INTRODUCTION

The most dreaded method of meting out punishment to criminals is capital punishment.
Globally, critics have been engaging in stern debate for decades on the issue of capital punishment. Some people are in firm support while some are questioning the credibility of the practice.
Proponents are of the opinion that the society is expected to hinge its moral codes on justice. In light of this, death penalty should be administered to a criminal when it is mandatory. Fein believes that “… communities would plunge into anarchy if they could not act on moral assumptions...” (Bruce Fein, pp 5).
However, critics opposed the notion by saying that capital punishment is biased and discriminatory. It places preference on the convicts based on their social classes. 'Those who receive the penalty still tend to be poor, poorly educated...' (Mary Meehan: 10 reasons to oppose the death penalty, pp 3).
Can we then affirm confidently that the purpose for capital punishment has been fairly expressed? We may not have the right answer yet but a fact stands out from the two opposing stands; the inconsistency in the law of capital punishment is the major demerit that mars the pure motives of its creators.
Based on this notion, three reasons prove this opinion right and they are picked from the premises of the heated debate on death penalty. One is the morality premise which, on one hand, is justifiable for reducing crime rate but on the other hand, gives room for inequality. Secondly, retribution which is based on the principles of revenge and thirdly, deterrence, which holds that death penalty should deter offenders from crimes.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

Capital punishment is mainly based on justice but there are loopholes in this viewpoint. Justice. Antonin Scalia in Miller v. Alabama stated that, 'Well, I thought that modern penology has abandoned that rehabilitation thing...and punishment is the criteria now..." ( Scalia in Mike Materni: Criminal punishment and the pursuit of Justice, pp 264).
From the foregoing, we can deduce that the foundation of justice in this context is shaky because capital punishment has overlooked the option of rehabilitation for offenders but rather has condemned them to the grave without second chance. Rehabilitation is a reformative program created for offenders to change their mindset about crimes and prevent later offenses. Reform centers are designed to help criminals deviate from their lawless lifestyles, making them better citizens of a country. According to Materni (2013), rehabilitation is meant to recuperate the criminal and sent back as a reproductive citizen (Mike Materni: Criminal punishment and the pursuit of Justice, pp 291).
But we need to look at the definitions and a brief history of capital punishment before we go any further.

DEFINITION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

Capital punishment otherwise known as death penalty, is a severe legal means of killing an offender. It is acceptable under the law of many countries of the world.
Another definition referred to it as a lawful infliction of death as a punishment. A sentence of death may be carried out by one of five lawful means: electrocution, hanging, lethal injection, gas chamber, and firing squad. It is usually only used as a punishment for particularly serious types of murder, but in some countries, treason, types of fraud, adultery and rape are capital crimes.
However, different scholars and legal organizations have come up with various definitions for the term. Two of them are briefly examined below.

Encyclopedia Britannica
In the 2008 6th edition of The Columbia Encyclopedia titled "Capital Punishment," , it was stated thus;
"Capital punishment: Imposition of a penalty of death by the state. ( Encyclopedia Britannica, 2008).
Columbia encyclopaedia (6th edition)
The Catholic Encyclopedia, a compilation of Catholic teachings and definitions originally which was published in 1907, had an interesting approach to the definition of capital punishment. In an entry titled "Capital Punishment," it was stated;
“The infliction by due legal process of the penalty of death as a punishment for crime." It also stated that Latins use the word capitalis (from caput, head) to describe that which related to life, that by which life is endangered.
From the above postulations, it is agreed that capital punishment is the practice that involves putting an end to one`s life after a fair legal trial. It should be noted that it can only be performed by a state legal system, other non-state organizations who engage in such acts without government approval actually committed a murder.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

