The debate on death penalty and the tought of Cesare Beccaria

The modern conception of natural and positive right, which takes precedence over those of the divine right, once again sheds a different light on the issue of penalty, and as such the death penalty. The legitimacy of the death penalty is reinforced for reasons that are mainly utilitarian (to protect and safeguard civil harmony); but on the other hand the first dissenting voices start speaking up and as such the debate around the subject commences. The real turning point came about in 1764 with the publication of the book by Cesare Beccaria, “Crimes and Punishment”, which argued the ineffectiveness of the death penalty as a means of crime prevention while highlighting the possible miscarriage of justice. Beccaria affirms that if the intention of the penalty is to “prevent the offender from doing any further damage and dismiss others from doing so as well”, then it is preferable to impose less cruel penalties, albeit intense and prolonged over time. Throughout the entire nineteenth century, there is a constant fiery debate that is enriched by the stance of the abolitionists with their socialistic mindset and that of the individualist-anarchist. Even to this day the debate is cyclically sparked, particularly in conjunction with heinous crimes and key intentions during electoral campaigns.