Victim-Perpetrator Reconciliation Agreements in Murder Cases: What Can Muslim-Majority Jurisdictions and the PRC Learn from Each Other?

Daniel Pascoe, Michelle Miao
{"title":"Victim-Perpetrator Reconciliation Agreements in Murder Cases: What Can Muslim-Majority Jurisdictions and the PRC Learn from Each Other?","authors":"Daniel Pascoe, Michelle Miao","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2919163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As 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 thirteen 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.","PeriodicalId":172026,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Comparative Law (Topic)","volume":"117 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Comparative Law (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2919163","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As 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 thirteen 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.
谋杀案件中的受害者-犯罪者和解协议:穆斯林占多数的司法管辖区和中国可以相互学习什么?
在一个越来越倾向于废除死刑的世界上,作为自由使用死刑的国家,严格拥护伊斯兰法律的穆斯林占多数的司法管辖区和中华人民共和国有一个重要的共同点:它们经常使用受害者-犯罪者和解协议,以消除被定罪的杀人犯被处决的威胁。在这两种情况下,罪犯逃避死刑的最后机会不是诉诸行政宽恕,受害者-犯罪者和解协议在很大程度上实现了相同的目的,同时提供了赔偿受害者经济损失的手段,并使有关国家能够减少处决人数,而无需在法律上正式限制死刑的范围。本文运用比较法的功能主义方法,将13个保留死刑并将伊斯兰教法原则纳入其实在法的国家与中华人民共和国就死刑案件中受害者-犯罪者和解协议的基本功能进行了比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信