July 9
<P>TRINIDAD & TOBAGO:<P> Lawyers want changes to mandatory death sentence<P> <P> Several prominent attorneys yesterday said that Government should move to make the death penalty a discretionary sentence even though the Privy Council ruled that it was the mandatory sentence for murder in this country. <P> Opposition Leader Basdeo Panday also joined in the chorus, as he urged that categories of murders should be introduced-a goal which he had tried to achieve while his party, the United National Congress, was in government. <P> But according to Attorney General John Jeremie, there are no plans to change the nature of the penalty and it will remain as the only punishment for people convicted of murder regardless of human rights considerations.<P> "Although that may be so (that the mandatory death penalty may be regarded as cruel and unusual treatment), it may not be unconstitutional. The mandatory death sentence is applicable to persons who commit murder, and government has no intention of changing that," he told the Express. <P> On Wednesday, the Privy Council ruled that the death penalty in this country was a mandatory sentence, backtracking on a previous judgment it had made that the sentence should be imposed on the discretion of a trial judge, who would have the power to impose any sentence on a convicted murderer. <P> Commenting on the judgment yesterday, constitutional expert Martin Daly SC said that it revealed "the inherent difficulty in having a court culturally removed for the Caribbean, 'giving effect to evolving values and standards', to use the words of the minority judgment". <P> "None of the confusion produced by these death penalty decisions would have arisen if we did not have a constipated Parliament that does not meet the challenge of pro-actively producing legislation that deals with evolving situations in our own jurisdiction. Legislation categorising degrees of murder is urgently required," the former independent senator said. <P> Law lecturer and attorney Dana Seetahal said while it was "good" that the law concerning the death penalty was settled, she still did not think that the penalty should be imposed on everyone who is convicted of murder. <P> Seetahal, also an Independent Senator, said the ultimate penalty should be reserved only for "exceptional cases" of murder. <P> "What the courts are saying is that it is not for them to change the law against the will of Parliament. What I do think is that the way to go about changing the nature of the death penalty, or abolishing it totally, is for legislative change, and for those persons who want that to push for that change," she said. <P> Panday agreed that capital punishment should only be imposed in cases of calculated murder. <P> "I have always felt that the death penalty was in accordance with the law. What the British (Law Lords in the Privy Council) were doing was twisting the law to satisfy an ideological position they had taken that hanging is a cruel and unusual punishment," he said. <P> "I think that they are correct when they say that hanging is part of the law (in Trinidad and Tobago). Whether you like it or not it is a legal matter," he added. <P> The Opposition Leader urged that Government should implement laws that would distinguishing between different types of murders. He reminded that while the UNC was in power, it brought to Parliament legislation defining degrees of murders and provided that the death penalty was only to be imposed in the most serious degree. <P> "Of course we did not say in office long enough to achieve that goal," he said. <P> Panday said that the Opposition was willing to discuss "all matters relating to human rights" with the government as part of his vision for constitutional reform. <P> Human rights attorney and abolitionist Gregory Delzin told the Express that the Privy Council's judgment seemed to be sending a message to Parliament "that Parliament must remedy the current situation where every single conviction of murder must be followed by a sentence of death". <P> He said that the Privy Council, at several instances in the judgment, referred to this country's human rights obligations to international bodies to preserve human rights. <P> "So that by acknowledging those principles (the Council) is sending a message to Parliament that it ought to remedy the situation," he said. <P> Delzin said he did not anticipate that the judgment had silenced debate on the death penalty. <P> "The fundamental rights provision and the preamble of the Constitution really constitute a body of moral values by which this country is guided. In that context there will always be arguments before the courts. When one door closes, another opens," he said.<P> (source: Trinidad News)<P><P><P> <P><P>
