Whose Act of Cruelty?

"The death penalty is an act of cruelty that should never be used.  Its use in Afghanistan, where a fair trial is typically out of the question, is even more horrific."
Brad Adams, Asia director, New York-based Human Rights Watch

Human rights groups are displeased that Afghanistan has resumed executions after a multi-year moratorium.  Under the Taliban summary executions were commonplace.  But these executions took place under Afghanistan's new justice system.  Eight men were found guilty of crimes against the people; in particular women and children. 

They were hanged, and there are an additional eight more meant to be hanged as well, according to a government official.  Human rights activists find this deplorable, particularly in a country with what they insist is a weak judiciary.  Particularly when human rights groups felt they were making some headway in leading the country toward more humane methods of meting out justice.

And then there is the sobering description of just who stood trial, were found guilty and sentenced to death.  The executed men included one who strangled a mother and her two children to death.  Along with men found guilty of kidnapping, raping and murdering young boys and girls.  What humane method of meting out justice might fit the bill for these men?

Their unforgivably brutal actions are beyond the pale.  What method of justice would satisfy the human rights groups representing Western-type justice in the case of such offences against decency and humanity, exactly?

"The eight hangings in a single day are a terrible step backwards for Afghanistan.  President Hamid Karzai should stop future executions and commit to a formal moratorium", insisted Mr. Adams of Human Rights Watch.

"By applying this (penalty) the rule of law is implemented.  This is a lesson to be learned", said Rafi Ferdous, spokesman for Afghanistan's Council of Ministers Secretariat, in defence of the capital punishment meted out to those eight psychopaths.