"I don't agree with capital punishment, but given the nature of his crimes I have no problem with his execution."- Ricardo Eichmann, the son of Adolf Eichmann
PAGE TITLE: http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/
ARTICLE TITLE: The case of Adolf Eichmann shows
that the death penalty can be just
DATE: Thursday 7 April 2011
AUTHOR: Francis Philips
AUTHOR INFORMATION: Francis Philips reviews books for
the Catholic Herald.
The case of Adolf Eichmann
shows that the death penalty can be just
His
crimes were of the gravest nature; his life was an affront to the families of
those who died in the Holocaust
By Francis Phillips
on Thursday, 7 April 2011
 |
| Adolf Eichmann is flanked by guards in the Jerusalem courtroom where he was tried for war crimes (AP Photo) |
Turning
on the car radio yesterday, I chanced on the end of a Radio 4 programme – the
sort that makes you park the car and carry on listening. It was broadcaster
Gavin Esler in Jerusalem, examining “the legacy of Adolf Eichmann” on the 50th
anniversary of his trial and execution. Everyone who followed that trial will
recall the kidnapping of Eichmann by Mossad agents from Buenos Aires in 1961,
as a result of a tip-off from agents of Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal. They will
remember the book about Eichmann’s trial by Hannah Arendt, in which she coined
the phrase “the banality of evil”. They will visualise the black and white
newspaper photographs of a bespectacled, balding, elderly man in the dock of
the courtroom – the man who had been the chief organiser of the deportation of
millions of Jews to the death camps in Poland. They will have pondered
Eichmann’s main defence: “I was simply carrying out orders.”
I tuned
in as the three judges in the Israeli court sentenced him to death by hanging
for crimes against the Jewish people; crimes against humanity; and war crimes.
Those like me who followed the news at the time thought the verdict a foregone
conclusion – not unlike the verdicts at the Nuremberg Trials, which Eichmann
had successfully evaded by escaping to South America. The sentence was carried
out on May 30 1962. It was followed by cremation, with the ashes scattered in
the sea outside Israel’s territorial waters.
Why am I
writing all this? Because it made me ponder the whole question (yet again) of
the morality of capital punishment. Many Catholics think that capital
punishment is now forbidden by the Church. Certainly the late pope, John Paul
II, in his public statements about it, seemed to indicate that civilised
countries should now have recourse to other means of punishment. Other people
condemn capital punishment under a general pro-life banner which lumps together
the adult guilty, like Eichmann, and the unborn who are innocent.
Personally,
I make a distinction between these two categories. Guilt does require some form
of punishment and justice must be seen to be done – whereas abortion is always
the death of the innocent. Just checking the Catechism of the Catholic Church,
I see that on page 488, paragraph 2266, it states: “Preserving the common good
of society requires rendering the aggressor unable to inflict harm. For this
reason the traditional teaching of the Church has acknowledged as well-founded
the right and duty of legitimate public authority to punish malefactors by
means of penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime, not excluding,
in cases of extreme gravity, the death penalty…”
Writing
as a Christian, I am sympathetic to the Israeli trial and execution of this
man, proved beyond doubt to have organised mass murder. In the radio programme,
Esler interviewed Michael Goldman-Gilad, survivor of Auschwitz and the Israeli
police interrogator of Eichmann during his trial. Now in his 80s, Goldman-Gilad
said, “We hanged one person; we couldn’t hang him six million times”, thus
recognising the symbolic aspect of the trial and execution. He did not sound
vengeful, simply adding “I felt relieved” after it was all over.
As I see
it, Eichmann’s continued life was a challenge to Israel’s collective memory of
suffering; it was an affront to the families of those for whose death he had
responsibility, families who wanted justice; his crimes were of the gravest
nature. The death penalty was, in this case, appropriate.
No comments:
Post a Comment