Abstract On the heels of President Biden’s last-minute grant of clemency to federal death row prisoners, the Trump administration has ushered in a new wave of pro-death efforts. President Trump’s second term initiated a renewed push for the rise of capital punishment. With the support of pro–death penalty Attorney General Pam Bondi, Trump has directed states to vigorously pursue and enforce the death penalty. In an apparent response to that directive, more states are conducting executions and even experimenting with new (and old) execution methods. Despite a decades-long decline in public support for capital punishment, the political tug-of-war on capital punishment is heating back up.

This study examines procedural failures in the imposition of the death penalty on a child that was later commuted to imprisonment, as reflected in the Decision of the Gunungsitoli District Court Number 8/Pid.B/2013/PN-GST and the Supreme Court Judicial Review Decision Number 96 PK/Pid/2016. The central issue of this research lies in the erroneous verification of the defendant’s age, which resulted in a child being treated as an adult and sentenced to death, contrary to Law Number 11 of 2012 on the Juvenile Criminal Justice System and the principles of child protection. This research aims to analyze the procedural failure, explain its juridical and ethical implications, and critically assess practices of dehumanization in juvenile criminal law through the existentialist perspectives of Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus. The study employs a normative legal research method with a qualitative approach, utilizing statutory, case, and legal philosophy approaches, supported by library research on court decisions and existentialist literature. The findings indicate that an excessively formalistic and positivistic application of law has negated the recognition of children as human subjects in the process of becoming, resulting in procedural and existential injustice. This research concludes that child protection in criminal law cannot be understood merely in normative terms but must be grounded in ethical and existential awareness to realize a more humanistic juvenile criminal justice system.

Cultural Cohesion in Regional Organizations: Equatorial Guinea, The CPLP, and its Death Penalty Abolition

Necropolitics and state-sponsored drug violence: the death penalty for drug offences in Indonesia.

This study aims to explain the Islamic legal perspective on the implementation of the death penalty in relation to the principles of human rights. The research employs a library-based method with a normative juridical approach and a prescriptive analysis. The focus of the study lies in the concept of al-maṣlaḥah al-mursalah as the foundational principle of Islamic law in determining capital punishment, particularly within the context of qishash. The findings indicate that the death penalty in Islam is not intended as an act of revenge but rather as an instrument for upholding justice and protecting human life in accordance with the maqāṣid al-syarī‘ah, namely the preservation of religion, life, intellect, lineage, and property. Islam also provides space for forgiveness and reconciliation, reflecting a balance between justice and compassion. Thus, the death penalty in Islamic law possesses strong theological and sociological foundations and remains consistent with humanitarian values and the overarching goal of law to promote public welfare.

Malaysia’s landmark 2023 decision to abolish the mandatory death penalty – thus granting judges discretion over 12 capital offences – marks a pivotal shift, significantly reducing the death row population from over 1,300 to approximately 140 by late 2024. Yet, the death penalty remains discretionary for 27 offences. Crucially, this reform has not eliminated systemic bias but has relocated discretion, amplifying the opaque gatekeeping roles of law enforcement and prosecution policy. This situation perpetuates the legacy of the ‘War on Drugs’ and its disproportionate impact on vulnerable populations. I present an original and rigorous research agenda to guide this continued reform. Utilising a novel comparative framework (the UK’s abolition of the death penalty and Singapore’s retention of it), I contextualise Malaysia’s reforms within its postcolonial legal heritage. I propose ten critical research foci: equitable judicial discretion, resentencing outcomes, law enforcement practices, prosecution policy, public opinion, empirical re-evaluation of deterrence, equitable access to justice, rehabilitation and reintegration, socio-economic analysis, and constitutional pathways to full abolition. These critical areas are significant for informing crucial policy development and contributing substantively to the decolonisation of criminal law in the Global South.

To what extent was the ‘Death Penalty’ policy beneficial for the USA in the last 20 years?

The study titled “Rehabilitation v. Punishment: Evaluating Effectiveness in Reducing Recidivism” critically analyzes the continuous conflict between punitive and rehabilitative measures within the criminal justice system. It traces the historical development of imprisonment from retaliation to correctional reform, examining the theoretical and conceptual foundations of punishment, rehabilitation, and recidivism. Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the study examines India’s current legal system, emphasizing both reformative measures like probation, parole, open prisons, and vocational training as well as punishment-based measures like imprisonment, fines, and the death penalty. The study also highlights the shortcomings of strictly punitive approaches in reducing reoffending through a comparative analysis and promotes a well-rounded, integrated strategy that include opportunities for reformation and reintegration with discipline. A paradigm shift towards restorative justice is reflected in recent legislative changes, such as the formal inclusion of community service as a punishment. The study concludes that in order to effectively lower recidivism and foster long-term social harmony and justice, offenders must be treated as reformable individuals who receive education, counseling, and skill development.

