Right to Life and death Penalty in Pakistan "Balancing Justice and Human Rights"

Abstract

In Pakistani context, the intersection of the right to life and the imposition of death penalty initiate a complex debate on justice and human rights. Advocates of the death penalty argue that it serves as a crucial deterrent, dissuading individuals from committing egregious crimes and contributing to public safety. They contend that in cases of extreme offences, capital punishment represents a proportional response, providing a sense of closure and justice to victims and their families.

The legal framework surrounding the death penalty in Pakistan is often cited by supporters as a safeguard against potential abuses. They underline the importance of due process and the right to a fair trial, asserting that the system is designed to minimize the risk of unlawful convictions. This perspective underscores the death penalty when administered judiciously, upholds the principles of justice. In contrast, opponents of death penalty in Pakistan argue that it infringes upon the universal right to life, enshrined in Holy book of Quran, 1973 Constitution of Pakistan and in International Human Rights conventions and agreements. They claim that capital punishment is inherently irreparable and raises ethical concerns about the state's power to take life. Critics also highlight the potentials of systemic flaws within the legal system, leading to miscarriages of justice and the execution of innocent people. Dealing with this debate, the Pakistani legal system faces the challenge of balancing the demand for justice and the protection of human right to life. This requires a thoughtful examination of the cultural, ethical and legal dimensions. Lastly, this abstract seeks to contribute to the ongoing dialogue, emphasizing the transformative potential of steering away from capital punishment and embracing a human rights-centric approach to justice.