The Instigator
emach
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
standardtoaster
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Should Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran have been executed?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/30/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 452 times Debate No: 74507
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

emach

Con

No they should not have been executed, for someone to spend 10 years in prison, away from home and their families, to go through a multitude of rehabilitation courses, practically turn their lives around and realise and see the extent of their situation, only to in the end be executed, seems pointless. If they were to be executed- which they were - shouldn't it have been done in the first place? why would so much money go into rehabilitating them for 10 years to waste it and have it mean nothing? There are a considerable amount of proven serial rapists, murderers, etc not being punished by capital punishment but for someone to have already been in prison for such an extensive amount of time, seems and is unreasonable and it shows the priorities of the legal system are clearly not in check and reasonable.

If a man lived next door to you, or on your street, went to prison and got out and moved back, would you feel safe? no any normal person would have fear.

If a drug mule/smuggler lived next door or on your street, went to prison, moved back after, would you feel as if you're unsafe? It is very unlikely.

The seriousness of a drug offence in comparison to a multitude of other offences, shows a lesser sentence should be handed out, even for these men to spend a considerable amount of their life in prison would be more humane and understandable than capital punishment.
standardtoaster

Pro

Whilst I do agree that it is a shame that these two men, along with Rodrigo Gularte and five other prisoners were executed, and yes, to us, executing drug smugglers does seem excessive. However, The crime they committed, 'Production, transit, import and possession of narcotics', carries the risk of the death penalty in Indonesia.

It follows, if you commit a crime in that country where the punishment may include execution, you are caught and arrested, and tried and found guilty of a crime where the punishment may be the death penalty, and then you are sentenced to be executed, and then you lose your appeal to overturn your sentence, and are refused clemency, then yes, you should be executed.

People cannot be executed as soon as they leave the courtroom, because they need to be given the ability to lodge an appeal, or ask for clemency, as presumably accounted for in the Indonesian justice code. As for why they were kept alive for 10 years? In the US, the only member of the western world to still use capital punishment, it was found in 2010 that death row inmates are kept alive for 15 years past their sentence on average. I also fail to see how being on death row for 10 years is less preferable to being executed after 6 months. It is still time spent alive, even in an awful place like an Indonesian prison. The idea of rehabilitating prisoners on death row is incredibly important. They were sentenced to a crime where the government decided that the only thing they could do to protect the outside population is to have them executed. There would be no point giving them opportunity to ask for clemency if they are not given an opportunity for penance.

'If a man lived next door to you, or on your street, went to prison and got out and moved back, would you feel safe? no any normal person would have fear.

If a drug mule/smuggler lived next door or on your street, went to prison, moved back after, would you feel as if you're unsafe? It is very unlikely.'

I am not sure what is meant by this, that a normal criminal, one who may be guilty of serious assault or arson would elicit fear from a member of the general population, but a drug trafficker is not a scary person? I would argue, that ringleaders of heroin traffickers are people that many people would be afraid of, because they could for instance try and coerce people you care about to smuggle drugs and risk being put to death, or perhaps increase the supply of heroin, a particularily destructive narcotic, to the local area.

If this was to be a debate on whether Indonesian laws on drugs need to be revised, I would fully agree with you that they do. But unfortunately, these two men committed a crime considered serious enough to require the death penalty, and that's the risk you face when moving drugs in Indonesia.
Debate Round No. 1
emach

Con

emach forfeited this round.
standardtoaster

Pro

standardtoaster forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.