Executing a Terrorist - Sajida al-Rishawi

What is the Point?
Although capital punishment is not practiced in Judaism today (for reasons beyond the scope not currently discussed on this site), Judaism does not in theory reject it on moral or other grounds. There are particular social and personal benefits of capital punishment. The social benefit is that it helps prevent the deterioration of societal sensitivity to certain evils. The personal benefit to the murderer is related to the concept of absolution (כפרה) for the commission of sins requiring capital punishment.

Speaking of capital punishment, it is on everybody’s minds today. People are fully aware of the continual wave of beheadings, burnings, and butcherings currently littering the media. We are incensed by what we read and wonder what can be done about it. For some, the question also touches on Judaism, for the Torah certainly proposes the death penalty for a number of spiritual crimes, such as murder, violating the Sabbath, and idolatry. That a murderer must theoretically receive capital punishment, certain conditions spanning beyond the scope of this post prevent it from being administered.

But how would it look right now if the Jewish Court indeed administered capital punishment? Isis? Hamas? Would it resemble some of the worst manifestations of hatred in today’s world that we can think of?

What about Jordan’s announcement who, according to the Jerusalem Post, executed “Sajida al-Rishawi, who is on death row for her role in a 2005 suicide bomb attack that killed 60 people in Amman, in response to the execution of Mouath al-Kasaesbeh.”

What does Jewish thought say about such a thing? Should she have been executed?

In an ideal world where the values of Torah abounded the answer would almost absolutely be “yes.” Bnei Noah, or Gentiles, are as well instructed in executing other Gentiles who violate the Noahide Laws, of which the prohibition against murder is one. So what is the Jordanian government to do regarding a person guilty for the death of 60 people, as previously mentioned? From a legal perspective according to the Noahide Laws there is no question that she should have been put to death.

The Noahide Laws nothwistanding, not everybody agrees. According to Jordanian army spokesperson, before the execution took place, Colonel Mamdouh al Ameri, the “revenge will be as big as the calamity that has hit Jordan," which according to the Jerusalem Post he said “in a televised statement confirming the death of the pilot, who was captured in December when his plane crashed over Syria.” Ameri is concerned, and perhaps rightfully so, that the execution of this captured terrorist will potentially bloody the hands of Jordan. This comes at a time when Muslim-linked murders frequent the airwaves, and perhaps when some seek to thus distance themselves from their brothers’ bloody ways.

But perhaps there is another reason why one might argue against executing al-Rishawi; the killings have so infiltrated the Arab street (and international papers) with death that following through might be pointless. Not so much that it will have an adverse effect, much more chilling is that it might have no effect. One purpose of the death penalty is to shock the public and individuals into moral astuteness. The tragic effect of the Arab world’s supersaturation with death is that capital punishment might seem just like one more death. It might lack the desired effect because death has become relatively commonplace. This brings to the light the very dark consequences of Muslim terrorists – they are rendering the natural human revulsion to death useless and are thus contributing greatly to the increased desensitization of their societies.

Woe to the wicked one and woe to his neighbor… (Bamidbar/Numbers 16:1, Sukkos 56b)

Comment below.