Dos delitos e das penas texto integral

When individuals, weary of a perpetual state of war, united in society, they sacrificed a portion of their natural liberty to secure the remainder in peace and safety. This sacrifice forms the bedrock of the sovereign's right to punish, a right born not of vengeance, but of the absolute necessity to defend public liberty against individual usurpation. Every act of authority exceeding this necessity is tyrannical. Thus, the purpose of punishment is not to torment or afflict a sentient being, nor to undo a crime already committed, but rather to prevent the offender from inflicting new injuries upon his fellow citizens and to deter others from similar acts.

The effectiveness of punishment lies not in its cruelty, but in its certainty and swiftness. A punishment that promptly follows a crime creates a strong and lasting association in the minds of men between the misdeed and its consequence, thereby acting as a more powerful deterrent than the most gruesome but delayed retribution. Laws should be clear, rational, and known to all, for it is only when the consequences of actions are plainly understood that individuals can weigh the costs and benefits of their choices.

Cruelty in punishment, far from preventing crimes, often hardens hearts and leads to further atrocities. Torture, in particular, is an abhorrent practice that ought to be abolished. It is a barbaric test of endurance, not truth, where the strong may remain silent and the weak confess to crimes they did not commit, leading to the grave miscarriage of justice. Moreover, secret accusations and arbitrary judicial processes undermine the very foundation of a just society, eroding trust and fostering fear rather than promoting order.

The proportion between crimes and punishments must be meticulously observed. If an equal punishment is ordained for two crimes that injure society in different degrees, there remains no incentive to deter men from committing the greater offense if it offers greater advantage. Punishments should fit the crime, designed to make the commission of an offense just risky enough to outweigh any potential gain, but never exceeding what is strictly necessary to defend the public good.

Capital punishment stands as a profound contradiction. How can laws, which detest and punish murder, commit murder themselves? The state does not possess the right to take a life, and such an act, rather than deterring, sets a brutal example for society. A perpetual servitude, though rigorous, is a more potent deterrent than the fleeting spectacle of death, for the constant reminder of a lost liberty serves as a lasting lesson to others. Only in the most extreme circumstances, when an individual's existence threatens the very security of the nation, could such a measure be justified.

Ultimately, the goal of justice is not vengeance, but the security and order of society, the protection of the social contract, and the promotion of the public good. Preventing crimes is far more desirable than punishing them, and this is best achieved through clear laws, education, and a system of justice that is swift, certain, and humane, reflecting the highest principles of reason and utility.