Tweet
The first day of the rest of your life
Anthony Gomes
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
Those of us who are fortunate enough to witness tomorrow's sunrise should use the moment for reflection on the length of time we have left on earth. For those who have robbed innocent others of their lives, experiencing the wonder of tomorrow's sunrise should be forfeited.
Frequently, we exalt Singapore as a most successful economic model to which Jamaica should aspire. No one can doubt Singapore's economic success, but behind this spectacular achievement is a structured society that demands excellence and decries failure. Such a strict environmental attitude runs counter to Jamaican culture which Mr Lee Quan Yew, the former prime minister, referred to on an earlier visit as a "calypso mentality".
Singapore is a "no-nonsense" state with exceptional law enforcement and an imperturbable justice system.
Remember the caning of an American youth accused of defacing expensive luxury cars with aerosol spray paint? All pleas for leniency fell on deaf ears as with accused drug users and traffickers. Most recently, a young Australian was sentenced to hang for trafficking. So far, calls for clemency have been denied. In the early 1980s a young couple in their 20s received the death penalty for using ganja.
Amnesty International reports that about 420 people have been sent to the gallows since 1991, making Singapore the country with the highest per capita execution rate in the world. At the other extreme is Jamaica, with possibly the highest per capita murder rate in the world. Singapore believes it must deal severely with drug offenders to protect its society which implies that it sees capital punishment as a distinct deterrent to crime.
If Jamaica had addressed its crime situation in like manner, is it possible we would have achieved similar levels of economic success as Singapore? Think about it. Meanwhile, the trite approach to crime and violence continues to sap the country's economic energy in ways that are becoming increasingly deleterious.
The antagonists of capital punishment usually refer to hanging as "barbaric" but seldom condemn the crime of murder in the same derogatory language. The United States has adopted the lethal injection as a more humane method of execution that could be introduced as an alternative to hanging.
So far the US has executed 15 criminals this year, of ages between 30 and 51 years old. Since 1976, 11 women have been executed, two by electrocution and others by lethal injection. Twenty-eight more inmates are scheduled for execution but subject to the outcome of "stays" and "appeals". Ten of these are from the state of Texas.
With regard to hanging, Amnesty states it will continue efforts to see that "this cruel and ineffective punishment is abolished". There is, however, a strong body of opinion which believes capital punishment is effective, and that any depiction of cruelty should be reserved for the victims and their families, which is often not the case. Generally speaking, human rights activists are slow to condemn the killing of law enforcement officers, who are the society's first line of defence against crime, violence and other civil disorders. These unsung heroes belong in the Christian category that believes: "No greater love hath any man than to lay down his life for a friend."
Since time immemorial the death penalty has been part of Christian teaching and is stated in the Roman Catholic Catechism under item 2266 as follows: "It is the right and duty of legitimate public authority to punish malefactors by means of penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime, not excluding, in cases of extreme gravity, the death penalty." The possibility of an erroneous conviction has been minimised to an insignificant level with the advanced DNA technology.
The argument that the death penalty is not a deterrent is based on circumstantial evidence at best. Professor Paul Rubin at Emory University in the US in an extensive study, sought to answer the question: "What are the consequences of an execution? Will an execution have the effect of deterring other potential murders or will it merely satisfy some desire for vengeance? The answer was as follows: "In all six equations measuring the deterrent effect of executions, we found that each execution led to a significant reduction in the number of homicides. The most conservative estimate was that each execution led to an average of 18 fewer murders. The 95 per cent confidence interval estimate for this value was between eight and 28 fewer homicides. In other words, we can be 95 per cent sure that each execution resulted in at least eight fewer homicides. In summary, if we decide not to execute murderers, then we are making a decision that will lead to many additional murders in society."
Both Barbados and Trinidad and Tobago have applied legal measures to avoid future attempts by the UK Privy Council to intervene and neutralise the decisions of their national Courts of Appeal. This has allowed them to proceed with determining verdicts within their supreme and unmitigated jurisdiction, and adopting the Caribbean Court of Justice as the final arbiter in criminal cases, including homicides.
Perhaps after the coming general election, we may see some progress in charting the way forward to resolve the contentious issue of the Caribbean Court of Justice in Jamaica.
