Capital punishment in Themiclesia: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Capital punishment was once practiced in Themiclesia as a mandatory punishment for a number of political and personal crimes, but it has been abolished in 1853; as of 2018, it is no longer a penalty stipulated for any crime in Themiclesia. Its abolition was politically motivated during a period of national confusion resulting from rapid industrialization, in order to enhance the | Capital punishment was once practiced in Themiclesia as a mandatory punishment for a number of political and personal crimes, but it has been abolished in 1853; as of 2018, it is no longer a penalty stipulated for any crime in Themiclesia. Its abolition was politically motivated during a period of national confusion resulting from rapid industrialization, in order to enhance the government's reputation and national morale, by appealing to both the traditional portrayal of a utopian society and the ideals of {{wp|Enlightenment}}. Though many cautioned against it initially, few dared to oppose it openly. However, in at least one case, the [[House of Lords (Themiclesia)|House of Lords]] gave a capital sentence through the process of impeachment, last in 1948. | ||
==History== | ==History== | ||
Capital punishment has been practiced as a punishment for those committing for a wide range of offences and those who are related to said perpetrators. Such crimes include, as an incomplete enumeration:— | Capital punishment has been practiced as a punishment for those committing for a wide range of offences and those who are related to said perpetrators. Such crimes include, as an incomplete enumeration:— | ||
*Sedition ( | *Sedition (working to overthrow the government) | ||
*High treason ( | *High treason (working harm the emperor physically, the crown prince, the empress, the empress dowager, and the great empress dowager) | ||
* | *[[Lèse-majesté laws in Themiclesia|Lèse-majesté]] (insulting the emperor's body politic, desecrating his residence, ancestral mausolea and shrines, and rescripts) | ||
*Treachery (supplying valuable information, land, or people to enemies) | *Treachery (supplying valuable information, land, or people to enemies) | ||
*Murder | *Murder | ||
*Rape (including consensual sex with minors under 16) | *Rape (including consensual sex with minors under 16) | ||
*Abduction of minors | *Abduction of minors | ||
*Incursion into the | *Incursion into the palace hall of an occupied palace | ||
*Opening or closing palace gates without proper authorization | *Opening or closing palace gates without proper authorization | ||
*Raising or dispatching armies over | *Raising or dispatching armies over 50 in strength without proper authorization or adequate emergency | ||
*Taking of bribes resulting in miscarriage of justice | *Taking of bribes resulting in miscarriage of justice | ||
*Perjury on an accusation of sedition or high treason | *Perjury on an accusation of sedition or high treason | ||
| Line 19: | Line 18: | ||
*Destroying dikes without valid cause | *Destroying dikes without valid cause | ||
*Counterfeiting or clipping and debasing of coins | *Counterfeiting or clipping and debasing of coins | ||
*Counterfeiting | *Counterfeiting rescripts | ||
*Armed burglary | *Armed burglary | ||
Most other crimes not listed above are of a nature likely to lead to the destabilization of the government, either through force or misinformation. | Most other crimes not listed above are of a nature likely to lead to the destabilization of the government, either through assembly, force, or misinformation. | ||
===Gradual remittance=== | ===Gradual remittance=== | ||
The extent of capital punishment was first remitted when the [[Meng-Rjang Dynasty|Meng dynasty was restored in Themiclesia]], under Emperor Ngjon, who wanted to appear magnanimous to those who opposed him and to appeal to the populace, which was doubtful of his rule. Though unable to reform the penal code with over 1,000 capital crimes, he did insist on clothing the condemned—executions were in the nude before his reign. However, later in the dynasty heavy taxation and frequent services encouraged revolts, which were dealt with harshly; legal historians belive this resulted in an expansion of capital offences. | |||
In the late 8th century capital punishment was outlawed for minors under 10, the elderly over 80, and the disabled, in observance of {{wp|Confucianism|Confucian}} ethics and the development of the "caring state" that responded to its people's feelings. In some analyses, this was motivated by the ascension of a usurper, who appealed to Confucianism to enhance his legitimacy in contrast with his predecessor, a crafty figure. The number of capital crimes also decreased, and the practice of capital punishment by association was limited to sedition and the perpetrator's immediate family after 618. Methods of execution were standardized to decapitation and strangulation in the same year, with dismemberment deprecated. | |||
