Cruel and unusual punishment
 | The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. (April 2023) |
| Criminal procedure |
|---|
| Criminal trials and convictions |
| Rights of the accused |
| Verdict |
|
| Sentencing |
|
| Post-sentencing |
| Related areas of law |
| Portals |
|
Cruel and unusual punishment is a phrase in common law describing punishment that is considered unacceptable due to the suffering, pain, or humiliation it inflicts on the person subjected to the sanction. The precise definition varies by jurisdiction, but typically includes punishments that are arbitrary, unnecessary, or overly severe compared to the crime.
History
The words "cruel and unusual punishment" were first used in the
United States
The
(1972), Justice Brennan concurring wrote, "There are, then, four principles by which we may determine whether a particular punishment is 'cruel and unusual'."- The "essential predicate" is "that a punishment must not by its severity be degrading to human dignity", especially torture.
- "A severe punishment that is obviously inflicted in wholly arbitrary fashion." (Furman v. Georgia temporarily suspended capital punishment for this reason.)
- "A severe punishment that is clearly and totally rejected throughout society."
- "A severe punishment that is patently unnecessary."
And he added: "The function of these principles, after all, is simply to provide [the] means by which a court can determine whether [the] challenged punishment comports with human dignity. They are, therefore, interrelated, and, in most cases, it will be their convergence that will justify the conclusion that a punishment is 'cruel and unusual.' The test, then, will ordinarily be a cumulative one: if a punishment is unusually severe, if there is a strong probability that it is inflicted arbitrarily, if it is substantially rejected by contemporary society, and if there is no reason to believe that it serves any penal purpose more effectively than some less severe punishment, then the continued infliction of that punishment violates the command of the Clause that the State may not inflict inhuman and uncivilized punishments upon those convicted of crimes."
Continuing, he wrote that he expected that no state would pass a law obviously violating any one of these principles, so court decisions regarding the Eighth Amendment would involve a "cumulative" analysis of the implication of each of the four principles. In this way, the United States Supreme Court "set the standard that a punishment would be cruel and unusual [if] it was too severe for the crime, [if] it was arbitrary, if it offended society's sense of justice, or if it was not more effective than a less severe penalty."[5]
Capital punishment
There is much discussion as to whether
In 2008,
- Death should be quick and painless to prevent suffering for the person being executed;
- Medical education should be provided to the executioner to prevent suffering caused by error;
- The death should not be gory (to prevent suffering for those carrying out the execution); and
- No co-operation should be required from the person being executed, to prevent inaction, distress, and/or suffering caused by the prisoner being required to participate in their own execution.
It was found that no method could fulfil these criteria and the unethical nature of capital punishment invalidates these principles.[7]
See also
References
- ^ "Britain's unwritten constitution". British Library. Archived from the original on 28 October 2021. Retrieved 27 November 2015.
The key landmark is the Bill of Rights (1689), which established the supremacy of Parliament over the Crown. ... The Bill of Rights (1689) then settled the primacy of Parliament over the monarch's prerogatives, providing for the regular meeting of Parliament, free elections to the Commons, free speech in parliamentary debates, and some basic human rights, most famously freedom from 'cruel or unusual punishment'.
- ^ Constitution of Poland, Chapter 2
- ^ Constitution of the Marshall Islands Archived 2011-01-02 at the Wayback Machine, art.II, s.6
- ISBN 978-0-7864-0673-9. Archivedfrom the original on 2022-03-14. Retrieved 2020-10-02.
- ^ the International Justice Project. "Seminal Cases - Brief Bank & General Resources - the International Justice Project". Archived from the original on 2 August 2012. Retrieved 7 January 2012.
- ^ "The Death Penalty: Revenge Is the Mother of Invention". Time. 24 January 1983. Archived from the original on February 22, 2008.
- ^ "BBC - Horizon - How to Kill a Human Being". Archived from the original on 2020-11-09. Retrieved 2014-02-09.