This journal entry is based on chapters 9 and 10 in Bilchitz et al (although the focus is on ch 10). You will possibly have to do further research on the question as well.
Read the following and answer the question below:
Set of facts as determined by credible witnesses to the event:
A conflict broke out between the state of Utopia’s military forces and rebels on Utopian territory. The rebels are part of a distinct ethnic minority in Utopia. On the morning of 10 July 2022, 21-year old Lawrence Mpofu and seven members of the 7th Military Unit of the army of Utopia were instructed to go to Silica, a small farmstead 50 km southwest from their base in the capital of Sikkim. When they arrived at Silica, they were told that captured men and boys of the enemy rebels would be arriving by bus throughout the day.
When the civilians arrived, they were taken to a nearby field where they were lined up with their backs to the assembled 7th Military Unit’s firing squad. The members of the 7th Military Unit, including Lawrence Mpofu, who composed the firing squad, then killed the men and boys. Lawrence Mpofu used an AK-47 to complete the task. It is estimated that about 1000 people were killed in this way.
Witnesses estimated that Lawrence personally killed about 40 people. In the testimony of another member of the 7th Military Unit who participated in the killings that day, named John Smith, it was only when they arrived at Silica that they were informed of the work required of them. Witness Smith noted that Lawrence immediately refused to do this task but was threatened by the commander in charge of the operation (named Lt. Callous) with instant death and told “If you don’t wish to do it, stand in the line with the rest of them and give others your rifle so that they can shoot you”. Witness Smith was convinced that Lawrence believed that he would have been killed or that his wife or child would have been directly threatened if he failed to comply with the instruction. Regarding this, Smith claimed to have seen the commander ordering a member of the 7th Military Unit to be killed because he had refused to obey the order. Witness Smith noted that despite all of this, he saw how Lawrence Mpofu still attempted to spare a man between 60 to 70 years of age. Witness Smith testified further that Lawrence Mpofu then opposed the order of another commander to participate in the execution of 100 men and boys being detained in a nearby public building. He was able to refrain from committing this further crime because three of his comrades (including witness Smith) supported him when he refused to obey.
After the end of the conflict, murder charges were brought against Lawrence Mpofu and he voluntarily handed himself over to the authorities of Utopia so that the trial could take place. Witness Smith noted that in their private conversations, Lawrence Mpofu continuously reiterated his loathing of war and that he deeply regretted getting involved in it.
Imagine you are the judge in this case and that you have found Lawrence Mpofu guilty of murder. In other words, the merits of the case were decided and you are now at the sentencing stage. It is now for you to consider (by discussing different viewpoints and providing a critical explanation) how to philosophically justify the sentence you want to impose. Your answer should be between 400-500 words in length. (10)
Answer this question by comparing and contrasting the arguments of Forward-looking theories of punishment(The utilitarian theory of punishment by Jeremy Bentham) and the Backward-looking theories of punishment(The expressive Retributivism theory by Hampton Jean as outlined in chapter 10 of the above mentioned textbook) and do not forget to take into account the fact that mpofu was threatened by the commander to commit these crimes
In considering how to philosophically justify the sentence to be imposed on Lawrence Mpofu, a comparison and contrast of the arguments put forth by the forward-looking utilitarian theory of punishment and the backward-looking expressive retributivism theory is necessary.
The utilitarian theory of punishment, as espoused by Jeremy Bentham, focuses on the future consequences of punishment in order to maximize overall happiness or utility. From this perspective, the goal of punishment is to deter future crimes, rehabilitate the offender, and protect society. In the case of Mpofu, one could argue that a harsh sentence is necessary in order to deter others from committing similar crimes in the future. By imposing a severe punishment, society may be protected from individuals who are willing to carry out egregious acts under duress, as was the case with Mpofu. Additionally, providing rehabilitation services for Mpofu may also be deemed necessary in order to prevent him from reoffending in the future.
On the other hand, the expressive retributivism theory, as outlined by Jean Hampton, focuses on the backward-looking concept of punishment as a form of moral communication. In other words, punishment is seen as a way to express societal condemnation of the offender's actions and to uphold moral norms. In the case of Mpofu, one could argue that a sentence that takes into account the circumstances in which the crimes were committed may be more in line with the principles of retributive justice. Given that Mpofu was threatened by his commander to carry out the executions, it could be argued that his culpability is lessened compared to a cold-blooded murderer who acts out of malice. Additionally, Mpofu's regret and willingness to cooperate with authorities may be taken into account in determining a more lenient sentence that reflects the proportionality of punishment to the offender's blameworthiness.
In this case, it can be seen that both forward-looking and backward-looking theories of punishment provide valuable insights into the considerations that must be taken into account when determining the appropriate sentence for Mpofu. Ultimately, the judge must carefully weigh the potential benefits of deterrence and rehabilitation against the principles of moral communication and proportionality in order to arrive at a just and fair outcome.