PORT OF SPAIN, Trinidad – As the country grapples with a murderous start to 2015, Govern¬ment is seeking to bring back the hangman by once again returning the death penalty legislation to Parliament.

There have been 16 murders in the country in the past ten days.

In February 2011, the contro¬ver¬sial “Hanging Bill” failed to secure a majority vote in the House of Representatives as the Opposition raised concerns over provisions in the legislation.

The bill was defeated as 29 Gov¬ernment members voted for the bill and 11 members of the Opposition People’s National Movement (PNM) voted against it.

As the People’s Partnership’s tenure of office comes to an end this year, the ruling party intends to once again make another effort to ensure the death penalty is carried out in the country.

Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar had signalled last year her Government will again try to work with the Opposition to make this a reality, given the high murder toll.

At the Parliament sitting last Fri¬day, at Tower D, International Waterfront Centre, Port of Spain, Attorney General Anand Ramlo¬gan han¬ded Opposition Leader Dr Keith Rowley a letter, requesting the

PNM make proposals to ensure the Constitution (Amendment) (Capital Offences) Bill, 2015 is passed this year.

Ramlogan stated in his letter the intention of this bill is to allow the

State to carry out the sen¬tence of death imposed by the courts on con¬victed murderers, regardless of how long they take to exhaust the various appellate procedures.

Ramlogan pointed out that in 2011 when the bill was brought to Par¬lia¬ment, the Opposition supported the death penalty as the mandatory sentence for murder.

He further noted Opposition MP Marlene McDonald indicated the Opposition was in agreement that the death penalty is good law and had stated, “The position of the PNM is that we support the law of the land, and the law of the land is in Section IV of the Offences Against the Per¬son Act, which says, ‘Every person convicted of murder shall suffer death’.”

He reminded that the Opposi¬tion voted against the Constitution (Amend-ment) (Capital Offences) Bill, 2011 although the Government made a major concession by remo¬ving the catego¬risation of murders.

“Again, the Gov¬ern¬ment would be happy to remove the categorisation of murders if the Oppo¬sition finds this objec¬tion¬able, and would support the measure,” stated Ram¬¬logan.

He stated subsequent to the last debate, he wrote on two occasions to soli¬cit legislative proposals from the Oppo¬si¬tion that supports the execu¬tion of convicted murderers who are sentenced to death.

“To date, I have not received any response from your Office, and I therefore renew my invitation from you to either indicate your support for the Constitution (Amendment) (Capi¬tal Offences) Bill, 2015 or pro¬vide a counter-proposal for the Government’s consideration,” stated Ramlogan.

“Having regard to the PNM’s public declaration of support for the implementation of the death penalty, I write to ask whether the Opposition would be minded to support the Gov¬ernment’s proposed bill to allow the sentence of death to be carried out,” he added.

“You would no doubt agree that the role of the Opposition is not limi¬ted to opposing but includes pro¬posing. It is untenable and unaccep¬table that a Parliament comprising elected members of Parliament from parties that support the death pen¬alty are unable to pass a simple amend¬ment for its implementation in the criminal justice system of Tri¬nidad and Tobago,” stated Ramlogan.

He pointed out in Jamaica, the Opposition joined hands with the Government in 2011 to pass simi¬lar legislation and amend its consti¬tution, section 13 (8), as follows:

13 (8) The execution of a sen¬tence of death imposed after the com¬¬mence¬ment of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2011 on any personfor an offence against the law of Jamaica shall not be held to be incon¬sistent with, or in contravention of, this section by reason of—

(a) the length of time which elap¬ses between the date on which the sentence is imposed and the date on which the sentence is executed

(b) the physical conditions or arrangements under which such person is detained pending the exe¬cution of the sentence, by virtue of any law or practice in force imme¬di¬ately before the commence¬ment of the Charter of Fun¬da¬mental Rights and Freedoms (Con¬stitutional Amend¬ment) Act, 2011.

Ramlogan stated Parliament had an inherent duty to ensure the rule of law was upheld and that laws are not passed in vain.

He added the death penalty was part of the laws of Trinidad and Tobago, and Parliament had a duty to respond to the legal manoeuvres by convicted murders that frustrate and defeat the carrying out of a sentence of death imposed by a court after trial before a judge and jury.

“Save and except for the catego¬ri¬sation of murders (which we are prepared to remove), the Govern¬ment’s bill is similar to the Jamaican legislation,” he said.

By Anna Ramdass anna.ramdass@trinidadexpress.com

SUNDAY EXPRESS