Introduction
The death penalty is a state-recognized method of punishment in Saudi Arabia. Executions occur by cutting off the head due to religious tendencies (Alotaibi et al., 2023). The case of a 25-year-old Arab named Wazir, who was sentenced to death for killing an older adult based on the testimony of a young female eyewitness, highlights the ethical dilemma associated with this practice. The girl-witness later realized that the accused only looked like a murderer and that she was a victim of false memories caused by a state of passion, leading to questions about the reliability of eyewitness testimony and the fairness of the justice system.
Statement of the Dilemma
This situation demonstrates how dangerous and destructive the death penalty can be from an ethical point of view. Many researchers oppose introducing the death penalty, arguing that the sentence is unfair and inconsistent (Bessler, 2019). According to research, economic and social factors show that evidence does not support the idea that the death penalty deters homicide (Fagan & Geller, 2018). Moreover, it is worth mentioning that many psychologists and researchers argue that it is essential to rehabilitate offenders, regardless of the severity of their crime (Phillips et al., 2021). Criminals need help and rehabilitation, while the death penalty will generate even more aggression.
When the legal system weakens, innocent and less privileged people are more likely to be wrongly convicted (Marier & Cochran, 2022). This is especially relevant in Arab societies that place an unhealthy emphasis on rank and status. False testimony is also common due to witness shock, which could result in an innocent person being killed (Alotaibi et al., 2023).
The relevance of using the death penalty in a developed society, focused on human life as the primary moral category, is also a dilemma. Ethnic diversity is a direct factor in sentencing in different countries, with ethnic polarization significantly influencing the level of sentencing bias (Marier & Cochran, 2022). In other words, human life cannot become a punishment in ethically polarized countries.
Key Terms
- False memories are a memory disorder in which, in addition to actual memories of past events or sensations, a person also has fictional ones (Howe et al., 2022).
- Memory replacement syndrome is a syndrome in which there are fictional memories caused by the need for the brain to fill in the gaps in memory in view of a specific physiological and emotional disorder (Howe et al., 2022).
- Shock (affect) is the psychophysiological process of internal activity regulation and reflects an unconscious subjective assessment of the current situation.
- Ethical egoism is a normative provision for moral agents to act in their interests (Salmieri & Mayhew, 2019).
- Social Contract theory implies that people will partly give up their sovereign rights in favor of the state to secure their interests through it (Rachels, 2019).
Conflicts
In Arab culture, a cruel attitude is a traditionally conditioned behavior. Moreover, punishments for violating religious prohibitions in themselves are an absolute norm. This is where conflicting positions or opinions can arise. For example, opponents of the abolition of the death penalty may argue that all events occur by the will of God. The selected issue encompasses conflicts between professional and familial duties, as the ANA code for nurses demonstrates. More specifically, it is the dilemma between participating in the death sentence as a professional responsibility against viewing it as unethical, owing to one’s familial or cultural background.
The problem is that only God has the right to give and take away life. Supporters of ethical egoism focus on evaluating crimes based on their own moral values (Salmieri & Mayhew, 2019). This concept underlies the Arab culture because its representatives focus primarily on specific religious traditions, ignoring the general principles of morality.
From the point of view of the social contract theory, the death penalty guarantees the observance of the law by all people because they are afraid of the death penalty. This approach allows the state to use more effective ways to manage the people. However, this theory focuses on abolishing such a penalty to avoid miscarriages of justice (Rachels, 2019). This theory puts human life as the principal value, destroying the logic of the death penalty supporters.
Most Ethically Correct Solution
The most ethical solution to the dilemma will be abolishing the death penalty as a practice in general. After all, the consequences of a miscarriage of justice can be dire (Crawford, 2020). Moreover, the death penalty also provokes a different kind of conflict. For example, the ANA code for nurses has a controversial perspective on the death penalty and implies the conflict between the nurse’s professional and familial duties.
A nurse can regard participating in the death penalty as immoral due to her cultural or religious background. At the same time, they are obliged to participate if they work in prisons, which is their professional duty. Arab culture may not always adhere to widely held moral precepts that cherish human life.
Even when cultural ideas contradict moral or religious principles, the death sentence should not be abolished entirely. Courts should instead base their conclusions on more significant evidence. Baumgartner et al. (2018) discuss these difficulties and how they affect the fairness of the criminal justice system. The state must prioritize moral virtues such as caring, loyalty, and humility to answer this difficulty while making ethical judgments.
