Santiago 1

Bryce Santiago Johnson APW Period 8 14 May 2011 Human Rights: Punishments and Retribution History is full of ongoing and ever-changing processes. These include patterns of migrations, womans rights, growths of different types of governments and much more. Yet one of the not so commonly observed processes that has occurred along with time is the way in which those accused of doing wrong are punished. Throughout history, methods of human punishment have been far from humane. While some societies governments have progressed towards more humane punishments, while others continue to lag in the acceptance of human rights for those convicted of crimes. The Code of Hammurabi is one of the most clear historic examples exemplifying negligence of human rights for one convicted of a crime. Created by the sixth Babylonian king, Hammurabi, this code is the first written form of law seen in history. Within this code, there are two-hundred and eighty-two laws that generally advocate by one rule, that being an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth1. This means that what crime one commits upon another, shall have the same wrongdoing committed unto them. For instance one of Hammurabis laws states, If a man knock out the teeth of his equal, his teeth shall be knocked out.1 Now while this particular law may seem more mundane, the Code stretches the meaning of an eye for an eye1 to much lesser humane punishments. An example of one of the more grotesque retributions can be found in law 195, If a son strike his father, his hands shall be hewn off1 or in law 230 which states, If it kill the son of the owner the son of that builder shall be put to death1. A recent event in Iran starkly parallels the Code of Hammurabi and its acceptance of an eye for an eye1. A man has been extended the punishment of having five drops of acid placed in each of his eyes after pouring acid over a woman who rejected his marriage proposals several times. The Tehran court that ordered this righting of wrongs has been counseled by many, such as the organization Amnesty International, to rescind their ruling and dole out a more humane sentence. Yet according to the court, they retribution being placed upon this man falls under a justifiable idea called retribution in kind2 and will not withdraw their ruling. In both of these cases, the idea of having the crime redone unto the doer is witnessed. And in both cases, the authority extending this retribution is completely in the wrong. Everybody makes mistakes and does things that they regret throughout their life. Yet if everyone had to have
1

"The Code of Hammurabi." Washington State University - Pullman, Washington. Ed. Richard Hooker. Trans. L. W. King. Web. 17 May 2011. <http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/MESO/CODE.HTM>. 2 "Blinding Man With Acid as Retribution Punishment Amounts to Torture, Says Amnesty International, Urging Iranian Authorities Not to Carry Out Cruel Sentence | Amnesty International USA." Amnesty International USA | Protect Human Rights. 13 May 2011. Web. 17 May 2011. <http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/pressreleases/blinding-man-with-acid-as-retribution-punishment-amounts-to-torture-says-amnesty-internationalurgin>.

Santiago 2

their mistakes redone unto them, unnecessary millions throughout the globe would be maimed, injured, or dead, all for one mishap that they slip. While I am not saying that these criminals should go without punishment, I am saying that their human rights are being violated in the way that they face retribution for their crimes. Punishments such as having acid dropped in ones eyes, or having ones hands cut off are distinctly akin to torture, a terrible process that every individuals human rights should protect them from. As stated by one official for Amnesty International, Regardless of how horrific the crime suffered by Ameneh Bahrami, being blinded with acid is a cruel and inhuman punishment amounting to torture, and the Iranian authorities have a responsibility under international law to ensure it does not go ahead.2 While it can be said that so far only societies that are not as sophisticated as those around them have participated in using methods that resemble torture as punishment, sophisticated societies have also done their part in this atrocious act. America, a global superpower in the contemporary world, is a prime example of this statement. Recently in Wallens Ridge State Prison, a super maximum security prison in Virginia, primarily Caucasian guards have allegedly abused prisoners in violent and torturous ways. As stated by Amnesty International, Prisoners in Wallens Ridge State Prison (WRSP) are routinely abused with electro-shock stun guns, subjected to racial verbal abuse by guards, fired on with painful pellet guns, and placed unnecessarily in five point restraints3. These acts all can be placed under the umbrella of treatments that compose the idea of torture. This claim is farther backed up by the death of two inmates within a year, an occurrence that does not seem likely within a prison that treats its prisoners with so much security, health monitoring, and a generally healthy eating style. A code of laws belonging to an ancient civilization that was superiorly sophisticated within its time period yet portrays inhumane punishment in response to crimes can be witnessed in the Romans Twelve Tables. The Romans surely were the most sophisticated empire within their time period. A constant pool of innovation, learning, and advanced technology throughout their reign, the Romans were far beyond other civilizations in almost every aspect of life. Despite this fact however, their early code of laws, the Twelve Tables, clearly established despise towards human rights through its use of punishments that were clearly torturous or inhumane in their rulings. This is easily exampled in Law 13, Part 21 "If a patron shall defraud his client, he must be solemnly forfeited (`killed')4. This shows that the Romans were willing to kill for something that could be a simple mistake during a transaction or cheating of another. Even more easily the simple guiding rule of the Tablets shows its disregard to human rights, "There are eight kinds of punishment: fine, fetters, flogging, retaliation in kind, civil disgrace, banishment, slavery, death."4

