The death penalty is not the answer
By: Opinion - Dianne HubbarbIN the wake of the recent spate of horrific child abuse and murder cases, many people in Namibia are calling for a re-introduction of the death penalty.
But is this a well-considered response, or just an expression of
the desperate need to do something to address the situation? What
is it that makes a person capable of raping and murdering a child?
Before we can begin to know how to prevent more such tragedies, we
must be able to answer that question.
Our entire society shares Namibia's past of violent struggle to
end oppression.
Many people in Namibia live with poverty and frustration.
Many people have backgrounds of abuse in their own lives.
Many drink too much alcohol.
IN SEARCH OF REASON
But what is it that turns only some of these people, and not
others, into child abusers? As the Legal Assistance Centre pointed
out in its recent press statement, the tender age of the recent
victims lays bare the real horror of rape.
Surely no one is going to argue that children aged 6 and 4
"seduced" their abusers or wore provocative clothing or somehow
"asked for it" in any way.
The rape of such young children strips bare the usual excuses
which are put forward for sexual violence.
But what is it that makes some people in our society capable of
viewing tiny children as objects of sexual gratification? The
recent explanation offered by one of the perpetrators - "I had the
need to have sex" - is chilling.
We need to know more if we are going to understand how such
things can happen and what we can do to prevent them.
There must be more than sex involved.
There must also be deep-seated issues of power and
powerlessness.
There must be complex mental health issues which need
exploration and analysis.
The idea that the death penalty would help with deterrence
assumes that would-be criminals make rational decisions.
The theory is that a potential rapist and murder would think in
advance of the crime: "Perhaps I should not do this deed, because
there is a chance that I will be caught, convicted and sentenced to
death."
Do we really believe that people who are capable of such
horrifically violent crimes are going to be so coolly logical and
rational? Isn't the real problem indeed that such people lack the
ability to control their irrational desires and impulses?
THE DEBATE
I believe that one strong thing Namibia has in its favour in the
daunting task of combating crime is our Constitutional statement of
fundamental rights and freedoms.
We as a society can speak out confidently against murder because
we can say that we as a group do not condone murder - not even
state-sanctioned murder in the form of a death penalty.
Against the backdrop of our Constitution, we can say that we
value the rights of every person in Namibia.
With that starting point, those of us who would never think of
committing child abuse or murder retain the moral high ground.
We make sure that the debate is about rights and morality, and
not about who has the most power.
The Constitution is there to remind us of our shared values,
even when our gut impulse says that some people do not seem to
deserve to live.
The Constitution is the national conscience that restrains our
impulses, reminding us to live by our principles and not to give
way to dark desires like some of those amongst us have done.
Article 6 of our Constitution, which protects the right to life,
is very clear.
It says: "The right to life shall be respected and protected. No
law may prescribe death as a competent sentence. No Court or
Tribunal shall have the power to impose a sentence of death upon
any person. No executions shall take place in Namibia."
And Article 131 says that no repeal or amendment of the
fundamental rights and freedoms which would diminish or detract
from them is permissible under this Constitution.
This means that the only way to re-introduce the death penalty
is to discard our entire Constitution and begin all over again with
the task of defining ourselves as a nation.
None of the rights in our Constitution will have lasting meaning
if we are willing to throw them out the window every time they are
challenged by the situation on the ground.
For example, what will happen in future if some people say that
they feel deeply threatened by the Constitutional promise of sexual
equality - will we water down that Constitutional promise as well?
We must either stand behind the set of values that the nation
adopted unanimously at independence, or else concede that we don't
really take them seriously.
Weakening even one of those Constitutional premises would by
implication weaken them all.
It would mean that no one will know in the future which values
Namibia will stand behind and which values Namibia will consider
expendable.
Is that the kind of message we want to give our children? I
believe that what we want to say is that we as a nation value
life.
Some people's lives have clearly gone terribly, horrifyingly
wrong when it is possible for them to kill innocent little
children.
We might make ourselves feel better if we murder the murders,
but perhaps what we need more is to learn from them.
Why did they do what they did? Is there any way to rehabilitate
them? If we could do that, THEN we might really know something
useful about how to stop others from committing serious crimes.
I do not believe that re-introducing the death penalty would
help to prevent the abuse and murder of children.
It might allow the rest of us to feel a little better about the
situation, by pretending that we were doing something to prevent
such crimes from recurring.
But real prevention and deterrence cannot be such a quick
fix.
We will have to study and understand the causes of violence in
Namibia.
And then we will have to do the long, slow, difficult work of
changing attitudes about men and women and children, and about sex
and violence and human rights - starting with our nation's
youth.
The new laws on rape and domestic violence that have been passed
are a part of society's response to the problem, but they were
never meant to be the whole response.
