March 14
JAMAICA:
Christianity and the death penalty
THE EDITOR, Sir:
PERMIT ME to comment on the issue of 'Capital Punishment', which at this
time seem to be the most burning topic on the lips of the Jamaican people.
The Jamaican people are predominately practitioners of the Christian
religion and although they are diversified in their respective doctrines
they are all guided by strong Christian religious principles.
It therefore behooves me to attempt to comprehend the thinking of the
followers of this religion which includes some of our political
representatives who continue to oppose capital punishment on the basis of
religious principles. The Bible clearly supports capital punishment in
several passages to name a few:
Acts 25 v 11; Romans 13 v 4; Genesis 9 v 6; Exodus 21 v 12.
Deuteronomy 19 v 1-11 states that "If any man hates his own neighbour and
lie in the wait for him and rise up against him and smite him mortally
that he dies and fleeth into one a city of refuge, then the elders of the
city should send and fetch him and deliver him into the hands of the
avenger of blood that he may die".
Now then, the Christian religion not only teaches but it was demonstrated
on the cross by Jesus himself that if in your last dying breath you are
able to admit your sins and ask for forgiveness and are sincere, your sins
will be forgiven.
Christ demonstrated this to the thief on the cross who admitted his guilt
and asked to be remembered in Christ's kingdom.
You must take note that the thief (not murderer) stated that he and his
companion were deserving of the death penalty and Christ seemingly must
have agreed with him in that he did not stay the execution, but rather
saved the man's soul.
SAVING SOULS
This demonstrates that the prerogative of saving souls is for the Lord and
not man.
The Christian and human rights groups are therefore misdirecting their
sympathy and compassion in opposition of the death penalty.
The fact is that the man or woman who commits murder and is found guilty
after going through the legal process and hence is placed on death row,
has all the time to admit his guilt and request forgiveness from his Lord,
whether or not he is a believer.
Jesus said He came to save and die for all, giving us hope through faith
and a promise for eternal life with Him.
It is the person that is murdered that we should be concerned about. He or
she might not have been given the opportunity to call on the Lord to have
mercy on his soul and therefore his soul might be lost.
DESTROY SOULS
So what is also clear here is that the murderer not only takes a life, but
also destroys a soul in many instances while still having the opportunity
to save his own soul.
For those who argue that the death penalty is not a deterrent I would ask
them the following.
Are prison sentences for rape, carnal knowledge, and incest, fraud,
larceny and illegal drugs a deterrent? If the answer is in the
affirmative, then how is it that we have so many criminals coming before
the courts repeatedly for some of these offences.
Surely, when Blackstone wrote our laws he must have intended that the
penalty for breaking the law must be a form of punishment, not a
deterrent, matching the crime committed.
Therefore, the matching punishment for capital murder from a moral and
Christian stand point must be the death penalty.
For those like my lawyer friend on the Patrick Bailey talk show recently,
that argue against capital punishment because of the chance that an
innocent life could be lost is baseless.
Is there ever a revolution, religious or otherwise, where innocent lives
were not lost?
Innocent lives were lost so that we can have this religion and all other
religions and will continue to be lost.
An innocent life was lost when Christ died on the cross and out of that
came hope for eternal life.
Christians remember that Christ said, before his words pass away heaven
and earth will pass away.
These are his words.
So let us not lament for the one who commits murder and maybe also
destroyed a soul, and has the opportunity to save his soul. Rather, let us
lament for the one who is murdered and hence, might have lost the
opportunity to save his or her soul.
I am, etc.,
Arthur 'Teddy' R. Phidd----Justice of the Peace
(source: Letter to the Editor, Jamaica Gleaner)
BANGLADESH:
Death penalty maximum punishment: Anti-Terrorism Law placed in cabinet
A tough new antiterrorism law providing capital punishment for acts of
terrorism was placed with the cabinet on Monday and discussed in detail,
pending endorsement, competent sources said.
The cabinet in its meeting at the PMO decided that a cabinet committee
would further review the draft of the proposed new law against those
involved in terrorism, their sponsors and terror financiers.
Prime Minister Khaleda Zia chaired the weekly cabinet meeting, attended by
Ministers and concerned State Ministers and Secretaries.
After the meeting, Law Minister Barrister Moudud Ahmed told UNB and some
private TV channels that a cabinet body would further review and observe
the draft of the new law and submit the final draft within 30 days to the
cabinet.
Replying to a question, he said the Prime Minister would soon constitute
the Cabinet Committee.
"There was a long-drawn discussion on the proposed new law in the Cabinet
meeting-and it would need further review as the new law is very important
and lengthy," said the Law Minister.
He said the draft of the law was placed on Monday in the Cabinet meeting
for discussion.
Billing the proposed law completely new, having many Provisions, Moudud
said there would be varying punishment for terror offenses, including
financing, cooperating and training terrors.
"Death penalty would remain as the maximum punishment in the new law," he
told one newsman.
Replying to another question, the Law Minister said the title of the law
would be 'Terrorism Resistance Law (Santras Protirodh Ain)'.
