On the morning of December 18, 2023, the Nanchang Intermediate People's Court executed the death penalty for Lao Rongzhi. According to the provisions of our criminal law, only criminals who have committed extremely serious crimes can be sentenced to death. In such cases, the death sentence needs to go through special procedures, including a death penalty review and approval system, to ensure that the sentence is strict and accurate, and to avoid unjust and indiscriminate killing.
Chinese law stipulates that, unless the Supreme People's Court directly adjudicates a case, all other sentences of immediate execution of the death penalty must be reported to the Supreme People's Court for approval before they can be executed. The order to carry out the death penalty shall be signed by the President of the Supreme People's Court and executed by the court that made the judgment in the first instance. There are two ways to carry out the death penalty in our country, one is shooting and the other is lethal injection. The place where the death penalty is carried out is divided into a special place of execution and a designated place of detention.
Lo Rongzhi was deprived of his political rights on all three charges. Political rights include the right to vote and to stand for election, the right to freedom of expression, the press, assembly, association, procession and demonstration, as well as the right to hold office in State organs and to hold leadership positions. Why should a death sentence be accompanied by deprivation of political rights?This is because some rights do not disappear because life is taken away. If political rights are not deprived, the convict may still enjoy some rights after being executed, such as writings, honorary titles, medals, etc., after being executed. A lifetime of political deprivation can avoid these problems.
The case of Lo Rongzhi has attracted widespread attention and discussion. On the Internet, many people expressed anger and condemnation of the crimes committed by Lo Rongzhi, believing that she should be punished with the most severe punishment. At the same time, there are those who question whether the execution of the death penalty will really solve the problem, arguing that the death penalty may not be severe enough for such a heinous crime.
Similar cases have occurred in the past. For example, in the 2012 terrorist attack on the Urumqi train station,** the death penalty was also given. This kind of malicious harm to innocent people has aroused public outrage, and the society has raised its voice to crack down on terrorist crimes. However, these events have also sparked debates about human rights and justice, particularly whether the death penalty should continue to exist.
The impact on the entire Lo Rongzhi case can be viewed from different angles. On the one hand, the execution of the death penalty shows that China has zero tolerance for serious crimes, which helps to deter other potential criminals and maintain social security and stability. On the other hand, some people have reservations about the use of the death penalty, arguing that more attention should be paid to the reasons behind the crime and to address the root causes of social problems.
So far, there has been no update on the development of the Lo Rongzhi case. However, the impact of this incident on society as a whole is far-reaching. It has provoked reflection and questioning about the death penalty system, and prompted us to examine the impartiality and human rights protection of our legal and judicial systems. At the same time, this case is a reminder that society needs to invest more in crime prevention, education and mental health to reduce the occurrence of tragedies.
Readers are invited to participate in the discussion, what is your attitude towards the use of the death penalty?How do you think we can do better to prevent crime and protect human rights?Feel free to leave your views and comments.