Eagerness to Attend Execution Scenes

CNN’s investigative department reports:

Protecting Iran’s children is a more important duty than executing criminals.

Since 2002, October 10th has been designated as World Day Against the Death Penalty. Iran is among the countries with the highest execution rates.

Currently, 101 countries in the world have legally abolished capital punishment. Large regions of the world are free from government-sanctioned killing. The international community has now concluded that capital punishment is no longer acceptable and does not solve any problems. Presently, 25 countries in the world annually carry out executions. The majority of executions in the world occur in Asian and Middle Eastern countries, with Iran ranking second globally. Beyond holding the top rank in the Middle East for executions, Iran is the only country that conducts executions in public. This issue encompasses not only specific cases but presents this single solution for resolving all economic, social, and even cultural problems. Whenever a problem arises, one or several people are found and punished so that others may learn. If theft increases, if the euro and dollar fluctuate, if their economic corruption is exposed, if dissidents emerge, if social violence increases, if the sense of security in society is questioned—they find several people and execute them in public in the shortest time possible so that others may learn.

Is watching the death of several criminals really so attractive that people wake from sleep in the middle of the night or at 4 in the morning even in the rain, stand for hours to witness the death throes of several criminals, and film and photograph them?! Many even climb walls, fences, and electrical poles so as not to miss even a moment of this “documentary.”

It does not seem that in a healthy society, such an indescribable eagerness to watch execution scenes would exist. This is a question that sociologists must answer with concern and worry: What is the reason for this widespread eagerness to watch execution scenes in our society? It is not the first time that people—whether in Tehran or in smaller cities—have rushed toward execution ceremonies with such enthusiasm as if money and coins will be distributed there!

Now throughout the world, including in Iran, it is customary that if a film contains scenes of violence, families are warned at the beginning that this content is not suitable for people under 13 or 16 years old, because watching violent scenes has many negative psychological effects on children and adolescents and can result in making them fearful or, conversely, violent. When such precautions exist regarding films, by extension, these considerations should seriously be applied to live, real scenes as well. What does it really mean when a father brings his 5-year-old daughter or teenage son to an execution ceremony and buys them ice cream from street vendors along the way, forcing them to watch the painful moments of the death throes of the executed hanging from the gallows?!

If some executions are to be carried out in public due to certain interests, families should be warned about the psychological consequences of such scenes being witnessed by children and adolescents.

Furthermore, if parents bring their children to such ceremonies out of ignorance or neglect of duty, the police should be obliged to remove them from the place of execution, since these children have committed no crime for which they should suffer the torture of watching scenes of death, and remain burdened with these scenes—which they will not forget—for the rest of their lives.

It is true that these individuals are certainly and undoubtedly criminals and had innocent victims, but from a deeper perspective, they themselves are also victims (though this does not mean portraying these perpetrators as wronged and the discussion goes beyond several specific individuals). In every society, there are always individuals who, despite having material and spiritual resources, commit crimes, and therefore, the existence of thieves who have financial means or violent perpetrators who have spouses is not far-fetched. But beyond this non-universal reality, what is universal is that a large portion of criminals are unconscious products of society and its deficiencies.

However, punishment does not only mean eliminating and penalizing the criminal, but also reducing the likelihood of crime in the future. Punishing a criminal has positive effects on other members of society who have not committed crimes. One of these effects is the distinction between criminal and non-criminal, which increases social solidarity. But the essential effect of punishment is in the fear that punishing one person creates in others. When a person knows or hears that society is serious about protecting its norms and rules and severely punishes violations, they hesitate and reflect on wrongdoing. This is the deterrent function of punishment.

In the past, due to the lack of archival audio and visual means, the memory of crime and punishment remained only in people’s minds and collective memory. For this reason, with the properties of the human mind, unpleasant parts of it were erased from people’s memory. But today, with archival means available, one can record the death scenes of an executed person and watch and broadcast them repeatedly, and therefore the public opinion is constantly susceptible to agitation.

Why should criminals pay so cruelly for frightening others who have not yet committed any crime? If killing people is considered a heinous and ugly act, why does the Islamic Republic encourage people to watch this government killing? This directly promotes violence and barbarism, and our children will inevitably hear about these executions, except in cases where children are direct witnesses to these scenes due to their families’ ignorance.

Has the deterrent factor of crime through executing criminals been proven? Has Iran’s first-rank execution rate in the Middle East had any effect on ensuring security and reducing crime? And if public execution were to have a deterrent property, there should be no murderers or rapists in the country by now.

In developed countries, these matters are discussed with consultants and psychologists, and they are even allowed to address these issues in the media from a scientific perspective, while unfortunately this space does not exist in Iran.

Moreover, the families of victims are also in a sense complicit in the murder. And instead of one murder, two murders occur. Do these anti-value laws themselves not turn murder and killing into a normal affair in a society? For people who have constantly faced severe cultural and political suppression, prevention of any joy and recreation, and blocking of various paths through which people (and especially youth) should find their vitality and enthusiasm for life, what lesson are they supposed to learn?

Where can logic really be found in this act? Are our people worthy of such Islamic laws that stem from barbarism? Has the time not come to deal with the phenomenon of crime in a more civilized manner?

Research shows that this not only fails to deter crime and provide moral lessons, but ultimately increases the tendency toward aggression. Watching executions strengthens the spirit of cruelty and vengeance; therefore, what authorities seek through public execution—which is reducing crime—is not achieved. Although those who issue such sentences are authorities in judgment and have legal standing, unfortunately they lack a psychological perspective on this matter.

Public execution may create fear of crime for the observer at that moment, but a person witnessing such scenes is encouraged that if they commit a crime, they can proceed with their wrongdoing through concealment.

We live in an era when research and investigation form the basis of management and decision-making in developed societies. Perhaps in past periods when societies did not have today’s complexity and scale, such measures would work, but today problems like poverty and unemployment, which instill a sense of misery in society, justify death even in public for the criminal. A person who has lost everything in life is not afraid of death.

What should be considered not only in reducing crime but in reducing all harms is preventive measures. Every country that has succeeded in prevention has also succeeded in reducing crime. Unfortunately, public execution has not been able to serve as a moral lesson for criminals because most individuals who commit severe crimes have nothing to lose. If instead of these measures we pay more attention to prevention, we can first return individuals who have not yet committed serious crimes to normal life.

Attending such ceremonies cannot be honorable. Most people who attend execution scenes are either seeking adventure or have low levels of information. Instead of seeking moral lessons from public executions, it would be better to analyze how a young prisoner, and especially one with a minor crime, becomes a murderer after leaving prison.

In the glorious name of our Lord Jesus Christ, we pray that He grant strength and blessing to the thoughts and perspectives of Iran and Iranians so that through recognizing Jesus Christ and faith in His salvation, they may be freed from pain and suffering.