It has been seen in history in the past couple decades that there has been quite a bit of controversy on the topic of the Canadian government agreeing to extradite people living in Canada accused of a capital offence to other countries that impose the death penalty. The opinions of people regarding this issue vary and depend on the circumstances of the case which makes it difficult today to differ weather Canada should extradite the offender who is accused of a capital offence to a country that imposes the death penalty or if they should not extradite them to that country who cherishes that law.
Conceivably, in my findings and my set of beliefs the Canadian government should not agree to extradite people living in Canada who are accused of a capital offence to countries that impose the death penalty. The Canadian government should debate and take into consideration the other options they can take instead of extraditing the fugitives to a country that embraces the death penalty. Some of the options include the offender being enrolling into rehabilitation centers or sentencing in Canada under our criminal justice system. Also, the Human Rights of the fugitive should come into consideration when speaking about this topic in the mindset of the person who is being extradited to that country who is willing to put the death penalty in place. The Canadian government also should take into consideration some of the risks of extraditing these offenders when there is a serious risk that the person will be subjected to torture or inhuman treatment. The deportation or extradition would, in itself, under such circumstances constitute inhuman treatment. Having to spend a long period of time on death row in such extreme conditions, with the ever present and mounting anguish of awaiting execution, and to the personal circumstances of the criminal, especially if the age of the person is quite old and mental state at the time of the offence just isn’t quite fair to that person even if they have committed such an atrocious crime.
Body 1 (Risks Of Extraditing): The risks of extraditing a fugitive to a country that imposes the death penalty outweighs any justification. The fear and the danger is the most commonly cited that innocent people will be executed because of errors and holes in the criminal justice system. This is very likely to happen and the chances of this occurring is increasing daily in today’s era. Proving this fact from 1973-2004, 144 people on death row have been exonerated. As a percentage of all death sentences, that’s just 1.6 percent.
But if the innocence rate is 4.1 percent, more than twice the rate of exoneration is an untold number of innocent. With more than 2,816 death row inmates in the United States of America as of January 1, 2018 my guess is that a few offenders on death row condemned are innocent. We might not yet know who they are, but virtually every week, throughout our nation, evidence is found that proves someone’s innocence. For example a man named Carlos DeLuna who was executed in 1989 for allegedly the fatal stabbing of Texas convenience store clerk Wanda Lopez in 1983 was found innocent as new evidence uncovered by reporters Maurice Possley and Steve Mills casts doubt on DeLuna’s guilt and points towards another man, Carlos Hernandez, who had a record of similar crimes and repeatedly confessed to the murder. According to Washington’s Posts Dionne Jr “the death penalty serves no useful purpose and spending $184 million annually to enforce it is obscenely expensive and that it is not a deterrent.” E.J.
Dionne Jr. also wrote in a Washington Post article that “we cannot maintain the death penalty as a punishment for the “worst of the worst” without incurring an unacceptable risk of executing innocent people. It is not the seriousness of the crime that determines the risk of executing the innocent; it is the quality of the evidence, the quality of legal counsel, and the mistakes and biases of fallible human beings.” This factual information that was written by Dionne Jr.
exemplifies that the criminal justice system isn’t picture perfect and makes errors which proves that it isn’t completely stable in the United States of America. The Canadian government should also keep in mind and take into consideration some of the other risks of extraditing these fugitives. One of the concerns the Government of Canada should have when extraditing these fugitives is that there is an immense risk that the person will be subjected to torture or inhuman treatment which is stated in Section 12 in the Charter of Rights Freedoms which states “Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment”.