There is no law that can fix this sickness in our society on its
own.
Now we have to turn to the harder, messier job of changing
hearts and minds.
We don't need to change the Constitution - we need to work
together to make it a living reality.
Our entire society shares Namibia's past of violent struggle to end
oppression.Many people in Namibia live with poverty and
frustration.Many people have backgrounds of abuse in their own
lives.Many drink too much alcohol. IN SEARCH OF REASON But what is
it that turns only some of these people, and not others, into child
abusers? As the Legal Assistance Centre pointed out in its recent
press statement, the tender age of the recent victims lays bare the
real horror of rape.Surely no one is going to argue that children
aged 6 and 4 "seduced" their abusers or wore provocative clothing
or somehow "asked for it" in any way.The rape of such young
children strips bare the usual excuses which are put forward for
sexual violence. But what is it that makes some people in our
society capable of viewing tiny children as objects of sexual
gratification? The recent explanation offered by one of the
perpetrators - "I had the need to have sex" - is chilling.We need
to know more if we are going to understand how such things can
happen and what we can do to prevent them.There must be more than
sex involved.There must also be deep-seated issues of power and
powerlessness.There must be complex mental health issues which need
exploration and analysis.The idea that the death penalty would help
with deterrence assumes that would-be criminals make rational
decisions.The theory is that a potential rapist and murder would
think in advance of the crime: "Perhaps I should not do this deed,
because there is a chance that I will be caught, convicted and
sentenced to death."Do we really believe that people who are
capable of such horrifically violent crimes are going to be so
coolly logical and rational? Isn't the real problem indeed that
such people lack the ability to control their irrational desires
and impulses? THE DEBATE I believe that one strong thing Namibia
has in its favour in the daunting task of combating crime is our
Constitutional statement of fundamental rights and freedoms.We as a
society can speak out confidently against murder because we can say
that we as a group do not condone murder - not even
state-sanctioned murder in the form of a death penalty.Against the
backdrop of our Constitution, we can say that we value the rights
of every person in Namibia.With that starting point, those of us
who would never think of committing child abuse or murder retain
the moral high ground.We make sure that the debate is about rights
and morality, and not about who has the most power.The Constitution
is there to remind us of our shared values, even when our gut
impulse says that some people do not seem to deserve to live.The
Constitution is the national conscience that restrains our
impulses, reminding us to live by our principles and not to give
way to dark desires like some of those amongst us have done.Article
6 of our Constitution, which protects the right to life, is very
clear.It says: "The right to life shall be respected and protected.
No law may prescribe death as a competent sentence. No Court or
Tribunal shall have the power to impose a sentence of death upon
any person. No executions shall take place in Namibia."And Article
131 says that no repeal or amendment of the fundamental rights and
freedoms which would diminish or detract from them is permissible
under this Constitution.This means that the only way to
re-introduce the death penalty is to discard our entire
Constitution and begin all over again with the task of defining
ourselves as a nation. None of the rights in our Constitution will
have lasting meaning if we are willing to throw them out the window
every time they are challenged by the situation on the ground.For
example, what will happen in future if some people say that they
feel deeply threatened by the Constitutional promise of sexual
equality - will we water down that Constitutional promise as well?
We must either stand behind the set of values that the nation
adopted unanimously at independence, or else concede that we don't
really take them seriously.Weakening even one of those
Constitutional premises would by implication weaken them all.It
would mean that no one will know in the future which values Namibia
will stand behind and which values Namibia will consider
expendable.Is that the kind of message we want to give our
children? I believe that what we want to say is that we as a nation
value life.Some people's lives have clearly gone terribly,
horrifyingly wrong when it is possible for them to kill innocent
little children.We might make ourselves feel better if we murder
the murders, but perhaps what we need more is to learn from
them.Why did they do what they did? Is there any way to
rehabilitate them? If we could do that, THEN we might really know
something useful about how to stop others from committing serious
crimes.I do not believe that re-introducing the death penalty would
help to prevent the abuse and murder of children.It might allow the
rest of us to feel a little better about the situation, by
pretending that we were doing something to prevent such crimes from
recurring.But real prevention and deterrence cannot be such a quick
fix.We will have to study and understand the causes of violence in
Namibia.And then we will have to do the long, slow, difficult work
of changing attitudes about men and women and children, and about
sex and violence and human rights - starting with our nation's
youth.The new laws on rape and domestic violence that have been
passed are a part of society's response to the problem, but they
were never meant to be the whole response.There is no law that can
fix this sickness in our society on its own.Now we have to turn to
the harder, messier job of changing hearts and minds. We don't need
to change the Constitution - we need to work together to make it a
living reality.