May 16
JAMAICA:
The death penalty is not the answer
National Security Minister Robert Montague recently said that his ministry is
taking steps "to determine if there are any legal impediments to the resumption
of hanging in Jamaica". He further stated that persons who intend to break the
law must know that "punishment will be sure, swift and just".
The minister's concern is understandable. When our country gained Independence
in 1962, our murder rate was 3.9 per 100,000, one of the lowest in the world.
In 2005, we had the dubious distinction of being the most murderous country in
the world, claiming a rate of 58 per 100,000 people. Our rate now hovers around
40 per 100,000.
Hanging is still legal in Jamaica, but was last carried out in 1988 at the St
Catherine District Prison. The death penalty was subjected to a moratorium that
year, but in 2008, Parliament voted to retain it. In Jamaica, the only offence
that warrants the death penalty is aggravated murder, and the punishment is
effected by hanging.
However, the resumption of hanging has been affected by a 1993 Privy Council
ruling stating that it is unconstitutional to have persons waiting for more
than 5 years after sentencing to be executed. Our Charter of Fundamental Rights
and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act in 2011 overturned that ruling, but
there still have not been any hangings here since.
So we find ourselves again debating the sensitive and controversial topic of
capital punishment. The overwhelming majority of Jamaicans will agree that
something must be done to curb our unacceptable crime rate, especially murders.
But is capital punishment the answer?
Today, only 36 countries actively practise capital punishment, with the United
Nations General Assembly calling for a global moratorium on executions, with a
view to their eventual abolition. However, although capital punishment is not
carried out in most countries, more than 60 % of the world's population live in
countries where executions take place.
Offences meriting the death penalty, termed capital offences, vary from country
to country, and include murder, treason, sodomy, human trafficking, apostasy
and atheism. The methods used also vary, and include hanging, shooting,
electrocution, lethal injection, beheading, and the use of gas chambers.
Objective research and analysis of relevant data, however, indicate that the
death penalty is not effective in deterring crime. A study performed in the
United States of America in 2008 found that 88 % of the nation's leading
criminologists did not believe that the death penalty is an effective
deterrent.
Subsequently, a report released in 2012 by the National Research Council of the
National Academies, based on a review of more than 3 decades of research,
concluded that studies claiming a deterrent effect on murder rates from the
death penalty are fundamentally flawed.
The report read: "The committee concludes that research to date on the effect
of capital punishment on homicide is not informative about whether capital
punishment decreases, increases, or has no effect on homicide rates. Therefore,
the committee recommends that these studies not be used to inform deliberations
requiring judgments about the effect of the death penalty on homicide."
Indeed, in that country, states that have death-penalty laws do not have lower
crime or murder rates than states without such laws, and states that have
abolished capital punishment show no significant changes in either crime or
murder rates.
Apart from the absence of convincing evidence demonstrating deterrence, capital
punishment presents several other issues. The death penalty violates the right
to life. When a person takes the life of another, one may claim that they have
forfeited their right to live, a view held by many.
Unfortunately, the death penalty is also discriminatory, and is often used
against the most vulnerable in society, including the poor, the illiterate and
people with mental disabilities.
Where justice systems are flawed, as in Jamaica, the risk of executing an
innocent person is a distinct possibility. Once a person is executed, the
result is final. An innocent person can be released from prison for a crime
they did not commit, but an execution can never be reversed.
Since 1973, 156 innocent men and women have been exonerated and released from
death row in the United States, including some who came within minutes of
execution. One study found that approximately 4 % of persons sentenced to death
in that country are innocent, and there is strong evidence that at least a
dozen persons executed there over the past 40 years were actually not guilty,
including a man who was executed in Texas because the jury confused him for
another man with the same name and appearance.
In the United Kingdom, the death penalty was abolished partly because a man was
wrongfully executed for the murder of his wife and daughter in 1950.
Substandard legal counsel is also a factor, mainly affecting persons of lower
socio-economic status. A Columbia University study found that 68 % of all
death-penalty cases were reversed on appeal, with inadequate defence being one
of the main reasons requiring reversal.
Death-penalty trials, and the appeals processes that usually follow, are also
likely to be significantly more expensive than trials seeking a sentence of
life in prison without parole, and are longer, which would stress our already
cash-strapped and frustrating justice system, which perpetually experiences a
backlog of cases. Families of murder victims undergo severe trauma, and the
extended process of murder trials prior to executions often prolongs their
agony.
Even if the death penalty were an effective deterrent, with a murder conviction
rate of five per cent in Jamaica, and the levels of corruption in our politics
and police force, it would be ineffective, and punishment would not be "sure,
swift and just", as the minister suggested.
The most effective deterrent to crime is the likelihood of getting caught. We
need to focus instead on methods to reduce crime and actually apprehend
perpetrators, rather than consider executions, which constitute revenge, rather
than justice.
(source: Michael Abrahams is an obstetrician and gynaecologist, comedian and
poet----Jamaica Gleaner)
PHILIPPINES:
Lifting of death penalty is Congress' call, says Palace
Malacanang on Monday said that it was up to Congress to decide on the
restoration of death penalty in the country.
Communications Secretary Herminio Coloma Jr. made the remark after presumptive
president Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte indicated his call for the
restoration of the death penalty.
"Lifting of the death penalty requires that the present law be amended. It is
best that this be tackled by the next Congress," Coloma said in a text message.
A report by Unang Balita said that Duterte wanted to revive the death penalty
for heinous crimes including robbery with rape.
Since the start of his term, President Benigno Aquino III has maintained his
opposition to death penalty.
In 2014, presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda said Aquino "has
reservations" due to flaws in the judicial system.
"Concerned tayo doon sa judicial system, hence, he [Aquino] has reservations on
death penalty. To the best of my knowledge, that position remains the same,"
Lacierda said then.
Although death penalty was abolished in the 1987 Constitution, it was
reinstated through Republic Act 7659, which imposes capital punishment on
certain heinous crimes, and RA 8177 provides for lethal injection as the means
of carrying out the death penalty.
In 2006, then-President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed Republic Act 9346
abolishing death penalty in the Philippines by repealing RA 7659.
(source: gmanetwork.com)
_______________________________________________
A service courtesy of Washburn University School of Law www.washburnlaw.edu
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Unsubscribe: http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/options/deathpenalty
