Retribution-Dominant Systems
In retribution-dominant criminal justice systems, the central tenet is that punishment should be proportionate to the offence committed. This notion is deeply grounded in the principle of lex talionis, or the "law of retaliation," which suggests that the severity of the punishment should reflect the severity of the crime. For example, in the United States, the use of the death penalty, particularly in states like Texas, Florida, and Arizona, reflects a retributive approach. It is commonly applied to serious crimes, such as murder or acts of terrorism, based on the belief that the offender deserves to die as a consequence of taking a life.

The ethical foundation of retribution centres on moral balance. Supporters argue that capital punishment serves to right the wrongs done to victims and their families, offering closure and a sense of justice. Retributive justice is also seen as essential for maintaining societal moral order, asserting that individuals must be held accountable for their actions.

However, this system is not without controversy. One of the main criticisms is the potential for injustice. Factors like race, social class, and the quality of legal representation can influence sentencing, leading to an unequal application of punishment. Additionally, the irreversible nature of the death penalty raises concerns, especially given the possibility of wrongful convictions. The case of Kenneth Foster in Texas, where a man was sentenced to death despite being a passive participant in a crime, underscores the problem.

While the U.S. continues to employ retribution-focused methods, many European countries have abolished the death penalty, viewing it as inhumane and incompatible with modern human rights standards. This division highlights the complexity of the debate, with critics arguing that retribution merely perpetuates cycles of violence and revenge.

Deterrence-Focused Approaches
Deterrence-based criminal justice systems, like that of Singapore, rely on the principle that the threat of severe punishment
will deter individuals from committing crimes. The focus is on preventing criminal behaviour by instilling fear of the consequences.
Deterrence can be divided into two types: general deterrence, which aims to deter society at large, and specific deterrence, which
seeks to prevent the individual offender from re-offending.

Singapore’s stringent drug laws exemplify this approach. The Misuse of Drugs Act mandates the death penalty for individuals
caught trafficking in large amounts of controlled substances, such as 500 grams of cannabis or 15 grams of heroin. The
government argues that these harsh penalties act as a deterrent, sending a clear message that drug trafficking is not tolerated.

Alongside the death penalty, Singapore also employs corporal punishment, notably caning, for crimes such as vandalism, rioting,
and certain sexual offences. Proponents claim that caning serves as a powerful deterrent, particularly when combined with the
public nature of the punishment. The visibility of such severe penalties reinforces the government's stance on crime, suggesting that any violation will be met with harsh consequences.

Critics, however, contend that deterrence-based systems fail to address the underlying causes of crime, such as poverty, lack of education, and social inequality. Moreover, there is no clear evidence that harsh punishments like the death penalty or corporal punishment are more effective in reducing crime rates compared to other strategies, such as rehabilitation. The growing debate within Singapore regarding these forms of punishment raises ethical concerns, particularly about their morality and effectiveness.

Rehabilitation-Centric Models
Rehabilitation-centric criminal justice systems, such as that in Norway, emphasise that crime often arises from underlying social, economic, or psychological issues. Rather than focusing solely on punishment, these systems aim to reintegrate offenders into society as productive, law-abiding citizens. The belief is that with appropriate interventions, such as education, vocational training, and psychological support, offenders can overcome the factors that led to their criminal behaviour.

Norway’s prison system is an example of rehabilitation in practice. Prisons like Halden and Bastøy provide inmates with education, vocational training, and therapy, fostering an environment that respects the dignity of the offender. For instance, Halden Prison offers university-level courses, while Bastøy provides job training in agriculture and construction. The goal is to address underlying issues like substance abuse, mental health problems, or lack of education.

One of the most notable outcomes of this approach is Norway’s low recidivism rate, with fewer than 20% of offenders re-arrested within two years. This stands in stark contrast to countries with more punitive systems, such as the United States. The success of Norway’s model has sparked international interest in reforming criminal justice systems worldwide.

However, the rehabilitation model faces challenges. One major concern is the high cost of maintaining such a system, which raises questions about its financial sustainability, particularly in larger countries with higher crime rates. Moreover, critics argue that the rehabilitation model may not be replicable in countries with different cultural contexts or resources. Additionally, in systems focused on rehabilitation, the needs and concerns of victims may be overlooked, leading some to feel that justice is not adequately served.

Despite these criticisms, Norway’s rehabilitation model is viewed by many as a more humane and effective approach to addressing crime and reducing recidivism.

Case Studies & Examples
Case Study: The Death Penalty in the United States
The United States has a longstanding history of using the death penalty, particularly in states like Texas, where executions remain common. This practice is often justified by a retributive framework, where offenders who commit heinous crimes are believed to deserve the ultimate punishment. However, growing concerns about racial bias and the potential for wrongful convictions, such as in the case of Cameron Todd Willingham—who was executed for a crime he did not commit—have led to increased calls for abolition.

Example: Singapore's Deterrence Model
Singapore’s deterrence-based criminal justice system is evident in its strict anti-drug policies. The Misuse of Drugs Act mandates the death penalty for trafficking large amounts of drugs, with offenders facing execution for as little as 500 grams of cannabis. While this policy has helped maintain one of the lowest crime rates globally, ethical concerns regarding the potential for miscarriages of justice and human rights violations continue to fuel debate.

These examples illustrate the diverse approaches to criminal justice systems around the world, each with its own ethical considerations and effectiveness in addressing crime.