The phrase 'capital punishment' comes from the Latin word 'capitalis' for the head. A 'corporal' punishment, such as flogging, takes its name from the Latin word for the body. Capital punishment was widely applied in ancient times.
Death penalty laws was first enacted a long time ago in the Eighteenth Century B.C. and established in the Code of King Hammaurabi of Babylon, where it was clearly stated that 25 different crimes were punishable by law. This law was also among the Fourteenth Century B.C.'s Hittite Code; in the Seventh Century B.C.'s Draconian Code of Athens, which vested the law with death as the only punishment for all crimes. This was in the Fifth Century B.C.'s Roman Law of the Twelve Tablets. Examples of executions were quartering, drowning, burning, etc.
In the Tenth Century A.D, Britain adopted hanging as the most popular method of execution and in the following century, William the Conqueror abolished capital punishment by hanging or other similar means, except during wars. However, the norms changed in the Sixteenth Century when Henry VIII was ruling, an estimated 72,000 people were executed.
Offenses such as intermarriage with a Jew, not confessing to a crime and treason were dealt with through execution.
However, the rate of capital crimes in Britain continued to soar throughout the next two hundred years. By the 1700s, crimes amounting to 222 were constitutionally punishable by death in Britain, ranging from stealing, cutting down a tree, and stealing a rabbit warren. Many judges refused to convict defendants as long as the crimes they were accused of were trivial. This was due to the seriousness of the death penalty. This led to reforms of Britain's death penalty. From 1823 to 1837, the death penalty was eliminated for over 100 of the 222 crimes punishable by death.' (Randa:1997).
Capital punishment was later imported to The United States from Britain. The first death penalty to be demonstrated in the US was done in Virginia in 1608, where George Kendall was executed after being accused of spying for Spain.
But a contingent of colonial anti-death penalty activists had its first major legislative victory soon after America was founded. In 1794, Pennsylvania outlawed capital punishment for cases other than first-degree murder. It has been inflicted principally for murder and rape in the last 200 years and there have been over 15,600 executions since 1608 mostly by hanging, up to 1900.
As of October 2014, 32 states had the death penalty. The death penalty is also available for Federal and Military crimes. 18 states, plus the district of Columbia, have no capital punishment status. In March 2013, Maryland became the latest (18th state) to abolish the death penalty, subsequent to Connecticut's abolition of the law in 2012 and New Mexico in 2009.
Additionally, Angola, Italy, Philippines, Ireland, Rwanda and Burundi are other countries that had abolished death penalty laws, while Chad, Jordan, Korea, Barbados, Indonesia, Nigeria and Saudi-Arabia are some of the countries that have retained the law of capital punishment.
It is worthy of note the many Americans support capital punishment. According to Gallop, a poll in October 2014 showed that about 60% of American citizens are in support and latest polls conducted in Pew Research Center implied that 55% now align with the law, a significant decline from 1996 poll which was 78%.
Now we will go back to the premises of capital punishment that make the law unfair.

MORALITY

Grave crimes such as rape, torture, treason, kidnapping, murder and stealing should be terminated by eliminating the criminals.
But as morally right as it seems, this unhealthy factor in the legal systems is conspicuously immoral and needs to be addressed in order to enact equality. There are numerous errors in morality viewpoint because of many factors which has segregation on the top of the list.
Racial and financial discriminations abound in the law. The result of one study published in 1980 by Crime & Delinquency revealed that black people in Florida who committed murder were sentenced to death when they kill whites but fewer whites who kill blacks were given the same sanction (Mary Meehan:1982).
Apart from this, no one has the moral right to kill others, regardless of the reason. Leszek Syski, a Maryland base activist said that asking if murderers deserve to die is wrong. "The real question is whether other humans have a right to kill them." Mr. Syski also added.
"Torture is dehumanizing, but capital punishment is the essence of dehumanization." (Leszek Syski in Mary Meehan, 10 reasons to oppose the death penalty" America Magazine, pp 21).
There are many who are unjustly convicted and sentenced to without being to prove their innocence.

DETERRENCE

Convicts naturally are more frightened with the prospects of being executed than getting sentenced into life imprisonment. This assertion was further buttressed by Haag (1983) “Therefore, nothing will deter a criminal more than the fear of death... life in prison is less feared. Murderers clearly prefer it to execution.“ Therefore, death penalty helps to relieve the society from countless criminals who will be deterred at the word ’DEATH’.
Defence for deterrence was further stamped by a 1970 economist by the name Isaac Ehrlich who reported that about 8 homicides were avoided between 1933 to 1969 due to the effect of deterrent judgements (Michael L. Radelet and Ronald L Akers, Deterrence and the death penalty: The views of experts, pp 3 vol 87).
But this claim with its corresponding evidences that deterrence reduce crime rate in the society is mere fallacy and has little or no basis.. Most retentionist countries still have high records of crimes in spite of deterrence. Research has shown that, from Michael Radelet and Ronald's report, some politicians use some aspects of this basis as appeal method to get votes from the citizens.

