28 _______________________________________________________ DOI : https://doi.org/10.33258/birci.v2i2.234 Kantian and Utilitarian Ethics on Capital Punishment Mfonobong David Udoudom 1 , Samuel Akpan Bassey 2 , Okpe 2 , Timothy Adie 2 1 Social Science Unit, School of General Studies, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria. 2 Department of Philosophy, University of Calabar, Calabar, Cross River, 540242, Nigeria Abstract : It is an indisputable fact that most societies in the world agrees that if a person violates the laws, he/she should be penalized. However, the variations appear when it involves what sensibly punishment ought to be applied, predominantly for major crimes like murder. Death penalty, which as well referred to as execution or capital punishment, is one amongst these variations which have caused several arguments and debates between its opponents and supporters. Today, numerous countries are attempting to seek out different sanctions for major crimes like life imprisonment relatively to capital punishment. This research tries to take a look at the idea of capital punishment from Kantian and Utilitarian ethics perspectives. Keywords : Ethics; Kantian; Utilitarian; Capital Punishment. I. Introduction Death penalty is one of the most severe of punitive consequences, with its appliance representing the utmost of finalities in law enforcement and criminal sentence. An issue which has garnered intense debate for decades and which has divided individuals along party lines and philosophical dispositions, the use of capital punishment is defended by its activists as an effective way to discourage violent crime and as a critically effective way to punish the worst of offenders. Its critics regard it as unconstitutional, barbaric or generally a violation of human rights. Nigeria is one of few democratic countries in the world which still employs the death penalty in its criminal justice system. This conversation will examine the death penalty from a number of perspectives in order to assess the ethical accuracy of its use. Addressing the concept of death penalty first as a policy, and subsequently, applying the Kantian and Utilitarian models to the policy, the argument will be designed to demonstrate that Nigerian use of the death penalty within the context of its legal system is ethically wrong. II. Review of Literature 2.1 The Death Penalty as A Policy It is the legal position that the death penalty is Constitutional in Nigeria and even in the United States. Accordingly, Reid (2004) reports that “capital punishment is obviously the most severe of all sentences the government imposes. The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution as placing some limitations on the punishment, but in 1972 in Furman v. Georgia the Court held that capital punishment is not per se unconstitutional although it was found to be so in that case.” (Reid, 536) Both countries Supreme Court have repeatedly confirmed the necessity of the death penalty as a tool for law enforcement and punitive retribution. This is vital because it is underscored by a Constitutional theory that is proposed to reflect an ethical balance of justice and mercy. With great conviction, ethical rightness is a part to every judicial assessment of capital punishment. An illustration is provided to the research by The British Medical Journal (1950) which serves as a major source on the debate during the middle of the 20 th Century regarding the state’s ability to function as an arbiter of ethicality while carrying out the death penalty. More specifically, the article investigates the treatment of insanity, mental