Should Teenagers be Subject to the Death Penalty

Today, more than half of the nations across the world have stopped the death penalty either by rule or through practice. They have reported that the death sentence is not a solution to deter crime. The social and economic environment of the criminal directs crime. The first nations to have put an end to capital punishment were Venezuela, San Marino, and Costa Rica in the mid-nineteenth century. Other countries like Yugoslavia, Montenegro Serbia, Turkey and Chile have also abolished death penalties from 2000. Executions are prevalent in China, Saudi Arabia and the United States of America. (The European Union is united against Capital Punishment, 2007). The sentencing of youths who have been convicted of violent crimes to execution again depends on the extent of the atrocity of the crime. The Juvenile Courts have long protected most of the young offenders from the full-fledged application of criminal law and have also allowed them to the enjoyment of their special rights and immunities. The special rights mainly include protection from publicity, imprisonment only to 21 years of age, no imprisonment with adults, and shelter from the consequences of adult punishment like the loss of civil entitlements, the exercise of adjudication against the juvenile convict in the following proceedings and debarment from public employment. The reason for drafting such rights and immunities is to provide the young convict with guidance and rehabilitation so as to ensure the child’s future as well as the protection of the society. Nevertheless, there are some youngsters who are extremely perilous and do not respond to efforts taken to reform them. The use of the death penalty under such circumstances would actually depend on the nature of the crime and on the mental state of the offender. However, giving another scope to the youth to rectify and straighten oneself out is desirable (Laurence and Scott, 2003, pp. 1009-1018).

Back To Top