Author:
Pascoe Daniel,Miao Michelle
Abstract
AbstractAs States that use the death penalty liberally in a world that increasingly favours abolition, the Muslim-majority jurisdictions that are strict exponents of Islamic law and the People's Republic of China share a crucial commonality: their frequent use of victim–perpetrator reconciliation agreements to remove convicted murderers from the threat of execution. In both cases, rather than a prisoner's last chance at escaping execution being recourse to executive clemency, victim–perpetrator reconciliation agreements fulfil largely the same purpose, together with providing means of compensating victims for economic loss, and enabling the State concerned to reduce execution numbers without formally limiting the death penalty's scope in law. Utilizing the functionalist approach of comparative law methodology, this article compares the 13 death penalty retentionist nations that have incorporated Islamic law principles into their positive criminal law with the People's Republic of China, as to the functions underpinning victim–perpetrator reconciliation agreements in death penalty cases.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Law,Political Science and International Relations
Reference85 articles.
1. Is Penal Reconciliation Acceptable or Needed in Capital Cases?;Sun;China Legal Science,2010
2. Restorative Justice in Islam: Should Qisas Be Considered a Form of Restorative Justice?;Hascall;Berkeley Journal of Middle Eastern and Islamic Law,2011
3. Islamic Criminal Law in Northern Nigeria : Politics, Religion, Judicial Practice
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献