The public will be able to watch via livestream the execution of Nidal Hasan, the US-born Muslim terrorist who shot dead 12 unarmed US soldiers. Officials in the Pentagon said that more details would follow of what would be the first public execution in the US in almost a hundred years. Nobody should be in any doubt about the abhorrent nature of Hasan’s crimes, but is that sufficient cause to turn the gravest of punishments – the death sentence – into mass entertainment?
Executions are not, and should never be, public spectacles. It is the very least that is expected of a civilised democracy, which is why public viewing of executions has been a no-no for a long time now. Taking someone’s life – even that of a terrorist – is not to be treated as some form of reality TV show, to be watched over a few beers. The Pentagon has not yet disclosed the precise broadcasting arrangements or what, if any, restrictions there might be, but there is every reason to suspect that any government-sanctioned broadcast will be widely shared on social media. It will be downloaded in workplaces and schools and potentially live for ever on the internet. It is hard to think of a better recruiting tool for the Islamist fanatics everywhere who trumpet violence and martyrdom.
Taking someone’s life is not to be treated as some form of reality TV show
Yet no one in the Pentagon or the White House appears to have thought this through. Pete Hegseth, the war secretary and a former Fox TV host, confirmed that the execution by military firing squad, due to take place on December 3, would be ‘public’.
‘We’ll make sure that people are able to watch it, that it’s public,’ Hegseth said. It was as if he was merely announcing a new series of a TV game show. When asked if the killer had made any final requests or had contacted the Trump administration, Hegseth replied: ‘Don’t care. We’ll see him on December 3.’ It is hard not to be dismayed by the flippancy on display here.
This really isn’t a debate about Hasan’s appalling crimes or even about the merits of the death penalty. The former army major and psychiatrist killed 13 people and injured more than 30 others in a mass shooting at the Fort Hood military base in Texas in 2009. He opened fire on unarmed soldiers, preparing to deploy to Afghanistan and Iraq, in what was a rare attack on American troops at a home base. Among the dead was a pregnant private who pleaded for the life of her baby to be spared. He claimed to have acted to protect Muslim insurgents abroad from US aggression. Hasan’s execution would be the first conducted by the United States military since 1961 and the first military execution by firing squad since 1945. Its location is also historically significant because it would take place at the site of his 2009 attack.
All this is now lost in the sound and fury over the decision to make the proceedings open to public viewing. What exactly is the Trump administration hoping to achieve by doing this? The live streaming of Hasan’s execution can only have a detrimental effect on the way the United States is perceived. The UN human rights office told the AFP news agency that it would be ‘tantamount to a public execution and would breach the absolute prohibition of torture’. Critics, including the Democratic senator Chris Murphy, described the move as ‘disgusting’, adding that it was reminiscent of executions carried out by the Islamic State terrorist group. The Republican senator Thom Tillis said public executions were what ‘oppressive dictators’ did, pointing to countries such as Afghanistan and Iran.
The unprecedented move to make Hasan’s execution a public broadcast must raise fresh questions about the quality of decision-making at the heart of the US administration. Is there any ethical or moral red line? What next: public beheadings? Stoning? Why not, if the crime is heinous enough? Nidal Hasan should be held accountable for his crimes, no question. Justice must be done and seen to be done, but it is another thing entirely to turn his execution into some grotesque public spectacle and appointment to view TV. The Pentagon – and Hegseth – must rethink before it is too late. If not, they are guilty of nothing less than the glorifying of violence.
Comments