Zimbabwe’s Death Penalty Debate: Reconsidering Punishment for Tapiwa Makore Murder

Death Penalty: A Violation of Human Rights

Introduction

The recent sentencing of Tafadzwa Shamba and Tapiwa Makore Senior to death by the Harare High Court has reignited the ongoing debate over the use of the death penalty as a form of punishment. In response, Khanyo Farisè, Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for Southern Africa, reiterated the organization’s strong opposition to capital punishment, stating that it violates the right to life and constitutes “the ultimate cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment.”

The Ethical Dilemma

The case of Tapiwa Makore’s murder is undoubtedly heinous, causing immense pain and anguish to his family. However, Amnesty International’s stance against the death penalty emphasizes the belief that executing individuals, regardless of the severity of their crimes, does not align with the principles of justice and human rights.

The central ethical question surrounding the death penalty revolves around the value placed on human life. By applying a “life for a life” principle, societies are confronted with a moral conundrum: Is it ethically justifiable for the state to take a person’s life as a form of punishment? This question lies at the heart of the ongoing worldwide debate over the death penalty.

Violation of the Right to Life

Amnesty International argues that the death penalty violates the fundamental right to life enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The organization contends that no state should have the authority to carry out premeditated and cold-blooded killings in the name of justice. By extinguishing a person’s life, society flouts the principles of human dignity and risks perpetuating a cycle of violence, rather than achieving true justice.

Furthermore, the concept of the death penalty as “cruel, inhuman, and degrading” punishment, as described by Farisè, emphasizes the moral and philosophical objections against such a practice. Advocates for human rights contend that the state’s role should be to protect and uphold the dignity and well-being of its citizens, rather than perpetrate acts that strip individuals of their humanity.

Deterrence and Retribution

One of the arguments often put forward by proponents of the death penalty is its alleged deterrent effect on potential criminals. However, Amnesty International challenges this assertion, stating that there is no credible evidence that capital punishment acts as a greater deterrent than imprisonment.

Moreover, the emphasis on retribution and vengeance embedded within the death penalty raises questions about the primary goals of punishment. While it is essential to hold individuals accountable for their actions, the ultimate aim should be rehabilitation, reconciliation, and ultimately, the betterment of society as a whole. The death penalty, Amnesty International argues, fails to contribute to these overarching goals and may hinder the potential for societal healing.

Editorial and Advice

In light of the recent sentencing in Zimbabwe and the broader debate surrounding the death penalty, it is crucial for the country’s authorities to consider the ethical, human rights, and practical implications of capital punishment. Amnesty International’s call for the commutation of all death sentences to prison terms, as well as the establishment of an official moratorium on executions, should be seriously considered.

Zimbabwean authorities must recognize that punishment should not stoop to the level of the crime committed. Instead, the focus should lie on developing a just and fair criminal justice system that prioritizes rehabilitation and reintegration. The resources that would have been spent on maintaining death row and executing individuals could be redirected towards improving prisons, implementing effective sentencing programs, and addressing the root causes of crime.

Ultimately, the abolition of the death penalty for all crimes is a necessary step towards upholding human rights principles and embracing a more progressive, enlightened approach to criminal justice. Zimbabwe‘s authorities have an opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to fundamental rights by joining the global trend towards abolition and ensuring that no more lives are lost at the hands of the state.

As societies evolve, so too should their views on punishment and justice. It is time for Zimbabwe to seize the opportunity to break the cycle of violence and fully embrace the values of human rights.