This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/09/whole-life-sentences-death-penalty

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Whole-life sentences are preferable to the hangman's noose Whole-life sentences are preferable to the hangman's noose
(2 months later)
The timing is impeccable. Less than 24 hours after the home secretary signalled that the Conservatives are highly likely to fight the next general election with a promise to withdraw from the European convention on human rights, the European court of human rights in Strasbourg has come up with another decision that Theresa May is sure to denounce in the same terms she used to describe the long-running legal wrangles over Abu Qatada: she'll call it crazy.The timing is impeccable. Less than 24 hours after the home secretary signalled that the Conservatives are highly likely to fight the next general election with a promise to withdraw from the European convention on human rights, the European court of human rights in Strasbourg has come up with another decision that Theresa May is sure to denounce in the same terms she used to describe the long-running legal wrangles over Abu Qatada: she'll call it crazy.
This time it relates to a case brought by three convicted killers, who argued that their "whole life" sentences – with no hope of parole – represented "inhuman and degrading" punishment. The court has now backed that claim, ruling that for a life sentence to remain compatible with the convention, there has to be both a possibility of release and a possibility of review.This time it relates to a case brought by three convicted killers, who argued that their "whole life" sentences – with no hope of parole – represented "inhuman and degrading" punishment. The court has now backed that claim, ruling that for a life sentence to remain compatible with the convention, there has to be both a possibility of release and a possibility of review.
The Strasbourg verdict will be in line with the sensibilities of most good liberals. In this view, it's wrong to write off forever the hope of rehabilitation: prison must never be solely about punishment or revenge but must hold out the prospect that even someone guilty of the most heinous crimes might eventually change.The Strasbourg verdict will be in line with the sensibilities of most good liberals. In this view, it's wrong to write off forever the hope of rehabilitation: prison must never be solely about punishment or revenge but must hold out the prospect that even someone guilty of the most heinous crimes might eventually change.
But liberals should hesitate. They should start with the stubborn fact that opinion polls show a majority still support the death penalty for the most serious offences, decades after its abolition. Parliament repeatedly thwarts that public demand by offering an alternative, reassuring voters that – for the wickedest crimes – life will mean life. Indeed, this was the unspoken bargain that underpinned the abolition of capital punishment: "We will no longer kill killers. We will do something more civilised, depriving them not of life but of liberty."But liberals should hesitate. They should start with the stubborn fact that opinion polls show a majority still support the death penalty for the most serious offences, decades after its abolition. Parliament repeatedly thwarts that public demand by offering an alternative, reassuring voters that – for the wickedest crimes – life will mean life. Indeed, this was the unspoken bargain that underpinned the abolition of capital punishment: "We will no longer kill killers. We will do something more civilised, depriving them not of life but of liberty."
Liberals might shy away from this truth, but to that majority who would bring back the hangman's rope, a whole-life tariff is not "inhuman" punishment but the more moderate alternative. They believe that a life behind bars for the likes of Mark Bridger, who murdered the five-year-old schoolgirl April Jones, is already a concession.Liberals might shy away from this truth, but to that majority who would bring back the hangman's rope, a whole-life tariff is not "inhuman" punishment but the more moderate alternative. They believe that a life behind bars for the likes of Mark Bridger, who murdered the five-year-old schoolgirl April Jones, is already a concession.
Those of us who wish to see no return to the death penalty should stick to our side of that tacit bargain: those who perform acts of unspeakable evil should face a punishment that fits the crime. Not death, but a life without freedom.Those of us who wish to see no return to the death penalty should stick to our side of that tacit bargain: those who perform acts of unspeakable evil should face a punishment that fits the crime. Not death, but a life without freedom.
Twitter: @freedlandTwitter: @freedland
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.