Anthony Gomes
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
Those of us who are fortunate enough to witness tomorrow's sunrise should use the moment for reflection on the length of time we have left on earth. For those who have robbed innocent others of their lives, experiencing the wonder of tomorrow's sunrise should be forfeited.
Frequently, we exalt Singapore as a most successful economic model to which Jamaica should aspire. No one can doubt Singapore's economic success, but behind this spectacular achievement is a structured society that demands excellence and decries failure. Such a strict environmental attitude runs counter to Jamaican culture which Mr Lee Quan Yew, the former prime minister, referred to on an earlier visit as a "calypso mentality".
Singapore is a "no-nonsense" state with exceptional law enforcement and an imperturbable justice system.
Remember the caning of an American youth accused of defacing expensive luxury cars with aerosol spray paint? All pleas for leniency fell on deaf ears as with accused drug users and traffickers. Most recently, a young Australian was sentenced to hang for trafficking. So far, calls for clemency have been denied. In the early 1980s a young couple in their 20s received the death penalty for using ganja.
Amnesty International reports that about 420 people have been sent to the gallows since 1991, making Singapore the country with the highest per capita execution rate in the world. At the other extreme is Jamaica, with possibly the highest per capita murder rate in the world. Singapore believes it must deal severely with drug offenders to protect its society which implies that it sees capital punishment as a distinct deterrent to crime.
If Jamaica had addressed its crime situation in like manner, is it possible we would have achieved similar levels of economic success as Singapore? Think about it. Meanwhile, the trite approach to crime and violence continues to sap the country's economic energy in ways that are becoming increasingly deleterious.
The antagonists of capital punishment usually refer to hanging as "barbaric" but seldom condemn the crime of murder in the same derogatory language. The United States has adopted the lethal injection as a more humane method of execution that could be introduced as an alternative to hanging.
So far the US has executed 15 criminals this year, of ages between 30 and 51 years old. Since 1976, 11 women have been executed, two by electrocution and others by lethal injection. Twenty-eight more inmates are scheduled for execution but subject to the outcome of "stays" and "appeals". Ten of these are from the state of Texas.
With regard to hanging, Amnesty states it will continue efforts to see that "this cruel and ineffective punishment is abolished". There is, however, a strong body of opinion which believes capital punishment is effective, and that any depiction of cruelty should be reserved for the victims and their families, which is often not the case. Generally speaking, human rights activists are slow to condemn the killing of law enforcement officers, who are the society's first line of defence against crime, violence and other civil disorders. These unsung heroes belong in the Christian category that believes: "No greater love hath any man than to lay down his life for a friend."
Since time immemorial the death penalty has been part of Christian teaching and is stated in the Roman Catholic Catechism under item 2266 as follows: "It is the right and duty of legitimate public authority to punish malefactors by means of penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime, not excluding, in cases of extreme gravity, the death penalty." The possibility of an erroneous conviction has been minimised to an insignificant level with the advanced DNA technology.
The argument that the death penalty is not a deterrent is based on circumstantial evidence at best. Professor Paul Rubin at Emory University in the US in an extensive study, sought to answer the question: "What are the consequences of an execution? Will an execution have the effect of deterring other potential murders or will it merely satisfy some desire for vengeance? The answer was as follows: "In all six equations measuring the deterrent effect of executions, we found that each execution led to a significant reduction in the number of homicides. The most conservative estimate was that each execution led to an average of 18 fewer murders. The 95 per cent confidence interval estimate for this value was between eight and 28 fewer homicides. In other words, we can be 95 per cent sure that each execution resulted in at least eight fewer homicides. In summary, if we decide not to execute murderers, then we are making a decision that will lead to many additional murders in society."
Both Barbados and Trinidad and Tobago have applied legal measures to avoid future attempts by the UK Privy Council to intervene and neutralise the decisions of their national Courts of Appeal. This has allowed them to proceed with determining verdicts within their supreme and unmitigated jurisdiction, and adopting the Caribbean Court of Justice as the final arbiter in criminal cases, including homicides.
Perhaps after the coming general election, we may see some progress in charting the way forward to resolve the contentious issue of the Caribbean Court of Justice in Jamaica.
Comment