While I was enjoying the holidays at home in Chicago, then-Gov. George Ryan gave Illinois a great gift by sparing 167 people from death.
In 2000, Ryan called a moratorium on all executions after the courts found that 13 death row inmates had been wrongly convicted since 1977, when capital punishment resumed in Illinois. After two years of soul searching and two days before the end of his term, Ryan issued his holiday gift. Calling the death penalty \arbitrary and capricious, and therefore immoral,"" Ryan saved those he had placed in limbo almost three years ago.
Illinois is one of 37 states that still employs capital punishment. I can only hope that Ryan's courageous decision will cause the other 36 to realize that murder is immoral even when it is committed in the name of justice. Whatever your religious convictions, and even if you have none, there is no doubt that capital punishment has been civilization's most barbaric practice since the Christians were thrown to the lions. How can America claim to be the world leader in human rights when murder has a place in its legal system?
Taking life is neither a duty nor a right of any man. No matter what the situation, even if killing another is necessary for self-defense, it is evil and should be avoided. But for the state, the structure of justice, to implement any policy that condones killing sets a precedent for the people: That at his own discretion, man may extend the line of right and wrong to suit his passions for revenge.
One hundred six countries, including almost all of Europe, have abolished capital punishment. Is violence such a fundamental part of our society that we can accept the contradiction of murder to prevent murder?
In a letter to the victims' families, Ryan said that he is ""not prepared to take the risk that we may execute an innocent person,"" because when dealing out life and death, there is no room for error. DNA evidence proved that 13 men sentenced to death were innocent of the crimes for which they were to lose their lives. Only then, after 12 men had already been executed in the state since 1977, did it become clear to the governor that human error and prejudice makes ""just"" murder a contradiction. This outrageous prevalence of error was strongly supported by a 1999 Chicago Tribune series that examined all 285 death penalty convictions since capital punishment was restored in Illinois and found that nearly half the convictions had been reversed for a new trial or resentencing. Were half of the 12 executed men innocent as well?
Morality and justice are the main concerns in all debates over capital punishment. Our system practices the archaic notion of an eye for an eye where justice is only served to murderers when they lose what they took from their victims. But instead of punishing the criminal we become the criminal.
As imperfect beings, we make imperfect judgments and the error of taking an innocent man's life is too grave to risk. Yet even if a man is positively guilty of the most heinous act, there is no justice in murder. Instead of mourning a tragedy, we are asking the state to satisfy our bloodlust by killing the offender. To take a life is final--it is irreversible. Therefore, to take life justly, one must be all-knowing and one must have the power to give life back. Only God or fate can be so precise.
J.R.R. Tolkien wrote in ""The Lord of the Rings,"" ""Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give that to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends.""