(source: The New Nation)
AUSTRALIA:
Baton relay to protest death penalty
The Commonwealth Games Queen's Baton will today be carried past the home
and church of Van Tuong Nguyen in silent protest against the death penalty
by the Melbourne man's parish priest.
Peter Norden - who campaigned to save Nguyen from the noose after he was
convicted of smuggling heorin in Singapore last year, then conducted the
young man's funeral - will carry the Queen's Baton today on the eve of the
Commonwealth Games opening ceremony.
The St Ignatius parish priest will carry the baton through the streets of
Richmond, at 2.30pm (AEDT), past Nguyen's home, church and former
kindergarten and primary school.
Nguyen was hanged in Singapore on December 2 for smuggling almost 400g of
heroin into Singapore.
Fr Norden counselled the family before and after his hanging and knows the
devastation the death penalty can cause.
He said the punishment was an "unfortunate legacy" 37 Commonwealth
countries owed to former British rule.
Of them seven counties have carried out executions in recent years,
including Bangladesh, Botswana, India, Malaysia, Nigeria, Pakistan and
Singapore.
"Singapore, with a population of just 4 million, is the world's leading
executioner, with more than 400 individuals having been hanged there since
1991," Fr Norden said.
"Its death tally since the last Commonwealth Games 4 years ago is
estimated to be 68 lives.
"Singapore's enthusiasm for putting a noose around the neck of criminal
offenders now marks it out for special attention in the worldwide
community.
"The Commonwealth Games provides the opportunity for international
coverage of this critical moral and ethical issue, with large numbers of
visitors from countries that still sanction death by hanging expected in
Melbourne at this time."
(source: The Australian)
BAHAMAS:
Hangings Since 1973 "Unlawful"
The executions of 16 murder convicts since 1973 could be viewed as
"unlawful" killings at the hands of the state, given last week's ruling by
the privy council, a Progressive Liberal Party senator said yesterday in a
call for a full enquiry into the practices and procedures at the Attorney
General's Office and the Ministry of National Security.
Damian Gomez, who is also a practicing lawyer, said that last week's
ruling by the Privy Council that declared the mandatory death sentence in
The Bahamas unconstitutional, has raised "serious societal" concerns and
presents an "enormous" task for the new Attorney General "as a defender of
the Constitution and the rights of citizens in The Bahamas."
In a statement released yesterday, Mr. Gomez addressed a range of issues
raised by the ruling, including what it says about the country's
commitment to human rights generally, and the possibility of government
making compensation payments for the "many human rights abuses which have
occurred since the 1963 Constitution came into effect in 1965."
Mr. Gomez said an enquiry would ascertain the entire circumstances in
which "we have bungled the law and in the process of bungling, 16 persons
have been killed."
"These unlawful killings shall remain a blight on our society and call
into question our commitment to human rights generally and the rule of
law," said Mr. Gomez.
He said it was shocking that 33 years after independence and 43 years
after internal self government, that the law on human rights would not
have been appreciated until now and that "some 16 persons are to be viewed
as the victims of unlawful killings at the hands of the state."
"An enquiry ought to be made of all departments of the government and its
agencies as to whether there is compliance with each and every aspect of
the Bill of Rights, as set out in our Constitution, and steps ought to be
taken to ensure such compliance," said Mr. Gomez, adding that compliance
officers may have to be appointed and employed at all government
departments.
Mr. Gomez is one of a number of lawyers voicing their concerns over the
ruling's potential impact on the country's judicial system.
Wayne Munroe, president of the Bahamas Bar Association, told The Bahama
Journal yesterday that the ruling raises a number of concerns,
particularly when it comes to the future of the remaining death row
inmates at Her Majesty's Prison.
The Attorney Generals Office announced last Friday that all sentences
handed down to the 28 convicts on death row would be remitted to the
Supreme Court for reconsideration, but according to Mr. Munroe, its not
that simple.
"If you're remitting it back, some of these [death row inmates] were
convicted before judges who are no longer on the bench," noted Mr. Munroe.
"Who do you remit those matters back to? And even if its remitted back,
there are a number of cases in which a murder could have been committed in
1 of 3 ways or 2 ways or more and the jury just says guilty, they dont
tell the judge what basis they convicted the person on.
"The person has a right to a trial by their peers and they would have to
be sentenced on what the jury found. The judge doesn't know the basis on
which the jury convicted and they have to sentence based on the
heinousness of the crime or otherwise. That creates a practical
difficulty."
He said even if a procedure was put in place, as was announced by the AG's
Office, questions would still remain.
"The question is how exactly do you do it. In the example of where a
murder may have been committed in 1 of 3 ways, all of the 12 jurors may be
convinced that you committed murder, but there's no guarantee that all of
them are convinced of the reasons which they are saying you are guilty of
murder. And if the imposition of capital punishment must be unanimous,
then the question is do they have to be unanimous about the method by
which they are finding you guilty?" Mr. Munroe asked.
And if a conviction is handed down before the procedures were put in
place?
The judge would simply have to "deal with it," said Mr. Munroe.