Relevance of Theories
Considering the described situation from the point of view of different ethical theories may help to identify some solutions to the dilemma. Aristotle’s theory of the golden mean is that virtue is the mean between excess and deficiency. Suppose we consider the death penalty as an excessive punishment and imprisonment as insufficient (precisely within the framework of the Arab culture). In that case, the virtue of this situation will be to select weightier evidence pointing to the young man’s guilt.
The theory of utilitarianism implies that dilemmas should be solved by achieving the maximum happiness for the maximum number of people. In this situation, it is challenging to determine in what format the calculation of happiness should occur with a particular outcome. In principle, the theory is rather doubtful as a way to resolve ethical conflicts since happiness is a subjective category.
The natural law theory implies that a person has a particular set of rights (the right to life) that are not controlled by the state. In accordance with this ethical theory, the death penalty should not be used as a means of punishment at all. However, the Arab state functions according to other rules.
Aristotle’s theory of the golden mean suggests that virtue is the mean between excess and deficiency. In this case, virtue would be finding weightier evidence pointing to the young man’s guilt. This approach is advantageous as it considers the cultural characteristics and preferences of Arab culture while protecting the natural human right to life as much as possible.
The theory is in balance or compromise, which is the basis for finding moral solutions to any dilemma, especially in a situation with two opposing forces in an ethical conflict (Rachels, 2019). Thus, Aristotle’s concept is well-suited to deal with such situations, and it is an appropriate theory to apply to the ethical dilemma of the death penalty.
The two remaining theories cannot be applied to resolving this conflict. The theory of natural law, despite its directness and relevance, needs to be more relevant to the context of the situation. In a country where the death penalty is permitted and the position of an executioner is considered an honor, a person has state rights. However, there can be no question of natural rights since the interests and religious traditions of the state are above the rights of citizens.
The utilitarianism theory is also irrelevant to assessing the situation under discussion. It is impossible to estimate how many people the execution of a person will bring happiness to. Such a decision would be a blessing for Arabian culture representatives. However, how conflicts are treated with erroneous testimony and false memories is still being determined.
Happiness is too subjective, so quantitative comparisons cannot be made. It could be stated that it is not the same as what was earlier stated as the most moral thing to do. The ethical dilemma is complicated in this case, and different ethical theories recommend alternative answers.
Conclusion
The moral problem of the death sentence is complicated and causes several disputes and debates. The most ethically correct answer to the issue is to eliminate the death sentence. The circumstance might be seen through the lens of several ethical philosophies to discover possible solutions to the challenge. The golden mean theory of Aristotle is well-suited to dealing with such situations and is an excellent theory to apply to the ethical quandary of the death sentence.
References
Alotaibi, H., Boateng, F., & Pryce, D. (2023). Crime and punishment in Saudi Arabia: Lashing, imprisonment, and other unusual punishments. Child Abuse & Neglect, 135. Web.
Baumgartner, F. R., De Boef, S. L., & Boydstun, A. E. (2018). The Decline of the Death Penalty and the Discovery of Innocence. Cambridge University Press.
Bessler, J. D. (2019). The arbitrary and capricious application of the death penalty: A comprehensive study of the ways in which capital punishment fails to meet its objectives. Routledge.
Crawford, C. (2020). Access to justice for collective and diffuse rights: Theoretical challenges and opportunities for social contract theory. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 27(1), 59–86. Web.
Fagan, J., & Geller, A. (2018). Police, race, and the production of capital homicides. Berkeley J. Crim. L., 23, 261. Web.
Howe, M., Patihis, L., & Otgaar, H. (2022). What science tells us about false and repressed memories. Memory, 30(1), 16-21. Web.
Marier, C. J., & Cochran, J. K. (2022). Ethnic diversity, ethnic polarization, and incarceration rates: A cross-national study. Justice Quarterly, 1-28. Web.
Phillips, S. W., Kim, D. Y., Sobol, J. J., & Gayadeen, S. M. (2021). Total recall? A quasi-experimental study of officer’s recollection in shoot–don’t shoot simulators. Police Practice and Research, 22(3), 1229-1240. Web.
Rachels, J. (2019). The elements of moral philosophy. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Salmieri, G., & Mayhew, R. (2019). Foundations of a free society: Reflections on Ayn Rand’s political philosophy. University of Pittsburgh Press.