Analysis of Arguments For and Against Death Penalty in Australia

This essay examines the debate surrounding the reintroduction of the death penalty in Australia. It begins by noting the historical context, including the last execution in 1967 and subsequent discussions. The essay argues against the reintroduction of capital punishment, citing data showing no increase in crime rates after its abolition, as well as the higher costs associated with death penalty cases compared to life imprisonment. It also highlights the risk of executing innocent individuals and the violation of human rights inherent in capital punishment. Counterarguments, such as the idea of death penalty as a justifiable punishment for heinous crimes, are also explored. The essay concludes by emphasizing the advantages of maintaining the abolition of the death penalty in Australia, referencing the arguments against reintroducing it. The essay utilizes academic sources to support its claims and provides a comprehensive overview of the key issues involved in this complex debate.

Running head: DEATH PENALTY IN AUSTRALIA
Death Penalty in Australia
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Name of the Author:

1
DEATH PENALTY IN AUSTRALIA
Death sentence has been revoked from Australia in all the jurisdictions in 1922
(Kornhauser,2013). The last person to be executed in Australia was Ronald Ryan in 1967 for
killing a prison guard in an attempt of prison break (Malkani,2013). Since then a lot of
speculations has been made regarding the reintroduction of the death penalty. Since the
abolishment of the death penalty in Australia it has been found that the rate of homicide and
murders has not risen in the country, suggesting the criminals are not affected by the execution
of the crime. This essay is intending to argue that death penalty is not a necessary option for the
government of Australia to reintroduce as well as it will also examine the debatable issues
through counterpoints too.
One of the major problems and fears which is faced by a country when the capital
punishment is abolished is the increase in the number of crimes but it has been seen that the
crime rates in Australia has remain the same since the death penalty has been removed. In a data
research done in Queensland, it is found that there were a total of 131 murders in the decade
earlier to the removal of the death penalty whereas there were a total of 129 murders in a decade
prior to the removal of the death sentence (Reckless,2017). This data clearly shows that there has
been no increase in the murders and homicides in the state. Not only Queensland but also in
other major states there has been no increase in the rate of crimes which clearly shows that there
is no need to introduce death penalty in the country again (Treloar,2013). It is the Australian
government revenue which would be mostly affected when the death sentence will come back
since capital punishment is more expensive as compared to life imprisonment. It is believed by
many people that life imprisonment is more costly as compared to death sentence but in reality it
is actually the opposite. An organization namely The Australian Coalition against Death Penalty
(ACADP) which is dedicated towards abolishing death penalty from the country permanently has

2
DEATH PENALTY IN AUSTRALIA
stated that a single case of capital sentence costs around $5.5 million whereas a case of life
imprisonment for thirty years will cost around $1.5 million (Brown,2013). Though the cost can
be reduced by various ways but there rises the chance of giving death penalty to an innocent
person. The cost saved from giving imprisonment to a criminal can be used in a better way by
improving the system of criminal justice.
Major reasons for not introducing death penalty in the country is the reduction in the risk
of executing an innocent person. In the past it has been seen that Australia has been wrong in
sentencing someone to death. The last person to be hanged in Australia namely Ronald Ryan did
not kill the security guard since the gun used in the accused act was jammed so there was no
possibility that he could have shot the security guard (Trevaskes,2013). This evidence shows that
Australia must refrain itself from introducing the death penalty in its jurisdiction again since the
last person who was hanged was evidently innocent. Death penalty is basically denying the
human rights to an individual and it clearly violates an individual’s right to life and it does not
justify the killing of innocent individuals (Mathias,2013). Death being irreversible eradicates the
scope of amending once it is done, thus if there is a slight chance that there can be an error of
judgment then it might lead to the death of an innocent person. The methods which are used for
executing as well as the capital punishment are mostly painful and humiliating which acts a
strong argument point against bringing back the death sentence. Effects of being in a death row
tends to be there for a long time, sometimes for even a decade, which in turn ruptures the human
rights policy (Kim,2016). At present there is no actual evidence which can state that death
penalty is the most effective way to reduce crimes. The introduction of death penalty will go
against the chance of rehabilitation and is considered to go against and is not fair for the ones
who are suffering from mental as well as cognitive impairments. The sanctity of the human life

