Lack of Deterrence:
Research, including the findings of the Justice J.S. Verma Committee, suggests that the death penalty does not necessarily deter crime. Studies have shown that regions without the death penalty do not have higher crime rates than those with it.

Possibility of Wrongful Execution:
The irreversible nature of the death penalty means that any miscarriage of justice, such as the conviction of an innocent person, cannot be undone. The risk of executing an innocent person is a significant ethical concern.

Reformative Justice:
Critics argue that the justice system should focus on reform and rehabilitation rather than retribution. Even those who commit heinous crimes may have the potential for reform, and the death penalty eliminates any chance for redemption.

Human Rights Concerns:
The death penalty is viewed by many as a violation of fundamental human rights, particularly the right to life. Human rights organizations argue that the state should not have the power to take a life, regardless of the crime committed.

Disproportionate Application:
There is evidence that the death penalty is disproportionately applied to marginalized groups, including minorities, the poor, and those with inadequate legal representation. This raises concerns about the fairness and equality of the justice system.

Global Trends:
Many countries have abolished the death penalty, reflecting a global trend toward its elimination. International human rights bodies often advocate for the abolition of capital punishment, viewing it as incompatible with modern standards of human rights.
Example: France abolished it in 1981, Italy in 1948, and the UK in 1998.

Focus on Addressing Root Causes:
Opponents argue that the focus should be on addressing the root causes of crime, such as poverty, lack of education, and social inequality, rather than on punitive measures like the death penalty. Social reform and education are seen as more effective long-term solutions.