"That's what judges do. They have to follow the law and the law is laid
down. The death penalty is not mandatory," he said.
"Judges will apply the law as they see it to be and as it's pronounced to
be, so thats what the Privy Council has pronounced the law to be. Our
Supreme Court judges are trial judges [and] will go about applying it as
they best think the law is. They will ask for the assistance of the
prosecution counsel and the defence counsel and we would be bound, in an
appropriate case, to point out what we think should be the principles that
guide them," said Mr. Munroe.
"And then no doubt, if they impose the death sentence and they have to
give a reason for it, the defence counsel having assisted, would still
appeal. The basis of that would be another matter, or do you appeal or do
you take constitutional action against it. It is a firestorm."
Citing the council's analysis of the decision, Mr. Gomez said the ruling
also has significant ramifications for other areas of the law.
"Clearly, all laws which have hitherto been regarded as existing laws as
of July 10th, 1973 must now be reviewed, considered and examined for the
purpose of ensuring their compliance with the provisions of the Bill of
Rights," he said.
Mr. Gomez pointed to a number of areas that could be reviewed in light of
the ruling, including the burden of proof, much of the legislation
affecting Town Planning, the separation of powers as it relates to a fair
trial before an independent and impartial court and the freezing of assets
"pursuant" to foreign government requests.
"One may well ask whether the government is prepared to do the right thing
by not only pursuing an enquiry, but also of accepting the findings of
such and enquiry and by making compensation payments for the many human
rights abuses which have occurred since the 1963 Constitution came into
effect in 1965," said Mr. Gomez.
"It may well be that the payment of these sums to victims and their heirs
and successors may well help to atone 4 less than careful adherence to the
Rule of Law. A gigantic task and obligation faces our new Attorney General
and we pray she will have the energy and resources to meet the challenge
which had been neglected by each and every one of her predecessors in
office."
*************
AG: Death Penalty Will Be Carried Out
If judges hand down death sentences, the government would see to it that
they are carried out, according to Attorney General Allyson
Maynard-Gibson.
Her assurance came at a recent press conference during which time she
explained that while the government has no choice but to follow the Privy
Councils ruling which effectively abolished the mandatory death sentence,
it will enforce the law of the land.
"Justice is going to be swift," Mrs. Maynard-Gibson said. "Once there is a
sentence, obviously it doesnt impact anyones right of appeal, but
certainly right after sentence, as quickly as possible, there will be a
death warrant read then the person against whom that warrant has been read
will take whatever steps [he or she] deems necessary, but the state
intends to fully enforce the laws of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas."
She stressed that under the laws of this country, the death penalty is
constitutional.
"So if the court again gives the death penalty, I want citizens to be
assured that it would be carried out," the attorney general said.
Her comment followed a renewed call by the international human rights
organization, Amnesty International, for The Bahamas to abolish the death
penalty.
The prime minister said in January during the funeral service of prison
officer Dion Bowles that he was fully in support of capital punishment.
There has been no hanging in The Bahamas since January 2000 when David
Mitchell met his fate at the gallows. The government of Prime Minister
Perry Christie has read no death warrant since it came to power in 2002.
But former Attorney General Alfred Sears had said repeatedly that the
country could not begin to seriously address the capital punishment
question until the case of Trono Davis and Forrester Bowe, 2 condemned men
at Her Majestys Prison, was decided before the Privy Council.
It is their appeal on which the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
ruled last week, determining that it is unconstitutional to hand down a
mandatory death sentence. The high court determined that a judge should
have discretion to view the merits of each case before determining
sentencing.
The ruling refueled the death penalty debate in The Bahamas, resulting in
some Bahamians, who were outraged and shocked by the ruling, calling for
the country to abandon the Privy Council as its highest appellate court.
Asked to respond to that call, the attorney general said, "The Privy
Council is the highest court in The Bahamas. There is no plan in the
foreseeable future to change that state of affairs.
"All that has happened in this judgment is that the Privy Council has
ratified, has agreed, with the position that the death penalty is
constitutional. The Privy Council had an issue with mandating that judges
give the death penalty."
On Friday, Mrs. Maynard-Gibson announced at a press conference that she
was "taking all necessary measures to have all convicted murderers,
including Bowe and Davis, swiftly remitted to the Supreme Court for
sentencing pursuant to the requirements laid down by the recent Privy
Council ruling."
But there are also more than 50 murder cases that will be impacted by the
ruling, possibly in the near future.
Asked whether the Privy Council ruling was considered a major loss for
prosecutors in the Attorney Generals office, Mrs. Maynard-Gibson said,
"Lawyers and the competent team of people here at the Attorney Generals
Office always recognize that when one goes to court one puts ones best
foot forward, and I want to assure the Bahamian public that the team at
the Attorney Generals Office [is made up of] consummate professionals.
"They do their best on a day-to-day basis and sometimes in the most
challenging of circumstances. After theyve done their best they recognize
that the matter after that is for the court. And so we respect the
decision of the Privy Council in the matter and as I have indicated we
will swiftly act on it."
(source for both: The Bahama Journal)
