Webster EdwardsPRIME MINISTER P. J. Patterson has said in his recent address to the nation that government has not given up on its desire to resume capital punishment. The Roman Catholic Church on the other hand, continues to take a very firm stand against its imposition.
The Pontiff, Pope Paul II has appealed for worldwide abolition of the death penalty and has repeatedly expressed his displeasure at the executions which periodically take place in the United States. Our own Archbishop Edgerton Clarke has affirmed, that human dignity does not allow for the death penalty to be imposed on people found guilty of murder, and has advanced the argument that the rehabilitation of these persons should be the preferred option.
The motives of these prelates are admirable and cannot be questioned as they have demonstrated a life dedicated to the cause of the oppressed and the general upliftment of humanity. Yet the issues are not as clear cut as they may seem. Take for instance the matter of repeated murderers, persons who have no respect for life, who are sworn to lead a life of terror, and the destruction of anyone who offends them, persons from whom it would seem that society has a sacred duty to protect itself.
In times of war or other emergencies when the existence of the State is at risk, it is unreasonable for anyone to demand the same freedoms or have the same expectations as in peace time. I too, at one time campaigned vigorously for the abolition of the death penalty, believing that it did not inure to our wellbeing as a people or the continued development of society.
Then, we had well under 100 murders a year, the majority of which were attributable to domestic disputes between former lovers. Well, today we are not living in normal times, there then comes a time when the protection of society must be seriously considered as the preferred option.
Some advocates seeking the abolition of the death penalty believe that the murderer must not take any responsibility for his actions. Their line of reasoning is that it is society which has failed the murderer, and that it is society which must reform itself to prevent the atrocities now being experienced. And although some attorneys argue passionately for the abolition of the death penalty, they are yet to come up with any credible workable alternative. The time has come when the message of the sacredness of life must also be conveyed to those who will spare no mercy in their dastardly deeds.
The present context in which we live must determine not just simply our world view, but the decisions which must be taken to govern the daily affairs of our lives. We are not living in Britain where the present murder rate is tolerable. The fact is that the present inaction has failed to serve as a deterrent to would-be murderers. Last year we had more than 800 murders, far too many for a country of 2.5 million. Despite our best intentions, there seems to be very little prospect of any significant reduction in the foreseeable future.
We cannot give in to this chaos which has overtaken our land, as the first duty of any State must be the protection of itself and its citizens.
Terrorism
The sheer brutality employed and the lack of any display of mercy or contrition by many of the perpetrators demonstrate quite clearly that we are not living in normal times. It is difficult to understand the extreme form of terrorism which is being unleashed on many defenceless persons, who are really the ones subjected to inhumane and degrading punishment within the context of their own homes. These murders may yet prove to be our undoing in the much heralded recovery that has continued to elude us.
What has been emerging is that some of these persons are multiple murderers who regularly commit murder after murder. We have a sacred responsibility of not only preventing the possibility of another murder, but of ensuring that the present system of justice works. When people loose faith in the judicial process, they develop a system of their own as we occasionally find in the incidence of vigilante killings. We cannot allow people to take the matter of justice into their own hands.
When we do, it is usually swift, brutal and every possibility exist that in the process the wrong person could be killed.
Where do we go from here? I believe that the Jamaica Council on Human Rights should take a proactive approach and launch an islandwide campaign on the sacredness of life. It certainly is not enough to give the appearance of being concerned with only one side of the coin.
There comes a time when the nation must rise up with one voice and affirm that enough is enough.
Webster Edwards works in the inner city and is the executive director of Operation Friendship.
