Hanson calls for death penalty revival in Australia after Kirk assassination

Australia's political debate intensified after the assassination of Charlie Kirk in Utah when Pauline Hanson, leader of the One Nation party, said she is all for reinstating the death penalty in Australia. Speaking on Sky News, Hanson endorsed the death penalty for Tyler Robinson, the man charged with Kirk's killing, and suggested Australia should consider similar penalties for premeditated murder.

She cited high-profile Australian cases to argue for tougher penalties, including the murders of Daniel Morcombe and Sian Kingi. 'I'm all for it. I don't have a problem with it at all,' she said, adding that 'these are people I believe forfeit their lives. We don't have a safe society, and too many people are living in fear.'

Hanson also recounted a personal encounter from her time in prison with Valmae Faye Beck, the wife of Barrie John Watts, who were associated with the murder cases surrounding Sian Kingi. She recalled looking Beck in the eye and saying, 'If anyone laid a hand on my daughter as you have done, I’d be the one to pull the trigger.'

The remarks come as Australia remains bound by international agreements that prohibit reinstating capital punishment, and as the national tradition of abolition remains in place. Australia outlawed capital punishment decades ago, and has not executed a person since the 1960s. But Hanson argued that the conversation is far from over, noting the financial cost of housing prisoners and challenging the notion that the current system delivers adequate punishment for the most egregious crimes. 'Why should the taxpayer be funding these people in prisons for over $150,000 a year?' she asked. 'If you want to go out and take a life, then be prepared to lose your own.'

Her comments arrive amid renewed global attention on capital punishment following the Kirk case and other high-profile incidents, including the death of health-insurance executive Brian Thompson in late 2024, which drew international media focus on the debate surrounding extreme penalties. In the United States, authorities have pursued murder charges in related cases, with ongoing discussions about whether political murder should affect sentencing. In New York, Luigi Mangione, 27, faced second-degree murder charges in a separate case; a judge ruled he should not be charged as a terrorist, illustrating the complexity of how governments classify and pursue capital cases on different terms.

In Australia, the historical record is clear: 125 executions have occurred since 1901. Ronald Ryan was the last person hanged in 1967 for killing a prison officer during an escape from a Victorian prison. The last formal abolition occurred in New South Wales in 1985, with the national abolition following in 1987. Since then, Australia has reaffirmed its status as a state party to international abolitionist norms, and any move to reintroduce capital punishment would require substantial legal changes and a broad political consensus.

Hanson’s position reflects a broader, often polarizing debate about crime, punishment, and the role of the state in deterrence and retribution. While officials and advocates emphasize evolving standards of justice and human rights obligations, proponents of restoration argue that the most serious crimes demand ultimate penalties and that public safety and the burden on taxpayers justify reconsideration. Critics warn that reintroducing capital punishment could undermine due process, set dangerous precedents, and fail to deliver the promised deterrent effect. The issue is unlikely to be resolved quickly, but Hanson has signaled that the debate will persist as Australia weighs its next steps in criminal justice policy.