Submitted by Yardbroom
Prime Minister Bruce Golding
“The International Federation For Human Rights (FIDH) welcomed the Caribbean Court Of Justice first death penalty ruling given on Nov 8, 2006, which dismissed an appeal by the Barbados Government seeking to restore execution orders for two convicted murderers. The case was largely perceived as a test case of the new court’s position on the death penalty.”
“The CCJ is the Supreme judicial organ in the Caribbean community and replaces the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council since April 2005.”
The situation has changed since 2006, as this year it was reported that Barbados’ Deputy Prime Minister Freundel Stuart, who is also Attorney General announced that the mandatory death sentence will be abolished in Barbados. “This statement was made after the Inter-American Court of Human Rights had stated that the power to have the death sentence commuted by an executive body as is the current situation, is not the same as having the appropriate punishment determined by a competent court of Law”.
There we have Barbados’ position however an up date of the situation will bring differences and similarities into focus.
On the 26th November 2008, The Associated Press reported that the Jamaican Parliament voted to keep capital punishment by 34 votes for to 15 against.
Although the death penalty has been legal in Jamaica the courts have not used that punishment for almost 20 years. Why did the Jamaica Parliament voted as they did? The vote was against a background of a “soaring crime rate and an increase in crime against children ( including the disturbing cases of a girl who was beheaded and a boy whose body was found cut up in a trash can ) many people have demanded that courts start condemning people to death again”.
The director for Jamaican’s For Justice said: “The island with a population of 3 million people, already has had 1,240 murders so far this year, (2008) coming close to last year’s total of 1,400 in comparison, Chicago, which has a population of 2.8 million had 443 murders in 2007″.
The passing of time has not diminished Prime Minister Golding’s views on the undertaking he gave to the Jamaican people. As recently as July 10, 2009, The Daily News reported that Golding told a town hall meeting that his administration “is prepared to honour the “yes” vote taken by Parliament last year on the capital punishment issue.” He added:
“Once Parliament has taken that position, this government has given a commitment, that we are going to honour it. We are obliged by the resolution of Parliament he said.” I should add that the Jamaican House of Representatives voted to retain hanging, and the Senate did the same a month later.
Before I address the homicide rate for Barbados what is the CARICOM position? It was recently reported: “Trinidad and Tobago has the death penalty for murder. If a murderer has the death penalty, it’s very difficult to reconcile it with someone who committed genocide getting life in prison” argued a legal expert for one Caribbean nation, who spoke on condition of anonymity. He believed that to be a general CARICOM view.”
If that is the case how does that perceived CARICOM view square up with Barbados, Trinidad and Tobago and now Jamaica’s Positions.
What this does highlight is though our backgrounds – CARICOM nations – are similar in most cases, distance and time have allowed us to adopt different cultures and ways of doing things…and dare I say it behaving. What is suitable for Trinidad and Tobago and Jamaica might not be necessarily so for Barbados. The idea that we are in CARICOM and a one size fits all is not possible. I have on purpose avoided mentioning Guyana…I will leave that for others.
The United Nations Survey on Crime Trends Homicides Rate for 2000 were:
- Barbados 7.49 per 100 000 population
- Jamaica 33.69 per 100 000 population
- The only countries with higher rates than Jamaica that year were:
- Swaziland 88.61 per 100 000 population ( In 2003 dropped to 13.05 and 2004 13.65 )
- Columbia 82.74 per 100 000 population.
- South Africa 51 per 100 000 population.
- For 2008 the murder rate in Barbados was 8.2 per 100 000 population.
It is obvious that Jamaica has a major problem with homicides and the Jamaican Prime Minister Bruce Golding seeks to address it the way he, the Jamaican House of Representatives, the Jamaican Senate and the Jamaican majority population think it should be addressed…democracy at work.
Should I or others interfere in the affairs of a sovereign state because it is a CARICOM member? or will that apply to certain issues for specific islands…no doubt there will be the usual silence. I take no position here on this issue, I have just given a factual account.
Honestly…
If you have a law, USE IT!
If not, GET RID OF IT!
Plain & Simple! Stop wasting the taxpayers’ money! WE are the ones working hard and staying on the right side of the law…EVERYONE can do that! Why should we pander to those who don’t want to?
