A thorough examination of historical experiences, human rights principles, and findings from psychology and criminology clearly indicates that public execution not only lacks any deterrent effect but also carries profound social, psychological, and moral consequences for society. Although some proponents view public execution as a tool for creating fear and reducing crime, in practice, it has yielded entirely counterproductive results. In societies where a significant portion of individuals manage their personal and professional lives based on adherence to national laws, international human rights standards, human dignity, and civic ethics, public execution is not only legally unnecessary but can also have widespread negative impacts on mental health and social order. Witnessing such scenes—even for healthy and law-abiding citizens—can cause anxiety, distress, and a reduction in the sense of psychological safety, which contradicts the right to life and personal security (Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights), as the public display of violence and death constitutes a degrading and inhumane act.

The right to life is the most fundamental human right upon which all other rights and freedoms are built. Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) explicitly states: “Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person.” Similarly, Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) affirms that the right to life must be protected by law and that no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of their life. General Comment No. 36 by the UN Human Rights Committee (2018) states that even in countries where capital punishment has not been abolished, it must only be implemented under the strictest conditions and with full observance of fair trial standards. It further asserts that public execution is inherently inhumane and degrading, and incompatible with the inherent dignity of the human person. (1) In addition, Article 7 of the Covenant prohibits torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, while Article 37 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child prohibits capital punishment for individuals under the age of 18 and obliges states to protect children from all forms of physical or mental abuse. Therefore, even the presence of children at execution scenes is a violation of their fundamental rights.

From criminological and social-psychological perspectives, public execution, rather than creating deterrence, results in the reproduction of violence and psychological harm. Witnesses of execution—especially children, adolescents, and women—experience trauma, anxiety, and depression, and these lasting psychological experiences diminish their trust in the justice system and public security. According to Albert Bandura’s social learning theory, exposure to formal and public violence leads individuals to internalize and imitate violent behavior. (2) This issue is particularly severe among children, adolescents, orphans, those with abusive caregivers, and other vulnerable groups, potentially perpetuating a cycle of aggression and criminal behavior. Social despair is another consequence of public execution. Individuals who consider themselves victims of injustice, inequality, or deprivation may, upon witnessing public executions, not feel intimidated but instead conclude that life lacks value and turn to high-risk behaviors, violence, or even suicide. In such circumstances, a society founded on fear and violence ultimately loses its social capital, public trust, and collective mental health.

International Experiences with the Positive Outcomes of Abolishing or Restricting Public Execution

Most European countries gradually abolished public execution starting in the 19th century. In England, the last public execution took place in 1868, and France banned it after the execution of Eugène Weidmann in 1939. The European Union not only abolished public execution but also outlawed capital punishment entirely, enforcing Protocols No. 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights for all member states. (3) Turkey, as part of its reform process for joining the EU, first suspended public executions and then abolished the death penalty altogether in 2004. In Latin America, countries such as Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay have abandoned public executions and many are moving toward full abolition of the death penalty. Studies show that these decisions have not led to an increase in crime; on the contrary, they have strengthened public trust in the criminal justice system. Even in China, where capital punishment is still practiced, concerns over its social consequences and international image have led to a significant reduction in public executions over the past two decades and to the secrecy of execution statistics.

From a human rights and ethical standpoint, public execution violates several fundamental principles. The principle of inherent human dignity (Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) affirms that no individual should be subjected to humiliation, even if they have committed a crime. The prohibition against torture and degrading treatment (Article 7 of the ICCPR) identifies public execution as a clear instance of inhumane behavior. Furthermore, the principle of proportionality in modern criminal law supports the notion that for crimes punishable by death, more effective alternatives such as imprisonment or rehabilitation programs can be used. Ethically and religiously as well, many teachings emphasize the sanctity of life and prioritize the reformation of the offender over their elimination, arguing that reproducing violence under the guise of official justice derails society from a humane and moral path.

In general, the social and cultural consequences of public execution are vast. It normalizes violence, undermines public trust, erodes social capital, and negatively impacts future generations. Children who witness state-sanctioned violence become carriers of the cycle of violence themselves, perpetuating delinquency and aggression within society.

Therefore, as a legal researcher and in light of psychological and criminological findings, it can be stated with certainty that public execution is not only ineffective as a deterrent but is in direct conflict with psychological well-being, social stability, moral security, and public order. This form of punishment violates human dignity, the rights of children, law-abiding citizens, the vulnerable, and even challenges the foundations of modern criminal justice. Consequently, penal policies concerning capital punishment require fundamental revision, with the first step being the abolition or restriction of public execution. Such a move would prevent devastating psychological and social consequences and lay the groundwork for a healthier society, law-abiding citizens, and public trust in the justice system.

Based on all these legal principles, comparative experiences, and psychological and social implications, it can be concluded that the abolition of public execution is not only a human rights necessity but also a social, ethical, and rational imperative for building a healthier, safer, and more dignified society. A society founded on fear and violence will eventually lose its mental health, social capital, and public safety, while one built on human dignity, rehabilitative justice, and offender reform can ensure lasting security, mental health, and social cohesion.

Notes:

1. General Comment No. 36 on Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, on the Right to Life (2018), Abdorrahman Boroumand Center, June 31, 2017 (10 Tir 1396).

2. Shahshahani, Soheila and Mirlotfi, Leila, “A Sociological Analysis of Factors Affecting Violence Against Women (With Emphasis on Social Learning Theory),” Women in Development and Politics Journal (Women’s Studies), 2009 (1388).

3. Protocol No. 6 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Concerning the Abolition of the Death Penalty (1983), Nezamát website.