Sunday Post-Herald
The case against hanging
Early next week the Queen will be giving consideration to a petition for mercy by a condemned Hongkong murderer
In most matters affecting her colonies, the Queen will no doubt be guided by her principai adviser on the spot or her Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
If the former, it will be to let the law take its course; if the latter, it can only be hoped that Sir Alec Douglas-Homo makes no distinction between capital punishment in Britain and Hongkong.
If the British Parliament can reject it by a two- to-one majority the same considerations must compei Sir Alec to urge the Queen to follow a similar course.
Opinion in Hongkong, if it were tested, would no doubt show a good many in favour of capital punishment but Sir Alec does not need to be reminded that the House of Commons took its decision despite reports of an 80-85 per cent majority in favour in Britain.
Parliament in other words took the stand that it should not give way to public hysteria or emotion and the vote against the reintroduction of the death penalty could only he passed with the help of a large majority of the Conservative Party abstaining or voting with Labour.
As it turned out they voted with Labour. And the supporters included the Prime Minister, Mr Edward Heath.
Now it will be argued that what Britain does is one thing, what Hongkong must do is for Hongkong itself to decide.
Public opinion of course has no way of expressing itself here except through the press and Government created information channels.
We are not seeking to discredit these channels which in the absence of anything else are useful guides. But it must not be assumed that because local worthies, including the Governor's immediate advisers, argue that Chinese concepts of punishment must prevail in today's climate of violent crime, that this is necessarily what everyone wants.
SUNDAY POST HERALD APRIL 22nd '73
Indeed there is good reason to believe that many Chinese people abhor capital punishment as much as a vocal sector of British opinion whose letters have appeared in the press this past week.
It can only be repeated that capital punishment has not succeeded over the years in preventing or deterring murder though it might make some people think twice.
The abolitionists are accused of indifference to the victim of the murder; this is frankly nonsense though surely we are passed the stage when sacrificial victims must be offered to appease either the victims' next-of-kin or outraged public opinion.
But the abolitionists do argue strongly that judicial killing is not the right or the civilised way of dealing with violence in Hongkong or any other society and that it would be wrong to make an example of one man, however heinous his crime, when so many have escaped the noose in recent years for equally heinous offences.
Far better 10 apply consistently heavy sentences; far better to improve methods of detection.
It has in any case yet to be seen how the anti- crine campaign this summer, in which the public will play a much bigger part, affects crime figures. It would therefore be wrong to apply Ac denth penalty at this juncture.
Perhaps the strongest arguiment against the principle of capital punishment - though it is not suggested it applies in the current case is the danger of a mistake. It has happened in the past (notably in the Evans-Christie case) and it is an error that can never be corrected.
A long spell in prison is the more effective way to keep murderers out of society with no remissions under 20 or 25 years and to deter young hotheads from carrying knives.
If up to now too many people use them with impunity it is because our courts and juries have not yet applied consistent penalties that demonstrate that crime does not pay.
This still remains our most urgent need,