@Bowman, As Leviticus 19 says, I will try and be ‘nice’ to you a spiritually ‘deaf’ person, as you don’t have a clue how to ‘rightly divide’ God’s Word, either in its historical, cultural, or theological context, hence, in your blinded ‘ignorance’ refer to it as garbage!
Yardbroom, I do believe that your assessment is correct, the lengthy stay in prison then amounts to cruel and inhuman punishment, if the ‘stated’ five years is reached.
I think that this was how T&T got around Pratt & Morgan, in the Dole Chadee case.
Produce swift and efficient prosecution case and case scheduling, eliminate lengthy delays caused by attorneys for the defense and you may have a go, I think anyway.
Turning back to the point on the socio-economic factors.
Surely I agree that the case of Mexico highlights a criminal and gang created warfare that results in a severe incidence of deaths.
Nevertheless, what causes these, greed for some but survival for others.
The ‘barons’ seek money over money i.e. greed, while the footsoldiers seek money for survival.
Is there a difference, maybe.
I too abhor the crime i.e. drugs, that destroy so many lives.
Nevertheless, what causes the success of barons and maintains the black market?
Money and survival, together with a product that hooks the buyers.
It is a social scenario, that must be handled before the crime i.e. murders.
How to eliminate the trade, that results in deaths?
Big question obviously, but surely hanging one person or even ten, will not get rid of the trade nor murders?
I am not apologising, merely playing devil’s advocate.
Note that I too agree that there are a select minority who are insanely brutal and sick, but can you apply this to the majority?
Will you generalise, at the risk of ignoring the underlying realities that could in fact address much problems?
Peace
Zoe, I ask you again, why should we, still a secular society be governed by the concepts of Leviticus? Why not adopt Sharia law then? And you have not answered Jack Bowman that we would have a most barbaric society if we should follow Leviticus! Spare me the thesis in reply, please.
Yard broom your interpretation is indeed quiet right.
zion1971,
I was away for a couple days. You’ve made some very solid and sensible comments above.
By the way, my gut feeling about the Dole Chady/Panday matter is that Panday did not want to take any chances with that murderous bunch.
With his minister Selwin (can’t remember the last name; I think it’s Richardson) being gunned down execution-style, Panday was not about to take any chances with his life.
To those who are in favour of abolishing the death penalty, please be honest in your postulations.
Kindly note that the death penalty was not instituted as a deterrent to murder; it is there as PUNISHMENT FOR THE CRIME OF MURDER!
The by product of the death penalty would tend to make potential murderers think twice, and as a result, lead to a deterrent in the crime of murder.
Themis, the majority of Barbadians, are NOT secularist; therefore, you cannot impose YOUR secularist mindset on everyone else!
As Facts correctly stated:
“Kindly note that the death penalty was NOT instituted as a deterrent to murder, it is there as PUNISHMENT FOR THE CRIME OF MURDER!”
Our shared morality, throughout the history mankind, is “self-evident” thus, the rule of voluntary agents on earth in the sentence that ‘reason’ gives concerning the goodness of those things which they are to do. Thus, reason discovers in nature the laws God has promulgated and all people know them to be right.
Civil, criminal, and most of our other laws, governing our society, for the good justice of all, find there genesis in the Word of God, the Bible, not a ‘godless’ secular mindset!
@ Zoe,
I do not care what the majority of Barbadians are or say they are. The Constitution declares them to be secularist! And you know the last part of your contribution is absolute nonsense. These laws preceded the Word of God.
FACTS
I coulnot agree with you more
@Themis, If any man be ignorant, let him remain ignorant, the choice is yours!
So it be!
Zoe,
we know that you made your choice to remain ignorant but why seek to have Themis join you?
Themis, where in the constitution of B’dos, does it refer to the majority of Barbadians as ‘secularist’?
Secondly, why then does one take the ‘Bible’ the Word of God, and swear on it in taking oaths, etc?
Secularism, Secular Humanism.
A way of life and thought that is pursued without reference to God or religion. The Latin root ‘saeculum’ referred to a generation or an age. ‘Secular’ came to mean “belonging to this age” wordly, it is a world view and life style oriented to the profane, (Godless) rather than the sacred.
