The Editor, Sir:

Capital punishment continues to be a burning topic on the lips of many as there seems to be no end to the escalating murder rate which now includes the rape, torture and sodomising of our children.

The now Government, when in opposition, stated that the then Government was "dragging its feet" on the issue of capital punishment and if and when they became the Government, the party would see to a speedy and efficient legal process so that the law could be enforced.

This Government is now in office for a little over one year and appears to be in a quagmire in this regard.

I was surprised to hear my prime minister stating on radio that he intends to allow a parliamentary vote by conscience with regard to capital punishment. This is preposterous and hypocritical!

The prime minister knows that some MPs represent garrison areas where some of the most gruesome murders are committed. How then can you ask such members to vote by conscience, knowing there is the possibility of some young supporters being charged and sentenced to death for murder?

Such a representative will not be able to have the same control of the garrison if it is known that he or she voted for the resumption of hanging.

No rehabilitation

Mr prime minister, the people are expecting you to make a decision in their best interest. If you are not clear as to what the people want, the right thing to do is to have a referendum.

For those of us who continue to believe that all murderers can be rehabilitated, they should listen to John Joubert, a former scout leader in Nebraska, United States, who tormented and killed three boys.

After he was sentenced to death, he stated that while he regretted what he had done, he enjoyed himself at the time and would have murdered again had he not been caught. This was published in the Omaha World Herald.

I am not saying that capital punishment is the only answer. There should be programmes developed to give hope to people in the inner city. People who live in squalour cannot be expected to be sanguine about their future, hence behaving in a manner that is conducive to civil society.

When the colonial masters, out of fear of reprisal from the ex-slaves, felt that situations warranted harsh laws, such as capital punishment and whipping for rape and carnal abuse to protect their women and children, they enforced these laws.

It was not until 1962, coincidentally the year of our Independence, that hanging was abolished by the British, which demonstrated that laws can be repealed after they have served their purpose.

Singapore's harsh laws

History has shown that societies that now oppose capital punishment were once supporters of it when their societies were seemingly out of control and they thought it was necessary if they wanted future generations to live in a civil society.

There is a talk-show host who says Singapore's economic model should be emulated, but never once have I heard him mention Singapore's harsh laws, which could be an integral part of its seemingly booming economy, work attitude and discipline.

Singapore has capital punishment not only for murder but for drugs, and they whip for graffiti; there are those among us who consider whipping for rape and carnal abuse as barbaric.

There will never be a utopian society on Earth. Jamaica won't be until we rid our society of the unscrupulous and undesirables, wherever and whoever they are.

Meanwhile, we continue to lament the high levels of rape and carnal abuse. Let us try to stop the murderers from murdering again.

I am, etc.,

ARTHUR (TEDDY) PHIDD

tedddyphidd1@yahoo.com

Red Hills, St Andrew