This study aims to critically analyze the application of the death penalty for terrorism-related crimes in Indonesia from the perspectives of criminal law and human rights. The primary focus is to assess whether capital punishment can be justified as a proportionate law enforcement instrument while remaining consistent with the protection of the right to life as a non-derogable right. This research employs a normative juridical method, utilizing statutory, case-based, and conceptual approaches to examine national legal provisions, judicial decisions, and contemporary theories of punishment in conjunction with international human rights standards. The findings indicate that the death penalty retains juridical legitimacy within Indonesia's positive legal system, particularly following the enactment of Law No. 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code, which introduces a conditional death penalty framework. Nevertheless, the justification of capital punishment based on deterrence theory lacks strong empirical support and raises serious concerns regarding proportionality and the protection of the right to life. This study recommends that the death penalty be strictly positioned as an ultimum remedium, applied in a highly selective manner with rigorous due process guarantees, and complemented by non-penal counterterrorism strategies emphasizing prevention, deradicalization, and a more humane justice-oriented approach.

This paper examines the death penalty through a public health framework, analysing its systemic impacts on individual and community well-being. Drawing on recent legislative changes in Malaysia, including the 2023 abolition of mandatory capital punishment, the study identifies three critical pathways through which the death penalty threatens public health: prolonged confinement of death row inmates, miscarriages of justice, and punitive drug policies. The research highlights how capital punishment creates trauma that extends beyond death row prisoners and affects families, prison staff, legal professionals, and communities. It emphasises the death penalty's disproportionate impact on marginalised groups, including women, sexual minorities, and individuals with disabilities, who face compounded discrimination in the judicial system. The paper concludes that abolishing the death penalty is not merely a legal imperative but a public health necessity, recommending a shift toward evidence-based, health-centred approaches that prioritise rehabilitation, harm reduction, and restorative justice.

Victim Impact Statements (VIS) allow crime victims or their family members to describe the harm caused by an offense and to express their views in criminal proceedings, most prominently at sentencing. In the United States, VIS expanded rapidly from the 1980s alongside a broader victims’ rights movement. Yet VIS has consistently generated a structural tension: while it may enhance procedural legitimacy and acknowledge the victim’s experience, it may also invite emotion-driven decision-making, undermine sentencing consistency, and threaten the defendant’s right to a fair trial. This article examines how the U.S. Supreme Court has shaped the constitutional boundaries of VIS in capital sentencing, focusing on the Eighth Amendment’s demand to prevent arbitrary and biased imposition of the death penalty. The Court first adopted a strict prohibition in Booth v. Maryland (1987) and extended it in South Carolina v. Gathers (1989), reasoning that victim-related information unrelated to the defendant’s blameworthiness could inflame jurors and increase arbitrariness. The jurisprudence shifted in Payne v. Tennessee (1991), which overruled Booth and Gathers in significant part and held that evidence describing the victim’s identity and the family’s loss may be relevant to assessing the gravity of the offense. At the same time, Payne indicated that excessively prejudicial presentations may still be constrained under due process principles. Subsequent developments highlighted new forms and limits of VIS: in Kelly v. California (2008), several Justices raised concerns about highly emotional “victim impact videos,” and in Bosse v. Oklahoma (2016) the Court reaffirmed that Payne did not eliminate Booth’s remaining bar on survivors’ explicit sentencing recommendations, particularly demands for death. Drawing on this doctrinal trajectory, the article proposes implications for Korea, where victims’ participatory rights are constitutionally recognized and implemented through statutory procedures. The U.S. experience suggests a “qualified admissibility” model: victim narratives about harm may be incorporated, but direct sentencing recommendations should be restricted, and emotionally amplifying formats (especially audiovisual media) should be subject to rigorous judicial screening. To balance victim participation with defendants’ procedural rights, the article recommends clearer functional boundaries for victim statements, standardized written formats, limits on length and content, careful management of media-based presentations, and explicit judicial instructions and record-based review to safeguard proportionality and consistency in sentencing.

