Should Europe Reconsider the Death Penalty? A Controversial Crossroads
Author: Sofia Pantazi, July 29, 2025 | Source: Anonymous
The death penalty has long been a red line in Europe: A mark of modern civilisation’s commitment to human rights and dignity. All EU member states have abolished it, and international treaties like the European Convention on Human Rights prohibit its use. Yet, as societies grapple with rising extremism, terrorism, and increasingly brutal crimes, some voices are beginning to question whether this absolute stance should be revisited. So, let’s put this complex, yet interesting subject on the table.
AI-Generated Picture, 2025. Photo: ChatGPT
The “No” Perspective: A Human Rights Bedrock
Europe’s opposition to capital punishment is deeply rooted in the post-WWII human rights framework. To many, abolishing the death penalty was not just a legal reform, but a moral and philosophical break from a past of authoritarianism, injustice, and state violence. While it still very much exists United States, Japan, and India, Europe shares a different standard.
Key arguments we gathered from individuals who are against the death penalty:
Right to life and human dignity: The death penalty is viewed as a violation of the most basic human right: life itself. Modern European identity is built on this principle.
Irreversibility and wrongful convictions: No justice system is infallible. A wrongful execution is a failure that cannot be corrected.
Lack of deterrent effect: Numerous studies have shown no conclusive evidence that the death penalty prevents crime more effectively than life imprisonment.
Moral authority: By renouncing the death penalty, Europe presents itself as a global advocate for humane justice, putting pressure on authoritarian regimes that still use capital punishment.
The “Yes” Perspective: Justice and National Security
While the moral opposition is strong, some argue that extraordinary crimes require extraordinary justice. In the face of terrorism, mass shootings, rape and brutal child murders, public outrage often leads to calls for capital punishment, not out of vengeance, but out of a perceived need for proportional justice and public safety.
Key arguments we gathered from individuals who stand for reconsideration of the death penalty in Europe:
Justice for the worst crimes: Some acts are so extreme, mass murder, genocide, terrorism, that life imprisonment feels insufficient. Death, in these rare cases, is seen as the only proportionate response.
Public sentiment: In countries like Hungary, Poland, and parts of France and Italy, polls consistently show majority support for the death penalty in specific contexts. Ignoring that sentiment can alienate citizens from the political system.
National security concerns: Imprisoned terrorists may still influence radical networks from behind bars or become targets for hostage negotiations. Execution eliminates that risk.
Moral clarity: For supporters, capital punishment in rare cases isn’t barbarism, it’s accountability, reinforcing a society’s refusal to tolerate inhuman acts.
Other democracies still use it: Nations like the United States, Japan, and India, all democracies, retain the death penalty for certain crimes. Abolition is not a universal standard.
Conclusion: Time for a Serious Conversation
Europe’s historical rejection of the death penalty is a proud marker of its dedication to human rights. But rights must also protect the innocent, and justice must serve not only ideals but the real, lived fears of European citizens. As penalties in Europe are already considered way too “soft” and short by many and prisons have ended up looking like “Jet2 Holiday” resorts, based on our research most would argue the following: Either stricter penalties and reformation of the entire justice system or implementing the death penalty in the most extreme cases.
As terrorism, organized crime, and public distrust in justice systems rise, it may no longer be enough to declare the death penalty “unthinkable.” A narrow, carefully controlled reconsideration, particularly for extreme crimes against the public, could reflect a more responsive, grounded justice system.
This doesn’t mean a broad return to capital punishment, but it does mean taking public concerns seriously, recognizing the limits of current penalties, and reopening the debate with honesty and courage.
In a democracy, no principle should be so sacred that it cannot be questioned,especially when innocent lives are on the line.
