The Catholic Times in the recent issue reports on the Bishop's Conference subcommittee on the abolition of the death penalty with the theme of 'the deterrent effect of the criminal policy of the punishment system'.
With the occurrence of heinous crimes in society, voices continue to arise calling for stronger punishment. However, statistics show that a moderate sentence is ineffective in preventing serious crimes; the deterrent effect of the death penalty, the biggest punishment, is also the same, and even if the effect of preventing crime is proven, experts have debated whether the death penalty is justifiable.
This seminar was held to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the World Day for the Abolition of the Death Penalty. A senior research fellow at the Korea Institute for Criminal and Justice Policy, who gave a presentation, discussed the issue of the deterrence of crimes and the abolition of the death penalty.
Researcher Kim explained: "If you look at the trend of major crimes over the past 10 years published by the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, both violent crimes and heinous crimes such as homicide, robbery, and rape showed little change." It is said that there was no significant change in violent crimes and the damage that followed.
He also made the same statement about the death penalty, the heaviest and most severe punishment. According to the results of a comparative study of changes in the homicide rate in 11 countries that abolished the death penalty in 2018, the homicide rate decreased by an average of 6 over the 10 years since the abolition of the death penalty.
He said: "It cannot be interpreted that the abolition of the death penalty has the effect of reducing homicide, but at least the fact that the death penalty does not increase after the abolition of the death penalty is clear, so it can be accepted as evidence that the effect of the death penalty on preventing homicide is difficult to recognize."
Furthermore, research has left the question of whether the death penalty is necessary or justifiable even if its effectiveness in preventing crime is proven. "What is clear is that the death penalty is a cruel and unacceptable punishment as part of the normal social system." He also pointed out that the death penalty in Korean society is contaminated by misjudgments and irreversible sacrifices like the 'Inhyukdang' case.
"The essence of the death penalty, which cruelly takes the lives of others, should not be obscured," said a lawyer at the Public Interest and Human Rights Advocacy Center, a group of lawyers for a democratic society who participated in the debate. The death penalty cannot be justified under any circumstances.
Bishop Son-tae Kim, in his opening speech before the presentation, emphasized: "It is the state, the government, and the National Assembly that can stop the vicious cycle of repeated violence. If the Republic of Korea becomes a complete abolitionist country by the abolition of the death penalty by our National Assembly, it will play an important role in leading the cessation of executions and the abolition of the death penalty in Asian countries. We hope that we will be reborn as a human rights nation that respects human rights."