General Background: Fraudulent shamanic practices exploiting beliefs in supernatural money-doubling persist in Indonesia and have escalated into serious violent crimes. Specific Background: The Banjarnegara serial murder case involving a money-doubling shaman revealed a systematic pattern in which fraud preceded and motivated twelve premeditated killings, adjudicated under District Court Decision No. 63/Pid.B/2023/PN Bnr. Knowledge Gap: Prior studies rarely examine the integrated construction of criminal liability combining fraud, premeditated murder, participation, and concursus realis, particularly in comparison with the preventive framework of the new Criminal Code. Aims: This study analyzes the layered application of criminal provisions under the old Criminal Code and compares them with the new Criminal Code to assess proportional accountability and sanctions. Results: The findings show that fraud under Article 378 functioned as the proxima causa triggering premeditated murder under Article 340, aggravated by participation (Article 55) and multiple offenses (Article 65), justifying the imposition of the death penalty despite the introduction of Article 252 of Law No. 1 of 2023. Novelty: The study conceptualizes fraud as a causal foundation for serial premeditated murder within a concursus realis framework. Implications: These findings reinforce the need for integrated repressive and preventive criminal policies to address extraordinary crimes rooted in deceptive supernatural claims. Highlights: Fraud functions as the causal trigger for systematic premeditated murder. Layered application of criminal provisions strengthens proportional accountability. Preventive norms in the new Criminal Code remain insufficient for extraordinary crimes. Keywords: Criminal Liability, Premeditated Murder, Fraudulent Shamanism, Concursus Realis, Death Penalty

This study explores the current academic debate on the punishment for apostasy within Islamic scholarship, focusing specifically on the Malaysian context. Traditionally, classical fiqh literature has prescribed the death penalty for apostasy, based on the view that renouncing Islam is both a theological error and a threat to community security and political stability. However, modern Muslim scholars are increasingly questioning this stance, arguing that it contradicts Qur’anic principles of freedom of belief and human dignity. The issue addressed in this study is the tension between classical legal positions, emerging reformist perspectives, and the existing legal framework in Malaysia, where laws vary from punitive measures in some states, such as Pahang, to counselling-based approaches in Negeri Sembilan. This research aims to analyse contemporary reinterpretations of the punishment for apostasy and assess their implications for Malaysia’s pluralist legal system. It particularly evaluates the viewpoints of three influential reformist scholars, Abdul Mutaal al-Soidi, Taha Jabir Al-Alwani, and Ahmad al-Raisūnī, who oppose capital punishment by emphasising the principles of Maqasid al-Shariah, including the protection of intellect, dignity, and freedom of belief. Methodologically, the study employs qualitative content analysis of primary legal texts, complemented by semi-structured interviews with officials from the Federal Territories Mufti Office and practising Syariah lawyers. Findings reveal a strong theoretical basis for reinterpreting apostasy as a matter of personal conscience rather than political rebellion, and for advocating a shift from coercive legal measures to education and dialogue. While classical jurists linked apostasy to political treason due to the sociopolitical realities of early Muslim societies, contemporary nation-states operate within different legal, constitutional and human rights frameworks. This makes a punitive approach less compatible with modern governance and more aligned with historical contingencies rather than universal principles. The study makes a global contribution by proposing an Islamic legal reform framework aligned with constitutional rights and international human rights standards, demonstrating how Islamic jurisprudence can evolve while maintaining its ethical foundations.

Chinese criminal justice practitioners’ death penalty opinion and justifications:

Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is a highly debated issue worldwide, raising questions about morality, ethics, and its consistency with constitutional values. The justice of the death sentence, its effect on human rights, and its compliance with constitutional protections are the main topics of dispute in India. This article looks at the death penalty's constitutional legitimacy in India, a country where it is still an accepted form of punishment. By analyzing constitutional principles, significant judicial rulings, and shifting societal norms, it evaluates whether capital punishment aligns with fundamental rights and due process. The death penalty has always been a topic of intense controversy. This paper critically examines the death penalty's legitimacy in view of India's newly proposed Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS, 2023), which aims to take the place of The Indian Penal Code (1860 IPC). Opinions regarding constitutional legitimacy of the death sentence vary widely. This article looks to explore the historical context of capital punishment and analyze its constitutionality within the Indian legal framework. To fully understand the polarized views surrounding this issue, it is crucial to examine key judicial rulings that have shaped the legal discourse and established significant precedents. Key judicial rulings have established a continuous and interconnected framework that helps develop a comprehensive understanding of capital punishment. The debates between abolitionists and retentionists offer valuable perspectives, guiding the search for a reasoned and rational resolution to the issue. The contrast between India's stance and the global approach to the death penalty prompts reconsideration of whether it should be abolished. It is crucial to recognize that humans require both reformation and punishment, depending on the nature of the offense, and punishment should be determined after carefully evaluating all aspects of the crime. This paper aims to provide a thorough analysis of facts, reports, and legal precedents to foster a well-rounded and clear understanding of the concept of capital punishment.