The final development occurred in the 18th | The final development occurred in the 18th century, when Casaterran concepts of humanism reached Themiclesia. It was decided at this point that both decapitation and strangulation were antiquated and brought unnecessary suffering to the victim, so the ancient prerogative of suicide, extended to civil servants and nobility, was instituted as the final method of execution before abolition. Prisoners would be unknowingly fed food or drink with a poison introduced, dying quickly and without prior warning. However, this was also done without actual legislative activity. | ||
===Abolition=== | ===Abolition=== | ||
==Methods of execution used== | ==Methods of execution used== | ||
| Line 44: | Line 40: | ||
==Procedures== | ==Procedures== | ||
===Sentencing=== | ===Sentencing=== | ||
Judicial independence developed relately late in Themiclesia, as judicial power was formally held by local magistrates appointed by the executive power. As the system of laws expanded in complexity and precedents (binding in absence of statute) | Judicial independence developed relately late in Themiclesia, as judicial power was formally held by local magistrates appointed by the executive power. As the system of laws expanded in complexity and precedents (binding in absence of statute), local magistrates, not always trained in jurisprudence, came to rely on legal officials that were qualified. The structure of such local officials was at first informal and highly personal to the magistrate, but later the court ordered standardization in the interest of expedience and uniformity of process. By the 1300s, it was customary for magistrates simply to ratify opinions presented to him by the head officer of the judicial department of the local bureaucracy, unless the magistrate was also qualified in law, or the department's involvement in some way improper or suspicious. | ||
===Review=== | ===Review=== | ||
While any court could try a capital crime, only the second-tier courts, those of the provincial level, had the authority to pass a capital sentence, and that sentence was not | While any court could try a capital crime, only the second-tier courts, those of the provincial level, had the authority to pass a capital sentence, and that sentence was not absolute without review. Under the ethical principle of restraint and in view of the irreversibility of capital punishment, the review system changed from time to time, but it showed a general trend towards more caution and safeguards to prevent injudicious judgments. After a capital sentence was passed, it was then submitted to the [[Principal Counsels#Justiciar|Justiciar]], the central judicial department. If the Justiciar is satisifed that the judgment stands under the penal code, he then submits it to the Chancellor. He then delivers it to the Council of Lords, or after 1845 the [[House of Lords (Themiclesia)|House of Lords]]. | ||
===Execution=== | ===Execution=== | ||
Some time after | Some time after 1700, executions were conducted without the prisoner's knowledge to reduce the likelihood of a rescue attempt. Though up to 1803 both strangulation and decapitation were maintained as official methods of execution, both fell into disuse. A Casaterran observer noted that "[the axe] was taller than most men, its wide blade razor-sharp, and tremendously heavy; only the an immensely strong man could lift this weapon, let along swing it accurately." Therefore, strangulation was used almost exclusively until its replacement in 1801. In this procedure, the prisoner is first sedated by opium introduced into his diet; then, a rope is fastened around his neck and twisted until tight to cause asphyxiation. The prisoner is thereafter pronounced dead. After strangulation was fell out of use, poisonous liquor, made with thousands feathers of the {{wp|hooded pitohui}} seeped into alcohol, is introduced to the prisoner's rations. After the prisoner dies, the prison notifies his family that he had died of an illness, and the family is at liberty to recover the body. | ||
==Vestiges== | ==Vestiges== | ||
As the abolition of capital punishment was | As the abolition of capital punishment was advertised as a manifestation the emperor's love for his subjects, few dared contest such a policy; however, this did not prevent parliament from sentencing individuals to death beyond the judicial system, via the process of impeachment. Under the Casaterran principle of {{wp|parliamentary sovereignty}}, this formerly-infrequent measure was imposed several tiems in the 18th and 19th centuries, and for the final time in 1948, but not on ordinary criminals by consensus. With the passing of the pre-war generation of politicians, it was gradually accepted that parliamentary sovereignty had its limits. | ||
===Case of M′rjang=== | |||
