Whether the continuing imposition of the death penalty which has not been carried out since 1999 continues to be a deterrent to capital offences was argued by Justice Frank Seepersad as he made a case for its abolition in T&T.
Advocating his case for its abolition, Seepersad said judges were yoked with the obligation of imposing a mandatory death sentence on an accused convicted of murder.
The contentious issue of the pros and cons of the death penalty was brought to the fore at a symposium focusing on human rights issues, organised by the Faculty of Law at the University of the West Indies, St Augustine, in partnership with the European Union, on Wednesday evening.
Seepersad said even though there had been no execution since 1999 and convicts, most of whom have been incarcerated for periods that exceed the Pratt and Morgan time line, continue to have the sentence of death ominously hanging over their heads.
“But this is the law of the land which a judge is constitutionally mandated to follow,” he noted.
The symposium, which featured leading jurists, intellectuals and activists, involved key issues of human rights, including children’s rights, LGBTI rights, the death penalty and prison/detention issues. Seepersad said the issue of the continuation of the death penalty was shrouded with a lot of emotion and had possible political ramifications.
“There is also a lack of empirical data as to whether it has proven to have had a deterred effect in this jurisdiction and one must therefore ask how effective a deterrent it has been, given that no one has been executed for close to two decades and although it is the law, the number of murders continue, to increase.
“It must also be acknowledged that our retention of the death penalty is inconsistent with the position that has been adopted by significant sections of the developed world.”
He said punishment that was cruel, inhumane and degrading should not be a facet of national life. He recalled Chief Justice Ivor Archie, at the opening of the 2015/2016 law term, identifying the number of convicted people that were on Death Row and asked whether as a nation, T&T could stomach the number of executions that would be required, if the orders of the court were to be carried out. He said the case for abolition must be considered and in pursuit of the spirit of partnership with global partners in particular European partners’.
The judge said human rights challenges that face judges could be readily remedied if there was the political will to do that which was right.
“Judges have a responsibility to ensure that the law develops so as to meet the just demands and aspirations of an ever developing society and decisions of the court should accord with the international human right norms.”
He said he hoped that the discussion started by the Law Faculty would pave the path for a meaningful review of issues such as the death penalty, discrimination based on sexual orientation and matters of privacy and that judges would be saved from embarking upon path of Judicial activism in an attempt to ensure that their decisions accord with internationally accepted norms.