Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-03-11-Speech-4-212"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100311.18.4-212"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, after 13 years without an execution in South Korea, it is deeply sad that the Constitutional Court there ruled in favour of the death penalty a few weeks ago. The ruling states that the death penalty is a legal punishment that can deter crime for the public good. That is a commonly heard argument and merely a response to emotive situations in a given country at a certain time.
It in fact means that the death penalty is being viewed as a preventive force in the hope that, when a criminal knows there is capital punishment, he or she will think twice about his or her acts. We all know that many studies have refuted that idea.
Even more important is the fact that an execution is irreversible; there is no way back. Roman law at the time of Justinian stated that it was better for a guilty person to go unpunished than for an innocent person to be deprived of their life. That was 15 centuries ago. Since the South Korean Constitutional Court itself recognised that the death penalty could be subject to errors and abuse, our concerns brought forward today might strengthen the democratic institutions of the Republic of Korea in the idea that this method of punishment should be abolished for good.
Since the Republic of South Korea acceded to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1990, and is a signatory to most of the major human rights treaties, moving backwards would be very harmful to its international reputation."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples