The Ethics of Capital Punishment: A Philosophical Debate in the Nigerian Context

This study examines the ethical debate about capital punishment through the lens of moral philosophy, applying its competing frameworks to the Nigerian legal context where the death penalty remains on the statute books and is periodically carried out for offences including murder, armed robbery, and treason. The philosophy of punishment addresses the fundamental justification for state-imposed penalties and whether the deliberate killing of a convicted offender can ever be morally justified. Using a descriptive philosophical design, the study engages with retributive, utilitarian, rehabilitationist, and abolitionist philosophical arguments for and against the death penalty, drawing on Igor Primoratz, Stephen Markman, and Hugo Adam Bedau, supplemented by secondary literature published between 2020 and 2024. Documentary analysis of Nigerian Supreme Court capital cases and structured interviews with 20 criminal law philosophers and human rights advocates in Abuja and Enugu inform the primary data. Findings reveal that the philosophical case for capital punishment in the Nigerian context is weakened by documented wrongful convictions, racial and class disparities in application, and the absence of credible deterrence evidence. The study argues that both retributive and utilitarian frameworks, consistently applied, generate strong arguments for moratorium on executions pending comprehensive judicial reform. Keywords: capital punishment, ethics of punishment, Nigerian law, retributivism, abolitionism.