Capital Punishment under Pakistani Law, International Human Rights Law and Islamic Law: A Comparative and Critical Legal Analysis

Abstract

The death penalty is still one of the most debated topics in international law, criminal justice and human rights field. Capital punishment has been eliminated in a few countries, but there are a number of countries that still practice it for the purpose of deterrence, retribution, public security, and religious legitimacy. This article aims to analyses and critically assess the regulation of the death penalty as per the international human rights laws and specifically the Islamic legal principles and the present laws in Pakistan. The article examines the proportionality, guarantee of a fair trial and the right to life as they relate to the state sovereignty and capital punishment. It also examines the legal and moral conflicts within the abolitionist movements as well as between abolitionist movements and retentionists states that do not abolish the death penalty form their domestic legislation but justify it based on cultural values or religious doctrine. The article concludes that although international human rights law leaves no room for the absolute prohibition of the death penalty, it contains strict substantive and procedural restrictions which substantially reduce the permissible use of the death penalty. The paper ends by stating that the current retentionists systems, such as Pakistan, are plagued with serious institutional and procedural shortcomings, which can weaken the legitimacy of capital punishment and raise the chances of arbitrary killing.