3
DEATH PENALTY IN AUSTRALIA
must be respected and the death penalty carried out by a state brutalizes it (Leechaianan &
Longmire,2013). Australia being an abolitionist country is concerned on the issue of death
penalty as it affects the Australians as well as the Australian government. At present a total of
106 countries has abolished death penalty which is the majority of world’s states and the few
states that still allow death penalty to be executed is standing against a huge wave of states
against it (Missbach,2015). In many countries like Canada, Middle East and many more the
crime rate has steadily decreased since the abolition of death sentence in these countries which
shows Australia should do the same (Nettelbeck,2013).
However there are number of arguments that might lead to the consideration of
introducing the death penalty in Australia since the justifiable punishment to a heinous crime like
murder is death penalty. The mass of people in support of death sentence believes that the only
fair way to punish someone for taking a person’s life is by taking their life (Reggio,2014). It can
be easily argued that just by having a death penalty crimes like murder will be deterred and thus
Australia will be safer place to reside. It can also be argued that a serious criminal can be stopped
from repeating the crime by giving a death sentence rather than giving the chance to harm the
inmates of the prison or even if they escape in the parole then they might repeat their crime.
Some other arguments in favor of introducing the death penalty includes providing the closure to
the victim’s family as well as the reduction of overpopulation in the prison system. The
punishment of death penalty must always fit the crime which is if a person is killing someone
that person must suffer the same. It can also be argued that when a criminal murders someone
then he/she loses her human rights and has acquired the rights to be executed.
The advantages of continuing the abolishment of death sentence in Australia have
significantly overpowered the advantages of reintroducing the death penalty in the country.

4
DEATH PENALTY IN AUSTRALIA
Though Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott believes that death penalty should be brought
back but since there has been no rise in the crime rate hence this assertion can easily be deterred.
Some arguments like the huge cost in a death sentence compared to a life imprisonment as well
as the killing of innocent people in the past history of Australia goes against the restoring the
capital punishment law. There are many such arguments that goes against the restoration of the
death sentence in Australia so it is wise for the Australian government to abolish the death
penalty permanently and never restore it.

5
DEATH PENALTY IN AUSTRALIA
Reference List:
Brown, A. D. (2013). ‘Losing my religion’: reflections on critical criminology in Australia. In
Critical criminology (pp. 91-131). Willan
Kim, D. (2016). International non-governmental organizations and the abolition of the death
penalty. European Journal of International Relations, 22(3), 596-621.
Kornhauser, R. (2013). Reconsidering predictors of punitiveness in Australia: A test of four
theories. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 46(2), 221-240.
Leechaianan, Y., & Longmire, D. (2013). The use of the death penalty for drug trafficking in the
United States, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand: A comparative legal
analysis. Laws, 2(2), 115-149.
Malkani, B. (2013). The obligation to refrain from assisting the use of the death penalty.
International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 62(3), 523-556.
Mathias, M. D. (2013). The sacralization of the individual: Human rights and the abolition of the
death penalty. American Journal of Sociology, 118(5), 1246-1283.
Missbach, A. (2015). The extradition of people smugglers from Indonesia to Australia: political
and legal challenges. Australian journal of Asian law, 15(2).
Nettelbeck, A. (2013). “Equals of the white man”: Prosecution of settlers for violence against
Aboriginal subjects of the Crown, colonial Western Australia. Law and History Review,
31(2), 355-390.
Reckless, W. C. (2017). The use of the death penalty: a factual statement. In Capital Punishment
(pp. 38-62). Routledge

6
DEATH PENALTY IN AUSTRALIA
Reggio, M. H. (2014). History of the death penalty. Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal
Justice, 2277-2285.
Treloar, C. (2013). Examining structural violence in opioid pharmacotherapy treatment in
Australia: Sweating the “small stuff” in a liberal paradise. International Journal of Drug
Policy, 24(6), e11-e13.
Trevaskes, S. (2013). China’s death penalty: the Supreme People’s Court, the suspended death
sentence and the politics of penal reform. British Journal of Criminology, 53(3), 482-499.