Talk:Extrajudicial punishment

definition

The first sentence of this article describes Extrajudicial Punishment as just "physical punishment," and I thought it mean torture or something, but a few sentences later on, it sounds like Extrajudicial Punishment consists of killing. It's confusing. Will someone who knows what this is clarify whether Extrajudicial Punishment is eliminating someone, or torturing someone, or what?

As this article correctly defines, Extrajudicial Punishment is "punishment without the permission of a court or legal authority". This can be anything, not necessarily the murder. Thus, no merging. I do not see any reply about the merging proposal during last six months (the previous message was posted June 2006). It is probably safe to remove it. Biophys 20:29, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

"Nguyễn Văn Lém (referred to as Captain Bay Lop) (died 1 February 1968 in Saigon ) was a member of the Viet Cong who was summarily executed in Saigon during the Tet Offensive. The picture of his death would became one of may an anti- Vietnam War icons in the Western World. [30]" <- I'm not sure if this is extrajudicial punishment, Captain Bay Lop which was shot, was in civilian clothes and not carrying arms openly and performing military operations -> he is a spy (and not prisoner of war) and geneve convention does not offer any legal protection to him, so he could be shot legally when he was caught. I'm not saying its OK to do so, but i'm not sure if this case fits in extrajudicial punishment category. Muhvi 17:27 (UTC+2), 17. July 2007

Working on it

There is a bit of a overlap issue with this article and assassination. While this is not going to go away, I have done some changes now, pointing to the discussion of extrajudicial execution in assassination. Eventually (may take some time) I will work over this article again (especially references - not good at all without!) and then maybe take the direct linking to assassination out again (except for see also). MadMaxDog 22:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes there seems to be confusion of extra judicial killing, extra judicial punishment/torture and summary execution throughout this page. I think they should be separated out into their definitions and linked to each other.

I'd like to see the inclusion of non-lethal weapons (tasers/mace/etc)as extra judicial torture. And swat teams/armed response units as extra judicial killing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.111.167.232 (talk) 23:58, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Swat teams/armed response units operate under the same policies as any other police officer. They can't use deadly force except in defense of themselves or others, which is very much legal. Secondly, tasers, mace, etc. are tools of compliance. If used after a person is in custody, then it would be extrajudicial torture. Further, while assassination is a type of extrajudicial killing in the broadest sense, it really should be linked to the assassination page, not discussed in detail here. This whole article is very biased, and seems to ignore the much more common cases of extrajudicial killings performed by government agents against people in custody while merely suspected or accused of a crime every day, generally in third world countries, in favor of questionable connections to Bonnie and Clyde, or other killings best discussed in some other topic.75.174.26.146 (talk) 14:23, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Merger

A merger with Extrajudicial killing has been put forward.--86.25.55.166 07:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

It was carryed out, but the merger with death squad was never done.--86.29.255.64 01:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Sources

It has been added along with it's sources.--86.29.245.48 00:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

They have arived!--86.29.253.67 00:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I've added some more links to--86.29.244.175 15:54, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Better opener, anyone?

The opening sentence seems doubly flawed to me.

• The phrase 'basic human rights' is inherently POV, in my view. Since when does such a phrase not carry with it a wiki-raging debate? The POV, which, I hasten to add I heartily agree with, is just not that nearly universal to qualify as neutral.

Basic human rights is a diplomatically defined-and-negotiated term, look it up. 14HumanRights (talk) 13:07, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

The definitions are generally agreed. As-is usual, the "devil" is in the implementation. Human nature being what it is, 'and all that'.14HumanRights (talk) 13:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

• The idea that a normative slogan, like "no extrajudicial punishment" is ever an actual fact, seems especially strange. When one considers the many governments who do speak that way, such as the US, the variouse extraordinary-rendition supporters in Europe, the PRC, or most of the former USSR, not to mention a bewildering number of non-governmental oddities around the world, they seem to hold extrajudicial punishment to be a violation of basic human rights in the same way they hold, say, the belief that "war is bad". That is, "war is bad except for the one I am waging". I haven't checked the War page, but I'm betting it doesn't define war as "blah-blah, which constitutes a violation of every value any human has ever held." -- User:GPa Hill (Why won't wikipedia keep me logged in?)

