That contradiction has never disappeared. Can a state punish killing by killing?

In recent decades, the answer has increasingly been no. More than two-thirds of countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice. Yet executions persist. Amnesty International recorded at least 1,518 executions worldwide last year, excluding the thousands believed to take place in China, where figures are difficult to verify.

Most executions now occur across parts of the Global South, particularly in the Middle East, Africa and Asia. In some countries, the death penalty is reserved mainly for murder. In others, it can apply to drug trafficking, blasphemy, same-sex relations, political dissent or even social media posts.

Sacred law, human judgement

Few cases show the danger of this power more clearly than Asia Bibi’s. A Christian woman in Pakistan, she was sentenced to death for blasphemy after a dispute over drinking water from a shared cup. Her conviction was eventually overturned, but the case triggered mass protests. Two politicians who defended her were assassinated.

In theory, capital punishment reflects the solemn authority of the state. In practice, it can become entangled with religion, politics, public anger and minority persecution. A death sentence does not only punish a crime. It also reveals who has power, whose voice is believed, and whose life is easiest to sacrifice.

Methods of death

Execution has always carried a message. Hanging was long seen as cheap, quick and orderly. Beheading was once considered more dignified for nobles. The guillotine was introduced partly to make death more equal and efficient, though its namesake, Joseph-Ignace Guillotin, opposed capital punishment.

Modern methods promise cleanliness. Shooting and lethal injection are among the most common today. But the search for a “humane” execution method exposes the central contradiction. The state tries to make killing appear controlled and moral. The outcome remains the same.

The cost of killing

Supporters argue that the death penalty offers justice, deterrence and closure. But it is not always cheaper than prison. In the United States, death penalty cases often cost more than life imprisonment because of appeals, legal safeguards and specialist procedures.

The deeper issue is not only cost. Justice systems are human systems, shaped by evidence, class, politics, legal access and public pressure. A wrongful prison sentence can be corrected. An execution cannot.

Democracy and death

Capital punishment is also political. Countries with weaker democratic institutions are generally more likely to retain and use it. Where courts are fragile, minorities vulnerable or opposition criminalised, the state’s power to kill becomes especially dangerous.

The global direction is still mostly away from execution. Ghana , Zambia and Zimbabwe have moved to end or sharply limit it. Malaysia and Vietnam have narrowed its scope. But some states are moving the other way, including Belarus, Israel and Burkina Faso.

The death penalty survives because it speaks to a powerful instinct: that some crimes deserve death. But it is fading because another belief has grown stronger: that the state should not mirror the violence it condemns.

World Reframed episode 37. More episodes of World Reframed .

World Reframed is produced in London by  Global South World, part of the Impactum Group. Its editors are Duncan Hooper and Ismail Akwei.

ISSN 2978-4891

This story is written and edited by the Global South World team. You can  contact us  here.

What they said

Limor Son Har-Melech, Knesset member for Otzma Yehudit, announced, "The Death Penalty for Terrorists Law, 5786–2026, has been approved in the second and third readings and will enter the law books of the State of Israel. Blessed are we who have lived, endured, and reached this moment. The people of Israel live." National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir also said, “Today we are restoring sanity to the State of Israel… A law of the death penalty for terrorists… is a historic law that changes the current reality.”

According to Middle East Eye , the bill would enable Israeli courts to impose capital punishment on Palestinians convicted of murder, especially when the motive is deemed “nationalistic” or “ideological.”

However, it would not apply to Israeli citizens, including settlers, who kill Palestinians under similar circumstances. The proposal, championed by Limor Son Har-Melech of the far-right Otzma Yehudit party and backed by National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, has ignited fierce debate about discrimination, legality, and timing amid ongoing conflict in Gaza.

Legal experts and government officials have already raised red flags. The committee’s legal adviser reportedly warned that the vote may be invalid because it was held during the Knesset’s recess and without consultation with key security bodies.

Gal Hirsch, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coordinator for hostages, cautioned that pressing ahead with the bill could endanger Israeli captives still held in Gaza.

Opposition lawmakers described the measure as “ an act of unprecedented savagery ,” arguing it risks institutionalising a two-tier justice system, one that applies capital punishment only to Palestinians.

Israel formally abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes in 1954. Since then, it has been reserved only for extreme cases such as genocide or treason, with the country’s sole execution being that of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in 1962.

Although several attempts have been made in recent decades to revive capital punishment for terrorism, none have become law.