English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

remission by the governor?( iam not sure if remission is the right word, i mean that the governor can decide or not if the sentence will be executed)

2006-09-10 07:04:40 · 6 answers · asked by girl24gr 3 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

6 answers

i think in some case it fair and so not

2006-09-10 07:10:36 · answer #1 · answered by jls10 3 · 0 0

When an issue becomes a hot political issue than sometimes but rarely the Governor will grant clemency. Its rarly done in the case of death sentences but sometimes facts arise after the sentence and before the execution which can only be hastened by action from the Governor. Its all part of the legal system of checks and balances and for the most part it works.

2006-09-10 14:09:30 · answer #2 · answered by Capt 5 · 0 0

executive pardons create problems with the doctrine of the seperation of powers. The executive is using the power of the judiciary, and this can undermine the judiciary's validity and also erode public faith in the courts.

That said, the death penalty is pretty extreme, so an occasional pardon in suitable cases may be ok. Whether it's fair or not depends on the individual case. But if it happens all the time, it's a problem.

2006-09-10 20:26:04 · answer #3 · answered by dave_eee 3 · 0 0

In most cases clemency is fair, I agree. The circumstances under which it isn't are usually fairly obvious, because the only reason that clemency is granted, other than additional evidence or the discovery of flaws in the original evidence, is for political gain.

If the case or the death penalty in general pose a heated debate, and becoming involved could bring him a key vote in the right demographic, an average politician would throw as much of his weight around as he was able to within his position.

2006-09-10 14:27:50 · answer #4 · answered by Em 5 · 0 0

It is perfectly fair for the possibility of pardon to exist, considering that justice is not always perfectly served by strict application of the law, and it is perfectly consistent with democratic principles to place that extraordinary authority in the hands of an individual who was elected to the position and who will be liable to voters for using the power in a way that is deemed unacceptable. Moreover, the pardon power is in many jurisdictions checked by the existence of panels (legislative, judicial, or a combination) that have the authority to overturn pardons and reinstate court-imposed sentences. If you have a problem with a specific use of the power, you can try to get the misuser put out of office, but to try to wring the flexibility out of the system would be irresponsible and short-sighted.

2006-09-10 16:32:07 · answer #5 · answered by BoredBookworm 5 · 1 0

certainly, the governor has ultimate authority over everything going on in his state. you mean to be pardoned

2006-09-10 14:22:18 · answer #6 · answered by C_Millionaire 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers