'Abandon the Privy Council'
CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
thenassauguardian
candia@nasguard.com
Nassau, Bahamas
The Privy Council’s recent ruling on the death penalty in the case of Maxo Tido has unwittingly said to criminals ‘you can get away with your next crime’, according to Bishop Simeon Hall, who chaired the government-appointed National Advisory Council on Crime.
Hall said it is clear that if families of murder victims are to ever have justice, The Bahamas must abandon the Privy Council, at least for murder appeals.
One of the recommendations the Crime Council made to the Ingraham administration is to resume capital punishment.
But various Privy Council decisions over the years have set such a strict standard for the imposition of the death penalty, the government has been unable to carry out the law in this regard.
Tido was convicted of the 2002 murder of Donnell Conover. The 16-year-old was found with her skull crushed, and her body burnt.
The Privy Council said while Conover’s murder was “dreadful” and “appalling” it did not fall into the category for the worst of the worst murders and therefore the death penalty ought not apply.
“The ruling by the Privy Council raises serious questions as to what is happening,” Hall said.
“I understand to some degree the Privy Council has the last word, but certainly my big problem I’m wrestling with is what is the justice system saying to families of victims of murder, and then to persons who do the murder?
“It seems that the whole system now is lending its way to criminality. For the law lords to conclude that this was a bad murder but it’s not counted as the worst of the worst, I think it’s time for us to cry shame on the justice system.”
Conover’s mother, Laverne, who recently met with Bishop Hall on the matter, said the ruling re-opened an old wound.
“The murderers have all the rights,” said Mrs. Conover, who added that she learnt of the ruling last week via the evening television newscast.
She told The Nassau Guardian that her daughter was so mutilated she was only able to identify her by her nose.
“What I would like to know is what is the worst of the worst because murder is murder. If this is not the worst of the worst, could somebody explain to me what is the worst of the worst?”
Conover said the murder tore her whole family apart — she and her husband subsequently divorced, one of her sons is on the run from the law, and the other children have had their own emotional challenges.
She said life has not been the same since.
“When I reached the police station and they told me, I was just not myself anymore, especially when I had to go to the morgue and saw what I saw,” Conover said.
“What I saw at the morgue, I don’t know what that was because really it was not my daughter.
“I don’t know what that was because a dog’s head wouldn’t have looked the way her head looked. She had no face, one big bone sticking up, they burnt her over her body.
”How do they expect me as a mother to deal with this and to know Maxo is in prison living?”
While the Privy Council quashed Tido’s death sentence, it upheld his murder conviction and ordered that he be re-sentenced.
In 2009, the government was preparing to read a death warrant to him.
Hall pointed out that a study by Police Sergeant Chaswell Hanna noted that in a five-year period when 349 murders were recorded in The Bahamas, there were only 10 murder convictions and two death sentences issued.
“Last year was a record number of murders and I understand that we had no more than two or three convictions,” Hall said. “This disparity between criminal behavior and the justice system, is it the police, is it the lawyers, is it the justice system?”
He said the law lords of the Privy Council are clearly out of touch with what is happening in The Bahamas.
“How is this family to swallow this latest ruling?” he asked.
“...It is very difficult to remain philosophical on murder now. The criminals seem to be getting the better end of the stick and families of murder victims seem to be left — as this family — totally disintegrated.”
Hall noted that the level of violent crime has worsened in the last couple years.
“It is true that part of the problem is in fact the social culture we face as a community, but at the same time I think Parliament and the lawmakers must take draconian measures to face this nightmare we are presently confronted with,” he said.
“It is true that the current minister of national security has adopted half of the things we suggested, but it seems to be getting worse. And you feel embarrassed that you served on this thing and [crime] seems to be getting worse.”
Jun 20, 2011
thenassauguardian
An International Caribbean Online Log about the news and opinions in the Americas and World. This Caribbean Blog of global reach and appeal is maintained by Bahamian Blogger - Dennis Dames with all readers and subscribers in mind.
Showing posts with label death penalty Bahamas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label death penalty Bahamas. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Courts -- a nation's sovereignty
Tribune242.com editorial:
MANY BAHAMIANS thought that by ridding themselves of the Privy Council as this country's last court of appeal our judicial system could retain the death penalty. Although the Privy Council is still our final court of appeal, and although a large number of Bahamians still favour its retention, it is quickly losing its attraction for those who want to retain the gallows for convicted murderers.
"Hang 'em high!" is still the angry reaction in this country as Bahamians defend capital punishment as the final solution to the growing murder count.
However, it now seems that the Privy Council is not the only stumbling block to retaining the death penalty.
According to Tuesday's Gleaner of Jamaica, the European Union is starting to show its mighty muscles by threatening to withdraw grant funds if Jamaica does not employ an additional Supreme Court judge.
According to The Gleaner Jamaica's Justice Minister Dorothy Lightbourne explained that she had to "follow the dictate of the powerful bloc of countries in order to benefit from grant funds they have provided."
The conditions, the Justice Minister told Parliament last week during the sitting of the joint select committee, have to do with fighting corruption and to improve the justice system. "They have said we should increase judges and we have brought on one judge."
Drawing attention to the notation in the 2010/2011 Estimates of Expenditure, which read: "One additional judge has already been hired to meet the European Union condition," MP Dr Morais Guy commented:
"I would be happy if I am told that this is just a wrong choice of terminology because I cannot see how they are imposing conditions on the sovereign country of Jamaica."
He was told that the money granted by the EU was going towards improving Jamaica's justice system. Guidelines were set out as a condition of the grant. An addition of judges was one of the conditions if funds were to be forthcoming.
And so as the EU could threaten to withhold grant funds over a judge, it could also threaten to withdraw much needed funds if the Bahamas insisted on retaining the death penalty in its legal system.
As a matter of fact this threat was seriously discussed in our private office several years ago by a visiting European ambassador paying a courtesy call on his annual tour of duty.
We believe that this discussion took place around 1993 when the hot topic on the street at that time -- and of much concern to Bahamians -- was the Privy Council's decision that two Bahamians could not be hanged because they had been languishing on death row for more than five years. To hang them after five years would amount to inhumane treatment, the Council ruled. This meant that the sentences of all those then on death row for five years or more had their sentences automatically commuted to life imprisonment. It also set out a time frame for the future.
On being asked public opinion on the abolition of the death penalty in the Bahamas, we explained that we believed that Prime Minister Ingraham was an abolitionist, but that most Bahamians were strongly for its retention. However, if capital punishment remained on the statute books, the Prime Minister would uphold the law. It was then that the ambassador threw down the gauntlet.
And what would happen, he asked, if the EU withdrew all grants from the Bahamas unless capital punishment were abolished?
We replied that the Bahamas would then have to face a serious issue. However, we believed it would be considered a bullying tactic by a powerful European bloc against a small, defenceless nation, especially with the mighty US next door, where many states still used the electric chair to get rid of its murderers. We suggested that they flex their muscles with the US first, and then they could come and talk with the Bahamas.
What is now interesting is that England is becoming nervous about the clout that the European Court of Humane Rights is having over the UK courts.
In defending his country's national sovereignty, the Lord Chief Justice -- Lord Judge -- has declared that the English Supreme Court must have the final say in its own jurisdiction, and that common law -- which is common sense built up over more than 800 years, going as far back as legal memory (1189) -- must be defended and preserved.
April 08, 2010
tribune242
MANY BAHAMIANS thought that by ridding themselves of the Privy Council as this country's last court of appeal our judicial system could retain the death penalty. Although the Privy Council is still our final court of appeal, and although a large number of Bahamians still favour its retention, it is quickly losing its attraction for those who want to retain the gallows for convicted murderers.
"Hang 'em high!" is still the angry reaction in this country as Bahamians defend capital punishment as the final solution to the growing murder count.
However, it now seems that the Privy Council is not the only stumbling block to retaining the death penalty.
According to Tuesday's Gleaner of Jamaica, the European Union is starting to show its mighty muscles by threatening to withdraw grant funds if Jamaica does not employ an additional Supreme Court judge.
According to The Gleaner Jamaica's Justice Minister Dorothy Lightbourne explained that she had to "follow the dictate of the powerful bloc of countries in order to benefit from grant funds they have provided."
The conditions, the Justice Minister told Parliament last week during the sitting of the joint select committee, have to do with fighting corruption and to improve the justice system. "They have said we should increase judges and we have brought on one judge."
Drawing attention to the notation in the 2010/2011 Estimates of Expenditure, which read: "One additional judge has already been hired to meet the European Union condition," MP Dr Morais Guy commented:
"I would be happy if I am told that this is just a wrong choice of terminology because I cannot see how they are imposing conditions on the sovereign country of Jamaica."
He was told that the money granted by the EU was going towards improving Jamaica's justice system. Guidelines were set out as a condition of the grant. An addition of judges was one of the conditions if funds were to be forthcoming.
And so as the EU could threaten to withhold grant funds over a judge, it could also threaten to withdraw much needed funds if the Bahamas insisted on retaining the death penalty in its legal system.
As a matter of fact this threat was seriously discussed in our private office several years ago by a visiting European ambassador paying a courtesy call on his annual tour of duty.
