Ethical Perspectives On Capital Punishment

relativism, in that there can be no consideration of other perspectives because it is argued that there is only one “true” perspective (Balraj Chauhan & Mridul Srivastava, 2009). A good example is the capital punishment. Despite these arguments of ethical views, capital punishment is an intense controversial issue of the criminal justice around the world, especially in these countries of interest; United States, Iran, Japan, Saudi Arabia and China. This will also raise and answer the questions of how just is the criminal justice system is and how the practice of capital punishment (inhuman or justifiable) is viewed in the society, economically, socially, religiously, and politically.
Capital punishment is of great concern to many because of

As a result of capital punishment, experimental execution has become another ethical issue that the criminal justice system need to address. An example, as written by Shah, states that on July 23, 2014, an execution in Arizona lasted nearly two hours, with the inmate struggling to breathe and gasping over 600 times, according to a local reporter witnessing the execution. This was the third example of a botched execution in seven months. The Supreme Court last evaluated the constitutionality of execution by lethal injection in 2008, but did not provide a clear standard for evaluating risks. Since that time, the lethal injection landscape has transformed. States are using entirely new drugs and drug combinations, and sometimes obtain these drugs from questionable sources, making it hard to predict what will happen in any given execution. The Court has now granted certiorari to examine the constitutionality of Oklahoma’s lethal injection protocol in the case of Glossip v. Gross.
But none of these arguments can stand to be the fundamental view of criminal justice ethics even in obvious situations or problems. In fact, these argumentations are the causes of the criminal justice ethical problems because there is no autonomy principle in any one of the arguments that represent an absolute standardize measure of adjudicating justice. As a result of this,

Yet it is all the more important that they do so now. Prosecutorial power has increased as our criminal justice system has moved away from an adversarial system to one of negotiated pleas. Sentencing is more often than not dictated by mandatory minimums or guidelines calculations, which vests more power in the prosecutor through charging decisions. The traditional tools for checking prosecutorial abuse—judges and the juries—have a much smaller role in the process than they once did. Finally, remedial measures, like suits for damages, are all but nonexistent. As a delegate to the Constitutional Convention remarked: "The life of a citizen ought not to depend on the fiat of a single person. Prejudice, resentment, and partiality are among the weaknesses of human nature, and are apt to pervert the judgment of the greatest and best of men. But because the life or liberty of the accused now depends increasingly on the decisions of one person, the prosecutor's commitment to seeking justice is all the more important. Here, we try to identify what one facet of seeking justice means and then examine the somewhat more beguiling question of how it could be better sought (Don J. DeGabrielle & Eliot F. Turner, Spring 2013). With the existence of ethics in criminal justice, prosecutors should be aware that their ethical obligations can exceed their constitutional ones. The