Dear ASS Editors,
I am disappointed with the death penalty ruling against disgraced policeman Iskandar Rahmat who was found guilty of murdering two men. The death penalty is not going to solve the problem, it is not going to bring back the dead but add to the body count.
It is a primitive form of punishment that has no scientific evidence for deterrence. It is but an archaic form of punishment that follows the draconian principle of An eye for an eye.
This point is clearly explained by prominent Anti-Death Penalty activist Kirsten Han. She said:
“So many people are punished by the death penalty, from the family members who have to go through the anguish of counting down the days to prison wardens who have to deal with the reality of the execution—and all for a form of retributive justice that has no proven deterrent* and certainly no rehabilitative effect.”
This is not the kind of solution we want for a democratic country which respects human rights. We are better than that. Iskandar Rahmat should be spared the gallows and spend the rest of his life reflecting on his actions in prison. He should not have to pay for the ultimate price because of his one grave mistake. We should be a nation about compassion and not partake in endless cycles of violence.
Remember, he was an exemplary policeman until his money problems forced him onto this regrettable path. Circumstances have led him to such a sorry state and his past performance show he is capable of being a decent human being.
Do we want to solve violent crimes with violence itself? Is this the moral way? Does this solve anything? Does this reform the criminal? No it does not.
I urge the authorities to relook the death penalty and spare Iskandar Rahmat the noose. Giving him life imprisonment is the best punishment and reformative action for him.