Military punishment reform moved from spectacular severity toward certainty of punishment

Evidence

The first thing that strikes one when reading this law is that it was tabulated with the main divisions being those of the type of offender: students and NCOs, officers and teachers. For every one of these divisions the law is further subdivided into three divisions: the offense (cürm ve zenub), its corresponding punishment (tedibat), and the officer who is to execute the punishment (müeddib). The mere form the law now takes, the table, strongly leads the mind to the correspondence between crime and punishment. The law is no longer a collection of articles loosely connected to each other whose only order is the chronology of their promulgation; rather, the very form it takes shows the gradual realization that the effectiveness of the punishment stems not from its spectacular severity but from its inevitability; “it is the certainty of being punished and not the horrifying spectacle of public punishment that must discourage crime.” Furthermore, there is a conspicuous absence of bodily punishment and a reliance instead on imprisonment. Out of the eighty-nine articles of the law, only four articles resorted to the whip as a punishment. These were reserved for the punishment of desertion and sodomy. — Khaled Fahmy, All the Pasha_s Men_ Mehmed Ali, his…, 700

Categorization

Category: Factual Claims

Broader Connections