Procrastination in addressing the abolition of death penalty has no advantage for Guyana

Dear Editor,

The Attorney General Basil Williams is absolutely mistaken about the death penalty being a requirement for FATF compliance. During the PPP time in Government, with the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Amendment Bill in the Parliament, the then APNU and AFC Opposition made many demands that they claimed would address deficits in the Bill, and the death penalty was not one of them. They knew then, as they know now that the death penalty was not a FATF requirement.

When the amendment bill for the Anti-Money Laundering Bill was passed last year, the former Attorney General, Anil Nandlall, objected to the death penalty being one of the penalties for offences and Basil Williams never pointed out that the death penalty was included because it was a FATF requirement. Incidentally, all of Europe is FATF compliant and they all have abolished the death penalty.

Suriname last year abolished the death penalty. Is Mr Williams saying that Suriname will never be FATF compliant? In insisting that FATF requires Guyana to include the death penalty for offences, is Mr Williams telling us that FATF has a double standard, having requirements for nations like those in Europe different from the requirements Guyana must meet?

The onus is now on the Attorney General to prove to citizens by pointing out the FATF instrument where the death penalty is a requirement for compliance. I am certain he and APNU/AFC must have good arguments why they favour the death penalty for offences under the Anti-Money Laundering legislation. But using FATF as an excuse and a shield demonstrate that the AG does not feel confident that he could justify inclusion of the death penalty. But even a poor justification for inclusion of the death penalty would be better than lying.

It is absolutely a scurrilous effort to smear FATF. FATF is a global organisation that nations under the UN established to stem the growing tide of money laundering and terrorism. These same countries that agree to establishing FATF also, under the United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHRC), insist that countries abolish the death penalty. Guyana is one country that has not yet complied with the UNHRC’s mandate and Guyana is, in fact, one of the countries under review for flouting this significant global human rights mandate.

The 10th Parliament had established a special select committee to ensure Guyana comply with the global requirement to abolish the death penalty. I was a member of that committee. So were the present Prime Minister and the present and past Attorneys General. The 11th Parliament has so far turned its back on moving Guyana towards compliance and now the AG is trying to justify, through a complete misrepresentation, why Guyana is not making any meaningful effort to reach compliance on the global agreement to abolish the death penalty.

Truth is; APNU/AFC seems to be on a pathway of maximum administrative delays to defy the UN’s instruction to abolish the death penalty. The 11th Parliament and the APNU/AFC Government appear disinterested in addressing the non-compliance issue with the global movement to abolish the death penalty.

When the Attorney General ingeniously informs us that Cabinet has not discussed the death penalty and taken a position, how truthful could this be? Did Cabinet not approve the amendment bill for the Anti-Money Laundering Act that the AG and his colleagues railroaded through Parliament in 2015?

That amendment bill, included the death penalty for several offences, under the Anti-Money Laundering Act. Surely, they had to have discussed the death penalty and had to discuss reconciling this action vs meeting the UNHRC mandate!

After being placed on the UNHRC’s list of countries under review for human rights deficits, specifically to eliminate laws permitting the death penalty, corporal punishment of children in schools and laws discriminating against LGBT, Guyana established a special select committee of the 10th Parliament to ensure recommendations for Guyana to be in conformity with the UN human rights platform. Extensive hearings were held to discuss the way forward in dealing with the death penalty.

A year into the 11th Parliament, Guyana has compounded the problem by further adding to the penalties that require the mandatory death sentence. Guyana, in fact, worsened its non-compliance with the UNHRC mandate when it included the death penalty in the Anti-Money Laundering Act for an additional eight offences, the most anywhere in the world.

But there is really no reason for Guyana to continue to have a law that allows the death penalty, particularly since it is rarely ever used anymore and for those on death row, the death penalty has been honoured in the breach. Guyana’s last judicial execution occurred in 1997, almost two decades ago.

As of May 2016, 102 countries have abolished the death penalty all together, including Suriname, which abolished the death penalty in 2015, and Haiti, which abolished it in 1987. Six other countries have abolished it, but retained the death penalty for exceptional or special circumstances, such as wartime crimes.

Guyana must not wait to be one of the few “hard ears” countries. The writing is on the wall, the time has come for Guyana to do the right thing and abolish the death penalty. The 11th Parliament must act in haste to bring Guyana in conformity with international laws.

It places the judiciary between a rock and a hard place: the laws of Guyana call for the death penalty, but the Constitution demands that judges take into consideration Guyana’s obligations under global treaties, conventions and agreements. As a member of the UN and under the mandate of the UNHRC, our judiciary must give cognisance to these international conventions.

Procrastination in addressing the abolition of the death penalty has no advantage to Guyana. Lying about why we continue to legislate the continuation of the death penalty in Guyana demeans us and makes us a rogue nation.

Sincerely,

Dr Leslie Ramsammy