Some one has already removed the lies and I cut the pov.--86.29.254.87 (talk) 10:02, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Wrong merger and massive deletions of sourced text

I think the merger of two articles discussed above was done without proper discussion. Extrajudicial punishment by state includes Extrajudicial killing, illegal torture and other human rights abuses committed beyond the law. Now Mikkalai left only materials about "extrajudicial killings" and removed the rest. I suggest to have two aricles: Extrajudicial punishment and Extrajudicial killing (which is a more narrow subject). What do you think?Biophys (talk) 23:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Whatever happened here, merger, etc., torture is usually not punishment. In the cases when it is indeed a punishment, it must be clearly stated so in original sources. Also, please keep in mind that the term "extrajudicial punishment" is applied only to punishments by bodies which do have a regular legal system. Otherwise the article will be turned into a huge mess about killings by various guerillas, rebels, mafias, husbands killing unfaithful wives, etc. IMO the article must be completely rewritten starting from really reliable sources which speak specifically about this term. Google is your best friend. And I agree, extrajudicial execution may be a separate topic. `'Míkka>t 18:08, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

P.S.: there was no merge. Extra-judicial killing is alive and separate. `'Míkka>t 18:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

P.P.S. Extrajudicial violence is a better umbrella term which will embrace both killings and torture. `'Míkka>t 18:16, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable to me. Thank you for pointing at Extra-judicial killing which is different from Extrajudicial killing.Biophys (talk) 18:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC) You just fixed this. Good.Biophys (talk) 18:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Scope of this article

Since we have a separate article Extra-judicial killing, this article should be about extrajudicial punishment in general, which may include torture and other types of abuse. Is not it?Biophys (talk) 20:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree wholeheartedly, Biophys.

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 17:21, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, but the whole segment about torture just has been deleted on the ground: "this is method of interrogation". No, this is often a method of "re-education", a method of murder, or just a method of punishment (please see article torture. Biophys (talk) 18:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

But it still was an obvious content fork to article torture. So, I left only a small summary there. Please feel free to add back some but not all materials.Biophys (talk) 18:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of image

An image was deleted on the following ground: "paintings that does not contribute to the uderstanding of the topic". It is hard to define what is "understanding" and what is not. The image should only illustrate the subject of the article. So it does.Biophys (talk) 19:54, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposed merger

While, in theory, the subject of extrajudicial punishment is broader than that of extrajudicial killing, there is little practical distinction. This is shown vividly by the fact that two years have passed, and both articles still cover essentially the same ground. Extrajudical punishment makes a faint stab at dealing with nonlethal action, and extrajudicial killing makes a doubtful attempt to include assassination by non-governmental criminal organizations within its scope.

As it stands, we have two articles with problems. Wikipedia would be improved if we had one article with fewer problems and a redirect. I would nominate extrajudical punishment as the surviving title. As coverage of the subject expands, this could evolve into an article in summary style and the redirect could again become an article. Robert A.West (Talk) 17:05, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

• Respectfully oppose. Both articles, while not of best quality, are not stubs either. As you correctly stated, one is a special case of another, so I would suggest a reasonable solution is to "dismerge" them, along the lines of wikipedia:Summary style. Lovok Sovok (talk) 00:33, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

None of the articles will be improved with a merger. I would recommend removing Extrajudicial Killing and redirecting it to Targeted killing as that is a much better article covering the same tactic.122.106.212.216 (talk) 07:15, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose also, for same reasoning. Targeted killing is closer, but its victims are more legit than this article. Therefore, I think all three should stay in their state, IMO. ~ AdvertAdam ^talk 17:36, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose -- I also support the status quo, for reasons I have explained in detail elsewhere... Geo Swan (talk) 06:37, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Applicability of the term

I am not an expert in this subject, but the first logical thing comes to my mind is that the term makes sense only in cases when a state is under supreme control of the law. In other words, if we are dealing with absolute monarchy or dictatorship or martial law, the term is rather meaningless. After all if a person is "punished by God" we don't call this "extrajudicial" do we? Are there any sources which discuss this? Lovok Sovok (talk) 01:22, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, applicable

NJP (Non-judicial, or "extra-judicial punishment" happens outside of monarchy and dictatorship. Unfortunately.

I vote to keep, and not to merge with Extra-judicial killing. They are two different things.14HumanRights (talk) 13:10, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Extrajudicial punishment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090802174925/http://www.amnesty-caribbean.org/Jamaica/AMR3800101/bericht.htm to http://www.amnesty-caribbean.org/Jamaica/AMR3800101/bericht.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050114040831/http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6802629/site/newsweek/ to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6802629/site/newsweek/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:44, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Extrajudicial punishment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070705141416/http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engAMR290151996?open&of=eng-SLV to http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR290151996?open&of=ENG-SLV
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051101220002/http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6814001/site/newsweek/ to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6814001/site/newsweek/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:52, 26 September 2017 (UTC)