The torment and inhuman treatment frequently includes serious physical assault ,psychological interrogation, cruel or barbaric detention conditions or restraints. The deportation or extradition of the fugitive would, in its nature, under these circumstances constitute inhuman treatment. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spoke and expressed his frustration about this topic in an interview segment with CBC news as he said “”we will not extradite into situations of capital punishment”. He also lead on to explain into further detail that he will not extradite to countries including the united states of america or any other country around the world if they have the capital punishment in place. Another concern that the Government of Canada should have when extraditing these fugitives to the country that has requested them is having the offender spend a long period of time on death row in such extreme conditions, with the ever present and mounting anguish of awaiting execution of the death penalty , and to the personal circumstances of the applicant, especially if the age of the person is quite old and mental state at the time of the offence just isn’t quite fair to that person even if they have committed such an atrocious crime.
Body 2 (Other Options): The Canadian Government may want to consider the many other options other than extraditing a fugitive to countries that imposes the death penalty. Some of the options which can include treatment programs and or rehabilitation which are some of the alternatives to incarceration which is any kind of punishment or treatment program other than time in prison and can be given to a person who has committed a crime and was convicted for that crime. Since federal and private prisons costs over $28,000 annually per inmate the Canadian Government may want to consider the possible alternatives to incarceration for these fugitives in order to save some taxpayers money. In, addition this can aid in prisons being overcrowded which can also help the government in saving even more money. Any option that costs below the price of 28,000 is an applicable way to salvage money.
In comparison, a program in rehabilitation costs under $10,000 annually per offender . Less restrictions and better costs overall will overcome the cost of offering and managing multiple options, resulting in a leaner, more efficient economic system in total. Spending 28,0000 on each offender to be incarcerated is a lot more expensive than tailoring options for each separate case. Having alternatives to incarceration can be very beneficial to the economy since rehabilitation centers can aid in getting these fugitives back on their feet and working which then could lead to boosting the economy. A system for rehabilitation is a more equitable approach to treat certain category of fugitives, ensuring that their behavior will improve upon their release to the society.
Where prisons do not focus on putting efforts which are designed to reform or redirect these fugitives towards a better life and hopefully a better future oftentimes using alternatives to incarceration to do so. Since these systems to rehabilitate fugitives are specifically designed to reform and improve the mindset of the individual , they lead to better outcome than incarceration , which is mainly designed to punish the mental state and mindset of the individual, and remove them from their personal communities that they are closely tied with. This leads to a safer environment for everyone when these offenders finish their respective sentences and return to society. Useful to societyBody 3 (Human Rights):It is seen by people and the Canadian government many times in the past that human rights issues occasionally pop up as additional grounds for refusal of extradition requests from foreign countries. This has occurred many times in the past between Canada and countries that enforce the death penalty. A prime example of this is when the U.
S government wanted Canada to extradite 22 year old Karim Baratov who was national charged in a U.S. investigation into a massive cyber attack against Yahoo, he was known for driving luxury cars and throwing lavish parties at his Ancaster, Ont to them so he can face the death penalty or some sort of punishment but Canada doesn’t want to since they were following section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In section 7 of the Charter it states “everyone has the right to life,liberty and security of the person”.” Section 7 of the Charter requires that laws or state actions that interfere with life, liberty and security of the person conform to the principles of fundamental justice — the basic principles that underlie our notions of justice and fair process.” This exemplifies that Canada follows the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in that they will protect people that are in their country no matter what crimes they committed in other countries .
Many of the countries including Canada and the United States of America have a set of values and beliefs system that they enforce within their country and follow very closely on a daily basis. In this case Canada, follows the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. An example of this is Canada Conclusion: In conclusion, the Canadian Government should not extradite fugitives that have been accused of a capital offence to countries that impose the death penalty.
Instead of extraditing these fugitives they should consider other options some of them include the offender being enrolling into rehabilitation centers that carry treatment programs within them or being sentenced in Canada under our criminal justice system. In addition, the government should evaluate and realize that the risks of extraditing a fugitive to a country that imposes the death penalty outweighs any justification. Lastly, the Government of Canada should follow their belief system and the human rights of the fugitive should come into consideration when speaking about extraditing the fugitive to another foreign country that imposes the death penalty.