We believe that this discussion took place around 1993 when the hot topic on the street at that time -- and of much concern to Bahamians -- was the Privy Council's decision that two Bahamians could not be hanged because they had been languishing on death row for more than five years. To hang them after five years would amount to inhumane treatment, the Council ruled. This meant that the sentences of all those then on death row for five years or more had their sentences automatically commuted to life imprisonment. It also set out a time frame for the future.
On being asked public opinion on the abolition of the death penalty in the Bahamas, we explained that we believed that Prime Minister Ingraham was an abolitionist, but that most Bahamians were strongly for its retention. However, if capital punishment remained on the statute books, the Prime Minister would uphold the law. It was then that the ambassador threw down the gauntlet.
And what would happen, he asked, if the EU withdrew all grants from the Bahamas unless capital punishment were abolished?
We replied that the Bahamas would then have to face a serious issue. However, we believed it would be considered a bullying tactic by a powerful European bloc against a small, defenceless nation, especially with the mighty US next door, where many states still used the electric chair to get rid of its murderers. We suggested that they flex their muscles with the US first, and then they could come and talk with the Bahamas.
What is now interesting is that England is becoming nervous about the clout that the European Court of Humane Rights is having over the UK courts.
In defending his country's national sovereignty, the Lord Chief Justice -- Lord Judge -- has declared that the English Supreme Court must have the final say in its own jurisdiction, and that common law -- which is common sense built up over more than 800 years, going as far back as legal memory (1189) -- must be defended and preserved.
April 08, 2010
tribune242
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Amnesty concerned over 'apparent inaction' of the Bahamas towards 2008 report issues
By AVA TURNQUEST:
HUMAN rights group Amnesty International has expressed concern by the "apparent inaction" of the Bahamas government towards any of the issues tabled in the 2008 report published earlier this year.
The report tabled concerns over the death penalty, domestic violence and migrant's rights, and provided suggestions towards restoring the country's commitment to promoting and protecting human rights.
Commenting on the police and security forces, the report stressed: "The lack of an independent body to investigate allegations of ill-treatment involving police officers undermined confidence in due process."
Yesterday, Amnesty International spokesman R. E. Barnes named the allegations surrounding the deaths of Patrick Strachan and excessive force used on Emmanuel McKenzie as two examples of inaction towards the report, as the organisation is unaware of any conclusion to either investigation.
He also criticised Government's refusal to release reports on the Carmichael Road Detention Centre.
Amnesty International calls on Government to:
Repeal all provisions allowing for the death penalty and immediately declare a moratorium on all executions;
Ensure that all complaints of excessive use of force by the security forces are subject to immediate, thorough and independent investigation and, if state agents are charged with misconduct, that their cases are brought to trial in an expeditious manner;
Amend existing legislation to ensure that marital rape is outlawed;
Ensure the full and effective implementation of the Domestic Violence Protection Order Act;
Implement migration policies that protect human rights, including ratifying and implementing the international convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families.
Mr. Barnes added: "We are concerned first and foremost about human rights, however we always try to allow governments or the appropriate bodies sufficient time to follow proper protocol.
"Our job is simply to observe and note what's occurred. However, it is our fervent hope that a report on the Detention Centre is forthcoming."
December 05, 2009
tribune242
HUMAN rights group Amnesty International has expressed concern by the "apparent inaction" of the Bahamas government towards any of the issues tabled in the 2008 report published earlier this year.
The report tabled concerns over the death penalty, domestic violence and migrant's rights, and provided suggestions towards restoring the country's commitment to promoting and protecting human rights.
Commenting on the police and security forces, the report stressed: "The lack of an independent body to investigate allegations of ill-treatment involving police officers undermined confidence in due process."
Yesterday, Amnesty International spokesman R. E. Barnes named the allegations surrounding the deaths of Patrick Strachan and excessive force used on Emmanuel McKenzie as two examples of inaction towards the report, as the organisation is unaware of any conclusion to either investigation.
He also criticised Government's refusal to release reports on the Carmichael Road Detention Centre.
Amnesty International calls on Government to:
Repeal all provisions allowing for the death penalty and immediately declare a moratorium on all executions;
Ensure that all complaints of excessive use of force by the security forces are subject to immediate, thorough and independent investigation and, if state agents are charged with misconduct, that their cases are brought to trial in an expeditious manner;
Amend existing legislation to ensure that marital rape is outlawed;
Ensure the full and effective implementation of the Domestic Violence Protection Order Act;
Implement migration policies that protect human rights, including ratifying and implementing the international convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families.
Mr. Barnes added: "We are concerned first and foremost about human rights, however we always try to allow governments or the appropriate bodies sufficient time to follow proper protocol.
"Our job is simply to observe and note what's occurred. However, it is our fervent hope that a report on the Detention Centre is forthcoming."
December 05, 2009
tribune242
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)