THBT Rehabilitation should be the only consideration in criminal sentencing

BURDEN
- To prove how ONLY using rehabilitation as an option is ine cient and injustice

STAKEHOLDERS

- victims, perpetrators, enforcement, population

CHARACTERIZATION
- what is rehab? Is it a quarantine centre or are you allowed to go home after
every rehab session?

- This debate is not about wether rehab is good or bad, it is about whether rehab
should be the ONLY consideration when criminal sentencing

- We have a general consensus rehab can be bene cial, but it should not be the
only sentence being given for ALL crimes

- For gov to win, they would have to prove why rehab is the only e cient form of
criminal sentence for all crimes regardless of the severity of the crimes and the
people they’ve hurt in the process

- Gov will have to prove why crimes like terrorism, treason and murder can be
solved using rehab only

STATUS QUO

- in the status quo, we a apply a system where its an eye for an eye

- The sentence being charged will depend on the severity of the crime

- For an example, hefty crimes such as terrorism and drug tra cking usually
heavier sentences such as death penalty, whipping and life sentence

- However, in status quo, rehab is still an option and is often given out depending
whether on the criminal can bene t from rehab

- This usually relies on the judge’s discretion

- Sometimes, certain cases such as drug abuse will have rehab as a part of the
sentencing

- Simply because some perpetrators can recover from their crime

- But this should not be our only option for sentencing

SUBSTANTIVES
- I will prove how rehab ONLY is not e cient

-
fi
ffi
fi
ffi
ffi
ffi
 ARGUMENTS
- moving on to my rst argument why only using rehab as an option for criminal
sentencing is not su cient

- Boils down to accountability

- We know that laws are there to act as a deterrence

- The only reason it acts as a deterrence because they fear the consequences of
their crimes

- And in Malaysia, the laws are very strict

- For an example, murder cases usually have a sentence of jail time and multiple
whippings

- Whippings is not something that is light like getting caned, whipping is much
more painful and will leave a physical scar to induce fear within the society from
committing such crimes

- Drug tra cking cases have death sentences or even life in prison

- The proof that it works is that in our world, it happens a lot less

- Compared to gov’s world, where the only sentence is rehab, people are most
likely going to commit the crimes and even repeat it because the sentencing is
fairly light

- This is because rehab is seen as a luxury

- You get your own accommodation, your own therapist and proper facilities

- And recognise that this is incredibly taxing on the country nancially

- It makes sense that the criminals are most likely going to commit the same
crimes even after rehabilitation anyway

- This problem is far less likely to happen in our world, following status quo

- The recidivism rate, recidivism is the likelihood of someone committing the same
crime, the rate is extremely low in Malaysia

- not enough to deter people from committing crimes

- Seeing the criminals being held accountable for their crimes will bring closure to
the victims and her family

- For an example, imagine a girl got raped, and she sees the rapist being provided
the luxuries in rehab, he gets proper facilities and is provided a dedicated
therapist

- Whereas the girl is left there alone with no justice?

- The irony is, the criminal is provided counselling when the girl doesn’t get any
form or therapy?

- The same girl who has to face the trauma for the rest of the life

- Does this sound fair to you?

- Because this is what the gov wants

- It is not justi ed for the gov to provide therapists for the criminals but not helping
the victims face with the trauma they had to go through

- If we have a sentence, it can prevent people from committing a crime

- One person deterred, is another innocent live saved

- Prevention is better than cure

ENDING
- members of the oor, the essence of the debate is simple, whichever side can
provide a safer world, which has a lower crime rate and can prevent more crimes,
wins the debate. We believe that our status quo already does that better.
ffi
fi
fi
fl
ffi
fi