M′rjang, a Major-General, was implicated in an alleged rape case while he was in Dayashina in 1947. The alleged victim committed suicide before she was able to present evidence, but her family insisted that she had been sexually assaulted by the implicated officer and committed suicide out of shame. There was no inquest into the death due to the degraded Dayashinese administration in consequence of the war, and an internal inquiry later exonerated him of the charge. The story then circulated, finding particular resonance as an example of the Allies' recklessness and lack of consideration during the occupation. M′rjang was impeached by the [[House of Commons (Themiclesia)|House of Commons]] on May 6, 1948 after the Secretary of State for War told the house that a "thorough inquiry was able to recover no evidence of wrongdoing of that nature." The House of Lords unexpectedly sentenced him to death on Jun. 22, after several peers alleged M′rjang's low regard for the [[Peerage of Themiclesia|aristocracy]]; the house further attainted (confiscated) his estate and deprived him of all dignities and emoluments, as well as forbidding his heirs from inheriting. While the House of Commons convened almost immediately to discuss a reprieve through the Government, M′rjang was not so informed and found to have committed suicide by hanging himself in Dayashina. In his will, he described his death to have occurred "purely for the defence of the reputation of the country, not in respect of any crime committed." The judgment shocked the nation and sparked discussion about the future role of the House of Lords in the judicial system. | |||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
Revision as of 18:40, 13 January 2020
Capital punishment was once practiced in Themiclesia as a mandatory punishment for a number of political and personal crimes, but it has been abolished in 1853; as of 2018, it is no longer a penalty stipulated for any crime in Themiclesia. Its abolition was politically motivated during a period of national confusion resulting from rapid industrialization, in order to enhance the government's reputation and national morale, by appealing to both the traditional portrayal of a utopian society and the ideals of Enlightenment. Though many cautioned against it initially, few dared to oppose it openly. However, in at least one case, the House of Lords gave a capital sentence through the process of impeachment, last in 1948.
History
Capital punishment has been practiced as a punishment for those committing for a wide range of offences and those who are related to said perpetrators. Such crimes include, as an incomplete enumeration:—
- Sedition (working to overthrow the government)
- High treason (working harm the emperor physically, the crown prince, the empress, the empress dowager, and the great empress dowager)
- Lèse-majesté (insulting the emperor's body politic, desecrating his residence, ancestral mausolea and shrines, and rescripts)
- Treachery (supplying valuable information, land, or people to enemies)
- Murder
- Rape (including consensual sex with minors under 16)
- Abduction of minors
- Incursion into the palace hall of an occupied palace
- Opening or closing palace gates without proper authorization
- Raising or dispatching armies over 50 in strength without proper authorization or adequate emergency
- Taking of bribes resulting in miscarriage of justice
- Perjury on an accusation of sedition or high treason
- Setting fire to a house currently inhabited
- Destroying dikes without valid cause
- Counterfeiting or clipping and debasing of coins
- Counterfeiting rescripts
- Armed burglary
Most other crimes not listed above are of a nature likely to lead to the destabilization of the government, either through assembly, force, or misinformation.
Gradual remittance
The extent of capital punishment was first remitted when the Meng dynasty was restored in Themiclesia, under Emperor Ngjon, who wanted to appear magnanimous to those who opposed him and to appeal to the populace, which was doubtful of his rule. Though unable to reform the penal code with over 1,000 capital crimes, he did insist on clothing the condemned—executions were in the nude before his reign. However, later in the dynasty heavy taxation and frequent services encouraged revolts, which were dealt with harshly; legal historians belive this resulted in an expansion of capital offences.
In the late 8th century capital punishment was outlawed for minors under 10, the elderly over 80, and the disabled, in observance of Confucian ethics and the development of the "caring state" that responded to its people's feelings. In some analyses, this was motivated by the ascension of a usurper, who appealed to Confucianism to enhance his legitimacy in contrast with his predecessor, a crafty figure. The number of capital crimes also decreased, and the practice of capital punishment by association was limited to sedition and the perpetrator's immediate family after 618. Methods of execution were standardized to decapitation and strangulation in the same year, with dismemberment deprecated.
The final development occurred in the 18th century, when Casaterran concepts of humanism reached Themiclesia. It was decided at this point that both decapitation and strangulation were antiquated and brought unnecessary suffering to the victim, so the ancient prerogative of suicide, extended to civil servants and nobility, was instituted as the final method of execution before abolition. Prisoners would be unknowingly fed food or drink with a poison introduced, dying quickly and without prior warning. However, this was also done without actual legislative activity.
