The
Australian
Australian
Judge and Parent of Bombing Victim Rejects Death Penalty
Brian Deegan, a magistrate in South Australia who lost his son
in the October 2002 Sari nightclub bombing in Bali, recently stated
that he believes the terrorists who commited that crime should not
receive the death penalty, but should be sentenced to a term of life
in prison without parole. In an opinion piece in The Australian,
Deegan noted:
The Bali bombers who murdered my son last October
are evil extremists, but they don't deserve the death penalty.
. . .
Indeed, I have no problem with the idea that he [Amrozi]
and his accomplices should remain in prison for the rest of their lives.
But the prospect of their judicial murder is something I want no part
of.
. . .
As a measure employed to dissuade potential criminals,
the death penalty has been an abject failure. This is borne out by
statistics that point to the commensurate rise of murders and executions
in countries where capital punishment is awarded.
The argument in favour of executions remains
difficult to reconcile with the universal revulsion generated by periods
in history when society thought nothing of hanging a child or burning a
witch. We read with disgust ? or perhaps with guilt ? of the stoning of
adulterers, the removal of a thief's hand or the decapitation of a
blasphemer. Yet we find it palatable to break a man's neck, to poison
his veins or to electrocute him.
The suggestion that Amrozi and his fellow
evildoers should face an Indonesian firing squad is unconscionable
because that would make the punishment as barbaric as the crime. What
the Bali bombers did to my child and to the hundreds of others defies
description. But the October 12, 2002, terrorist attacks do not give
anyone the right to repeat such a vile act.
|