Justification For And The Abolition Of Capital Punishment Under Human Rights Law

The human right proponents see death penalties as a violation of the right to life and human dignity as such countries that are becoming more democratic are eager to abolish it. The trend in most industrialized nations has been to first stop executing prisoners and then substitute long terms of imprisonment for death as the most severe of criminal penalties, about 90 nation have abolished death penalties and an almost equal number of nations, (most of which are developing countries in which Nigeria is included) have retained it

This thesis considers the argument for and against death penalty in relation to human rights, the argument against this concept goes beyond the Human Right Parlance, as there are other arguments like; the propensity to condemn and execute innocent citizens, the non-deterrent effect of capital punishment, the arbitrary use of the concept against the poor, the discriminately application of the concept on the basis of race, and the lesser argument that proclaims that capital punishment is cruel and inhuman. All these argument have not been reckoned with by anti-abolitionist, as some of them have come up with other modes of executions that they believe are more humane and less cruel, the sole aim of this is to kill the argument of cruel and inhuman treatment

The retributive nature of the human race would rather love that a murderer be necessarily paid back in His own coin, this is believed to be the anti-abolitionist main reason for insisting on the retention of death penalty. If the cost of executing an innocent person and abolishing the concept of death penalty is compared, it would be discovered that, it is more beneficial to abolish the use of death penalty than to lose valuable citizens to wrongful executions. Moreover, countries that have substituted life sentence for death penalty are not worse off than countries that have retained it.

Table of Content COVER PAGE
CERTIFICATION PAGE
ABSTRACT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
TABLE Of CASES
TABLE OF STATUTES
LIST OF ABBREVIATION

CHAPTER 1
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.0.0: INTRODUCTION
1.1.0: OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
1.2.0: SCOPE OF STUDY
1.3.0: METHODOLOGY
1.4.0: LITERATURE REVIEW
1.5.0: DEFINITION OF TERMS
1.6.0: CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 2
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND HUMAN RIGHT LAW
2.0.0: INTRODUCTION
2.1.0PUNISHMENT
2.1.1FORMS OF PUNISHMENT
2.1.2COMPENSATION
2.1.3INCARCERATION
2.1.4CORPORAL PUNISHMENT
2.1.5BANISHMENT
2.1.6CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
2.1.7OTHER APPROACHES
2.2.0: HISTORICAL FRAMEWORK OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
2.2.1: MODES OF EXECUTION
2.2.2CRUCIFIXION
2.2.3STONING
2.2.4HANGING
2.2.5: SHOOTING OR FIRING SQUAD
2.2.6: GAS CHAMBER OR LETHAL GAS MODE OF EXECUTION
2.2.7: ELECTROCUTION
2.3.0: WORLD WIDE ANALYSIS OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
2.4.0: HISTORY OF HUMAN RIGHTS
2.5.0: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND RIGHT TO LIFE
2.6.0: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND RIGHT TO HUMAN DIGNITY
2.7.0: CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 3
JUSTIFICATIONS FOR CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND ITS ABOLITION
3.0.0: INTRODUCTION
3.1.0: JUSTIFICATIONS FOR CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
3.1.1JUST PUNISHMENT
3.1.2DETERRENCE
3.1.3INCAPACITATION
3.2.0ABOLITION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
3.2.1PROPENSITY TO CONDEMN INNOCENT DEFENDANTS
3.2.2DISCRIMINATLY APPLICATION ON THE BASIS OF RACE
3.2.3ARBITRARY APPLICATION AGAINST THE POOR
3.2.4 COMPARING COST TO BENEFITS
3.3.0FLAWS IN ARGUMENTS FOR ABOLITION
3.3.1RACIAL BIAS
3.3.2RISK TO THE INNOCENT
3.4.0FLAWS IN THE ARGUMENTS FOR CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
3.4.1CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 4
A COMPARISON OF THE NIGERIAN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT TO THAT OF OTHER SELECTED COUNTRIES
4.0.0: INTRODUCTION
4.1.0 THE NIGERIAN AND U.S.A CAPITAL PUNISHMENT COMPARED
4.2.0 THE NIGERIAN AND AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT COMPARED
4.3.0NIGERIAN AND SOUTH AFRICAN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT COMPARED
4.4.0: CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.0.0: CONCLUSION
5.1.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ARTICLES IN JOURNALS
ARTICLES ON THE INTERNET
BOOKS
CHAPTERS IN BOOKS