost impossible for jurists to implement the law.

Therefore jurists should no longer dwell in their academic arguments: It's time to communicate more with the public. Only through such discourse can the argument against capital punishment win public support.

To win more support, jurists in favor of limiting and eventually abolishing the death sentence should explain at least the following three points to the public:

First, corruption cases are only one of many economic crimes. Jurists are also considering such nonviolent crimes as financial fraud, smuggling and larceny when they advocate limiting, even abolishing, the death sentence. Second, facts and results from investigations have shown that the death sentence does little to prevent economic crimes. It is the chief reason why many jurists hope to abolish it. Last but not least, capital punishment should first be abolished for economic crimes, but the ultimate goal is to abolish the sentence completely.