Abolition
Methods of execution used
- Dismemberment (磔, trak): amputation of the arms, legs, nose, and ears, castration, bisection at naval, evisceration, flogged, then decapitation and mincing of the corpse
- Decapitation (要斬, ′jaw-tsram′): split down the waist
- Decapitation (梟首, k′êw-l′ju′)
- Strangulation (棄市, k′jêi-dje′)
Procedures
Sentencing
Judicial independence developed relately late in Themiclesia, as judicial power was formally held by local magistrates appointed by the executive power. As the system of laws expanded in complexity and precedents (binding in absence of statute), local magistrates, not always trained in jurisprudence, came to rely on legal officials that were qualified. The structure of such local officials was at first informal and highly personal to the magistrate, but later the court ordered standardization in the interest of expedience and uniformity of process. By the 1300s, it was customary for magistrates simply to ratify opinions presented to him by the head officer of the judicial department of the local bureaucracy, unless the magistrate was also qualified in law, or the department's involvement in some way improper or suspicious.
Review
While any court could try a capital crime, only the second-tier courts, those of the provincial level, had the authority to pass a capital sentence, and that sentence was not absolute without review. Under the ethical principle of restraint and in view of the irreversibility of capital punishment, the review system changed from time to time, but it showed a general trend towards more caution and safeguards to prevent injudicious judgments. After a capital sentence was passed, it was then submitted to the Justiciar, the central judicial department. If the Justiciar is satisifed that the judgment stands under the penal code, he then submits it to the Chancellor. He then delivers it to the Council of Lords, or after 1845 the House of Lords.
Execution
Some time after 1700, executions were conducted without the prisoner's knowledge to reduce the likelihood of a rescue attempt. Though up to 1803 both strangulation and decapitation were maintained as official methods of execution, both fell into disuse. A Casaterran observer noted that "[the axe] was taller than most men, its wide blade razor-sharp, and tremendously heavy; only the an immensely strong man could lift this weapon, let along swing it accurately." Therefore, strangulation was used almost exclusively until its replacement in 1801. In this procedure, the prisoner is first sedated by opium introduced into his diet; then, a rope is fastened around his neck and twisted until tight to cause asphyxiation. The prisoner is thereafter pronounced dead. After strangulation was fell out of use, poisonous liquor, made with thousands feathers of the hooded pitohui seeped into alcohol, is introduced to the prisoner's rations. After the prisoner dies, the prison notifies his family that he had died of an illness, and the family is at liberty to recover the body.
Vestiges
As the abolition of capital punishment was advertised as a manifestation the emperor's love for his subjects, few dared contest such a policy; however, this did not prevent parliament from sentencing individuals to death beyond the judicial system, via the process of impeachment. Under the Casaterran principle of parliamentary sovereignty, this formerly-infrequent measure was imposed several tiems in the 18th and 19th centuries, and for the final time in 1948, but not on ordinary criminals by consensus. With the passing of the pre-war generation of politicians, it was gradually accepted that parliamentary sovereignty had its limits.
Case of M′rjang
M′rjang, a Major-General, was implicated in an alleged rape case while he was in Dayashina in 1947. The alleged victim committed suicide before she was able to present evidence, but her family insisted that she had been sexually assaulted by the implicated officer and committed suicide out of shame. There was no inquest into the death due to the degraded Dayashinese administration in consequence of the war, and an internal inquiry later exonerated him of the charge. The story then circulated, finding particular resonance as an example of the Allies' recklessness and lack of consideration during the occupation. M′rjang was impeached by the House of Commons on May 6, 1948 after the Secretary of State for War told the house that a "thorough inquiry was able to recover no evidence of wrongdoing of that nature." The House of Lords unexpectedly sentenced him to death on Jun. 22, after several peers alleged M′rjang's low regard for the aristocracy; the house further attainted (confiscated) his estate and deprived him of all dignities and emoluments, as well as forbidding his heirs from inheriting. While the House of Commons convened almost immediately to discuss a reprieve through the Government, M′rjang was not so informed and found to have committed suicide by hanging himself in Dayashina. In his will, he described his death to have occurred "purely for the defence of the reputation of the country, not in respect of any crime committed." The judgment shocked the nation and sparked discussion about the future role of the House of Lords in the judicial system.