"Blinding Man With Acid as Retribution Punishment Amounts to Torture, Says Amnesty International, Urging Iranian Authorities Not to Carry Out Cruel Sentence | Amnesty International USA." Amnesty International USA | Protect Human Rights. 13 May 2011. Web. 17 May 2011. <http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/pressreleases/blinding-man-with-acid-as-retribution-punishment-amounts-to-torture-says-amnesty-internationalurgin>. 3 "UNHCR | Refworld | USA: Abuses Continue Unabated? - Cruel and Inhumane Treatment at Virginia Supermaximum Security Prisons." UNHCR Welcome. Amnesty International, 1 May 2001. Web. 18 May 2011. <http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/category,COI,AMNESTY,,USA,3b83b70a15,0.html>. 4 "THE TWELVE TABLES." California State University, Northridge. Ed. John P. Adams. California State University, Northridge, 10 June 2009. Web. 18 May 2011. <http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/12tables.html>.

Santiago 3

In both of these cases, the government heading a leading global nation has allowed for the degradation of human rights in the aspect of reconciliation for a crime to occur. In both cases, these governments were also completely wrong to do so and should rescind their rulings immediately, albeit that the Roman Empire can no longer do so. All individuals have a basic human right against being tortured, or as Americans have coined the term, cruel or unusual punishment. Acts such as flogging or shooting a criminal have no place in the world. The criminals did surely do wrong, yet they realize that and are already paying for their mishaps through their punishments of being in jail for years, or paying numerous fees and fines. If a government takes away the human rights of a prisoner, how can they expect that same prisoner to go back into life thinking of and valuing the human rights of others? The answer, they cannot! And so it is that governments should definitely make efforts to contain and end the use of inhumane punishments in response to crime. Many contemporary countries have become aware of the problem posed by torturous punishments that degrade human rights and are working to stop it. Possibly the best example of this is seen in the work of the United Nations, an international organization created to bring stability to the world and make it a better place to live in, fairly and nonviolently fixing issues, helping struggling countries, and much more. On December 9, 1975, the United Nations adopted the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment5. This declaration does exactly what it sounds like it will, prohibiting Inhuman punishments on individuals within the borders of the nations compiled under the United Nations. The United Nations did not stop with the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment5. Since putting this declaration into effect, the United Nations has done much more to stem the flow of inhuman punishment throughout the globe. They have even gone as far as to request a convention be started by Commission of Human Rights for the subject of torture and how to stop it. Since then the United Nations has accepted a convention against torture and inhuman punishments and worked hard to correctly define torture in order to better be able to dissolve its existence in this world. As stated, the Torture Declaration was intended to be the starting-point for further work against torture5. The United Nation shows a strong sign of realization and reaction to inhuman methods of punishment in response to crimes. With the many nations within its banner, this has at least twenty independent countries supporting the end of torture and the recognition of human rights! This shows that the world is coming to be a more equal place, where no longer is one above the other, yet all are equal. As a beginning to the end of disregard to human rights for those accused of crimes, the Declaration and conventions sustained by the United Nations present a beacon of hope to many around the globe. While presently it seems as if only organizations are making efforts to stop inhuman punishments, many countries are taking their only personal steps towards the same goal. This can clearly be seen within the eighth amendment of the United States Constitution. Created by the founding fathers, this first legal system of America distinctly prohibits use of cruel or unusual
5

"The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment." Audiovisual Library of International Law. United Nations, 2008. Web. 18 May 2011. <http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/ha/catcidtp/catcidtp.html>.