Historically, “secularization” first referred to the process of transferring property from ecclesastical jurisdiction to that of the state or other nonecclesiastical authority.
Secularization is to be understood as a shift in ways of thinking and living, away from God and toward the worldly. Renaissance humanism, Englightenment rationalism, the rising power and influence of science, the breakdown of traditional structures ( e.g., the family, the church, the neighborhood), the technicization of society, and the competition offered by nationalisn, evolutionism, and Marxism have all contributed to what Max Weber termed the “disenchantment” of the modern world.
Secularization, is itself, a fact of history and a mixed blessing. However, ‘Secularism’ as a comprehensive philosophy of life expresses an unqualifed enthusiasm for the process of ‘secularization’ in all spheres of life.
Secularism, is fatally flawed by its reductionist view of reality, denying and exculding Almighty God and the supernatural in a myopic fixation on the immanent and the natural. In contemporary discussion, secularism and humanism are often seen in tandem as secular humanism, an approach to life and thought, individual and society, which glorifies the creature, and rejects the Creator; it is an entirely ‘godless’ approach to life.
Whose values should be reflected in our Law and Public Policy?
The traditional answers from Judeo-Christian history, philosophy, and theology are often dismissed without a hearing, and our ‘heritage’ including the ‘Moral Roots’ of our ‘Legal’ and political sysytems is being exchanged for the views that the so-called enlightened secularists offer in its place.
While the Biblical values may not, ‘ipso facto’ be appropriate for legislation, across the board, there are numerous instances in which these ancient traditions do offer the best alternatives for public affirmation, as Lutheran theologian Richard John Neuhaus has written:
“It was thought until very recently, by the cultural leadership of the Western world, that (the source of public values) had been resolved…by excluding religion or religious-based morality from the public arena…The idea of the separation of church and State…has by remarkable convolution of logic and Law, come to mean in the minds of many people the separation of religiously based values from public policy. But, the period is now past when it was assumed that these issues could be resolved by simply removing one side of the debate from the public square…We are not talking about imposing a belief system, BUT, rather, about RESISTING the imposition of ‘Alien’ belief systems, that IMPOSE themselves under the guise of being ‘value-neutral’ and ‘value-free’, when in fact they are laden with ALL kinds of values which are ‘Alien’ to the beliefs, the dreams, the (very) convictions of the American people, ( and I dare say Barbadians as well!).
A secuIar state is one where church and government are two different entities, Iike ItaIy where the Pope does not make the Iaws nor does he enforce them, in a IargeIy CathoIic country, or Turkey which though mainIy MusIim is not governed by Imams but by the democraticaIIy eIected goverment and unIike Iran, where we have seen recentIy that the peopIe may want one thing but the “church” ruIes. We have a IegaI system based on EngIish Common Iaw, the Iaw of precedent which though infIuenced by Christianity originaIIy is not dictated by bibIicaI ruIes, unIike the horrendous sharia Iaw which uses the Koran as the be aII and its priests to ruIe. We don’t have to swear on the bibIe in court if we don’t want to, we have the right to choose what to swear by and our word is taken seriousIy when we give it, without resorting to God or gods and uItimateIy the peopIe ruIe, via the jury system and the eIectorate. The peopIe decide, not God, whether we are teIIing the truth or not. Yay!
@Thanatos,
I only just saw your question…it is section 19 of the Constitution.
Truth, by definition is absolute, regardless of who denies it, truth is the ultimate certitude.
No matter how vigorously we attempt to hide from truth, it always finds a way to survive, and deliver its consequences. And the consequences can be severe; the greater the repression of truth, and the longer the period of time over which the repression takes place, the graver the ultimate consequences.
“And many will follow their ‘destructive’ ways, because of whom the way of ‘truth’ will be blasphemed. By covetousness they will exploit you with deceptive words; for a long time their judgment has not been idle, and their destruction does not slumber. ( 2 Peter 2: 2,3).
“And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” (John 8:32).
“To say of what is, that it is; or of what is not, that it is not, is true.” Aristotle.
Is that by any chance an answer to my post?
Pingback: Looking Behind The Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke Matter « Barbados Underground