RETRIBUTION

As the saying goes, do unto others what you want to be done unto you, it is imperative to mete out punishments to offenders with the same degree of offense. Moreover, retribution is not base on personal grudge (like a revenge) but legal specifications. Robert Nosick (1981) ascertained this point by saying that 'revenge' is personal while retribution is impersonal so it can be considered as 'impartial' (Robert Nosick, philosophical explanations, pp 366).
But proponents don't seem to realize that there is a thin line between revenge and retribution. Capital punishment on the grounds of retribution encourages the continuation of hatred and murder between the offender and the avenger, thus creating an environment of bloodshed. In this case, revenge does not end the pain of the avenger, rather it aggravates it. (Schroth, 2008).

CONCLUSION

The legal systems of the world have designed numerous forms of punishments for different crimes, and the most dreaded one is Capital punishment. Capital punishment is an age-long practice which has come to stay, in spite of strong opposition coming from various critics.
Nevertheless, there are no credible evidence that shows the 100% omnipotence of the law. Errors and irregularities have been recorded in many instances. A large number of innocent persons have been condemned to die for a crime they knew nothing about.
Opponents of the law are clamouring for the total overhaul of capital punishment. There is need for it to be reviewed and if possible, removed totally from constitutions.
All stake holders concerned in the legal fields should come together to deliberate on the modification of death penalty law. Clauses should be strictly examined and harmful parts should be eliminated.
Each country of the world knows the type of law enforcement acts that is best for its people, therefore accuracy should be their watchword. The autonomy enjoyed by each country that either abolished the law or retained it should be maintained, nevertheless, fairness and transparency must be applied when it is about to be enacted. Sentiments and marginalisation should be avoided. Anyone found guilty must face the wrath of the law, regardless of social status, race or background.
Finally, people should try as much as possible to steer clear of crimes. In the words of Plato, “ He who commits crime is ever made more wretched than he who suffers it”. There can be no replacement with peace in the world.

REFERENCES

“Abolitionist and Retentionist Countries” (2016) www.deathpenaltyinfo.com
American Civil Liberties Union, (2007). “The Death Penalties: Questions and Answers”.
Budziszewski, J. (2004). “ Capital Punishment: The Case for Justice”.
Bohm, R. (1999) “Deathquest: An Introduction To The Theory and Practice of Capital Punishment in The US” Anderson Publishing.
Collin D.(2015). “ American Execution: A Brief History of The Death Penalty in the US” www.mashable.com
Demleitner, (2014). “Types of punishments” In Marks, D.D .and Tatjuma Hornle (eds) Oxford Handbooks of Criminal law.
Dudley, S. (1997). “Death Penalty and Sentencing Information”.
Dieter, R.C. (2007). “House Bill 1064- Costs of Death Penalty and Related Issues”.
Feingold, R. (2000) “ National Death Penalty Moratorium.
Fein, B. (2008). “Individual Rights and Responsibility”
Haag, D.V. (1983). “For the Death Penalty”.
Nora, V. (2014). “Types of Punishments” Oxford Handbooks of Scholars Research Reviews.
Randa, L. (1997) “Society`s Final Solution: A History and Discussion of Death Penalty” University Press of America.
Stevenson, B. (2004) “Close to Death: Reflections on Race and Capital Punishment in America”
“Top 10 Pros and Cons-Death Penalty” (2009) www.deaqthpenalty.procon.org
Michael L. Radelet and Ronald L Akers, Deterrence and the death penalty: The views of experts, pp 3 vol 87).
Meehan M. (1982) "10 reasons to oppose the death penalty" America Magazine, pp 3.
Materni C.M. (2013), "Criminal Punishment And The Pursuit of Justice", published by 2 B J.
Radelet M.L.and Ronald L. Akers (1996) "Deterrence and the death penalty" The views of experts, pp 3 vol 87
https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/1982/11/20/10-reasons-oppose-death-penalty
Alexandra R.and John W. (2015). "The research on capital punishment: Recent scholarship and unresolved questions" Journalist Resource research topic Journal, pp 1 Vol 1.
Capital Punishment. The Catholic Encyclopedia.Procon.org 1907
Capital Punishment. The Columbia Encyclopedia.Procon.org 6th edition