Santiago 4

punishment with regards to those convicted of a crime, making it in itself a federal crime. Punishments such as flogging and beating are not allowed for under this amendment. This shows recognition of the basic human right against tortuous punishment methods and the need to uphold this right within one of the most sophisticated countries of this time period. Another example of a nation participating in independent work to halt the use of inhuman punishments can be found in France. In a semi-modern Time article, French opposition to these methods can be seen simply in the title, France: Against the Torture6. If this is not clearly evidence, the article continues on to speak of how the French prosecuted their own soldiers who resorted to torturous punishment methods upon Algerians, while in Algeria to help with their civil war. This shows that France is not only trying to protect its own citizens from inhuman punishment, but is trying their hardest to stop the spread of torture wherever possible, even going as far to stop the degradation of human rights of other nations citizens by its own citizens. Both of these nations above portray work being done independently towards the termination of torturous punishments within their respective spheres of influence. This shows that many nations throughout the world have recognized first, the basic human right belonging to all individuals that protects them from cruel or unusual punishment and second, the need to reinforce and support this human right. While both America and France have participated in different acts of torture through punishments, nobody is perfect. The nations have been tried for their mistakes, whether it be by other nations or their own people, and continue to work on not allowing more mistakes to be made. Both continue to work against inhuman punishment and do their best to completely exterminate it, the most that one can ask. These countries attempts represent the building blocks to the eventual global termination of torturous punishments and an acceptance of the human right protecting individuals from that same torture. For every nation that does recognize the basic human right talked about in this essay, another does not. An example of this can be seen in a recent court ruling in Egypt. Ahmed Marous Ibrahim is a seventeen year old Egyptian boy who was accused of raping a girl along with three other men. Tried by the Supreme Military Court in Cairo, Ibrahim has been found guilty and extended the death penalty for his crimes.7 This ruling is absolutely not right. Despite disregarding the boys human rights, he is seventeen! Everyone makes mistakes when they are young and to give someone the death penalty for such a mistake is almost a vile as the crime committed. This ties into one of the largest global debates over the basic human right against cruel and unusual punishment in regards to an individual charged with a crime. The death penalty is used by every nation worldwide in response to large-scale crimes such as manslaughter or homicide. The question constantly called into play is whether or not this punishment respects the basic human rights of the individual receiving the penalty. And the answer to this is yes, it does respect the basic human rights. If an individual participates knowingly in crimes as bad as
6

"FRANCE: Against the Torture - TIME." Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com. Time, 1 Apr. 1957. Web. 19 May 2011. <http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,867566,00.html>. 7 "Egypt Teenagers Death Sentence Condemned | Amnesty International USA." Amnesty International USA | Protect Human Rights. Amnesty International, 18 May 2011. Web. 19 May 2011. <http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/news-item/egypt-teenager-s-death-sentence-condemned>.

Santiago 5

homicide, they are a danger to society, and therefore need to be exterminated. Their basic human rights are nullified by their crimes, and it is the lesser crime to disregard their human rights than to allow them to continue living. It is almost violating the human rights of the innocent to let such a predator live and constantly plague others lives with fear. So in some extreme cases, the death penalty is allowable. As seen, the process of eliminating the violation of individuals human rights in response to commitment of a crime is well under way throughout the contemporary globe. Many nations are actively involved in stopping this atrocious act within their own borders, if not also in other nations. Yet there are ways in which this process of termination could be moved along faster. One of these ways is forming an international court to try any who participate in inhuman punishment. This would act as a deterrent for nations who think to commit to torturous methods and keep the chances of a war breaking out over it much smaller, because the nations would be united against just one. Another way in which the process can occur faster and safer is to educate not as sophisticated societies on how to punish through methods such as jail or fines. Many countries do not have such things and therefore resort to torture for punishments. As seen, patterns of human punishment throughout history have been quite brutal. From cut off hands to instant death for a lesser crime, the human rights of individuals have been violated constantly throughout history. Progressing more towards modern day, many nations have realized these wrongs and place the responsibility on themselves to fix them. Whether it be international or purely independent efforts, the race to stop the infliction of inhuman punishments upon those convicted of crimes has begun.

Bibliography "Blinding Man With Acid as Retribution Punishment Amounts to Torture, Says Amnesty International, Urging Iranian Authorities Not to Carry Out Cruel Sentence | Amnesty International USA." Amnesty International USA | Protect Human Rights. 13 May 2011. Web. 17 May 2011. <http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/press-releases/blinding-man-with-acid-asretribution-punishment-amounts-to-torture-says-amnesty-international-urgin>. "Egypt Teenagers Death Sentence Condemned | Amnesty International USA." Amnesty International USA | Protect Human Rights. Amnesty International, 18 May 2011. Web. 19 May 2011. <http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/news-item/egypt-teenager-s-death-sentencecondemned>.

Santiago 6

"FRANCE: Against the Torture - TIME." Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com. Time, 1 Apr. 1957. Web. 19 May 2011. <http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,867566,00.html>. "The Code of Hammurabi." Washington State University - Pullman, Washington. Ed. Richard Hooker. Trans. L. W. King. Web. 17 May 2011. <http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/MESO/CODE.HTM>. "The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment." Audiovisual Library of International Law. United Nations, 2008. Web. 18 May 2011. <http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/ha/catcidtp/catcidtp.html>. "THE TWELVE TABLES." California State University, Northridge. Ed. John P. Adams. California State University, Northridge, 10 June 2009. Web. 18 May 2011. <http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/12tables.html>. "UNHCR | Refworld | USA: Abuses Continue Unabated? - Cruel and Inhumane Treatment at Virginia Supermaximum Security Prisons." UNHCR Welcome. Amnesty International, 1 May 2001. Web. 18 May 2011. <http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/category,COI,AMNESTY,,USA,3b83b70a15,0.html>.