Capital Punishment and the Injustice Seen in "White Bear"

Capital punishment has been a heavily debated issue: Should the practice be abolished because of its immorality and injustice, or is it a justifiable means of punishing criminals? In practice, crimes such as murder, treason, espionage, terrorism, or large-scale drug trafficking can be punishable by death in the United States. While not exactly "eye for an eye" justice, capital punishment can be comparable to eye for an eye because the one who committed the crime is being dealt a punishment that is the same or similar in severity to the crime. Murder is the simplest example, where one who kills is killed--a punishment that is the same as the crime. So, is capital punishment justifiable? I look to the Catechism of the Catholic Church for an answer.

According to the CCC, capital punishment is typically condemned in most cases because it does not acknowledge the God-given dignity that all humans have (in addition to the obvious conflicts with the Fifth Commandment). However, the CCC states that execution is allowed if two criteria are met. 1.) The public must have "full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender" and 2.) no other "practical way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor" is available (CCC 2267). In other words, the public must know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the person in question did in fact commit the crime he or she is accused of, and there must be no other way to protect the public from the criminal. If those conditions are met, then according to the CCC, the death penalty can be issued.

In the society we live in today, such a case where the death penalty would be justified would likely never arise. First, there have been a surprisingly (even alarmingly) high number of people sentenced to death row that have been later found innocent. This proves that the United States' justice system makes mistakes, and that they cannot always say beyond a shadow of a doubt that a given criminal is guilty of his or her crime. Secondly, prisons do a very good job of protecting society from dangerous criminals. A person behind bars certainly can't do any harm to the public.

Let us consider the "justice" seen in the film White Bear. Victoria, the woman accused and convicted of kidnapping, torturing, and killing a child, must endure a strict eye for an eye punishment everyday for an undetermined amount of time. While she is not exactly sentenced to death, her punishment could be comparable to the death penalty because of the sheer severity of the punishment. At one point, Victoria even asks for death, implying that what she is going through is a worse punishment than execution. Even though everyone is the film knows that Victoria is guilty of her crime, it is clear that the society in which she lives in is capable of containing her and protecting the public from her. Thus, such an extreme punishment would be unjustified by the CCC. Indeed, the punishment done to Victoria in the film is not only immoral, but counterproductive. The ultimate goal of punishment should be to rehabilitate the wrongdoer, not to torture them. Once the punishment has run its course, the criminal should be able to reenter into society, and not be constantly judged or discriminated against for his or her past actions. It is clear that by keeping Victoria in a seemingly endless cycle of torture, no one really benefits.