In this article, we focus on the data obtained by an international survey on faith and religious experience amongst young people aged between 18–29 years in Italy. This survey was conducted by the Footprints Project and involved researchers from eight countries: Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Kenya, and the Philippines. We will specifically examine the representative sample of young Italians on: the prevalent image of God amongst the youth; which religion is followed most; what values are embraced; the degree of conviction with which people identify themselves as believers or non-believers; whether they pray and, if so, how; if they are Catholic; how they perceive the Catholic Church; their thoughts about the Bible, the Magisterium, tradition of the Church, and the sacraments; and their approach to Catholic doctrine. We will also explore the views of young people on moral issues such as the role of conscience, relationships (such as the effects of pornography and contraception), and social issues (war, the death penalty, political corruption, and pollution).

This article explores a performative repertoire emerging from research on Black women’s political representation in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Focusing on a critical discursive moment—“There is no death penalty in Brazil”—the study examines a rhetorical strategy termed “unsettling astonishments”. This approach serves as a method of denunciation that aims to expose human rights violations in favelas and peripheral regions. By engaging with theories of performative politics, the research investigates how deliberately provocative performances can generate discomfort and challenge existing narratives of public security. The analysis considers whether creating emotional shock can effectively make visible the systemic dehumanization and disposability of certain bodies, ultimately questioning the potential for such performative interventions to reshape social and political imaginaries centered on the fundamental right to life.

Background. Corruption is a crime that has a multidimensional impact and hinders national development. As a crime that has caused leakage of state finances, corruption threatens the fulfillment of citizens' basic rights, especially economic, social, and cultural rights. Purpose. This study aims to understand the basis of judges' considerations in imposing a penalty, including the death penalty, and to analyze whether corruption can be categorized as a violation of Human Rights (HAM). Method. With a juridical-normative method through the analysis of laws and regulations, doctrines, and literature Result. This study found that corruption has the characteristics of extra-ordinary crimes and substantially impacts human rights violations, especially when corruption causes a loss of people's access to welfare. Conclusion. This research confirms that national legal mechanisms need to recognize corruption as a serious human rights violation.

In the Soviet Union in the 1960s, criminal cases were brought against individuals who speculated (traded with the aim of making a profit) in foreign currency and valuables. There were two criminal trials that were widely publicised in Soviet Lithuania in 1962 – the Vilnius and Kaunas foreign currency dealer cases. The proceedings were also notable in that some of the defendants were sentenced to execution by firing squad. The Vilnius and Kaunas foreign currency dealer cases were examined in accordance with the 1957–1961 Soviet Criminal Law reform.Reformed criminal laws were in force in the Soviet Union. They prohibited the imposition of stricter penalties for actions committed in previous periods. However, in the case of the Vilnius foreign currency dealers, the death penalty was imposed for acts of trading in foreign currency and valuables that the defendants had carried out before the punishment of death penalty was introduced for this crime. The execution by fusillading some of the individuals convicted in the Vilnius foreign currency dealer case may have been decided by the fact that, at the initiative of the Soviet Security, a resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union which had been adopted even before the trial was submitted to the case, listing the names of persons against whom it was permitted to retroactively apply the criminal law providing for the death penalty.The case files provide no grounds to claim that the defendants’ Jewish identity was the basis for initiating the speculation cases or for the sentences that were given. However, the defendants themselves tended to emphasise that they were Jewish in their attempts to explain the reasons for their involvement in trading in valuables and their possession of the material resources for these activities.

This article explores how Islam and Christianity address capital punishment within their sacred texts. While most research emphasizes legal, ethical, or social aspects, the theological and scriptural foundations remain underexamined. Using a comparative doctrinal approach, the study analyzes the Qur’an and Hadith and the Bible to examine how each tradition defines the legitimacy, purpose, and limits of the death penalty. It highlights the balance between divine justice and human imperfection, as well as tensions between retribution and restoration. The findings reveal both common themes, such as the moral function of punishment, and notable differences, particularly in the areas of mercy, forgiveness, and non-violence. By foregrounding these scriptural insights, the article deepens understanding of religious perspectives on justice and supports further comparative theological research.