Like all other vulnerable, disgusted and concerned citizens, I am totally frustrated at the inability of our leaders to tame the crime monster. I, too, have lost many very close friends and patients to cowardly gunmen. In this atmosphere of unbridled savagery, it must be very difficult for our parliamentarians to calmly and carefully consider the pros and cons of resuming capital punishment.

Can they say 'no' to the hanging of convicted murderers when their constituents are crying out for 'justice'? Will they approve of hanging even though other avenues of stemming the crime and murder rate have not yet been explored? Will they vote with clear consciences knowing full well that it was politics that planted the seeds of acrimony and first provided the guns for our people to kill one another?

Pratt and Morgan

What about the United Kingdom Judicial Committee of the Privy Council ruling on Pratt and Morgan in 1993? It ruled that prolonged periods on death row (five years and over) was tantamount to torture, inhumane and degrading treatment. The Privy Council prohibited capital punishment in such cases. Are we going to break from that ruling?

What about that Independent Jamaican Council for Human Rights press release? It expressed grave concerns over the inherent danger in the proposed amendment to our Constitution that will deprive every court (whether in Jamaica, the Caribbean Court of Justice or the Privy Council) "of its essential right to inquire into and decide whether a condemned person is being treated fairly in relation to the manner in which the death penalty is being imposed or executed".

Are our parliamentarians aware that they will breach Jamaica's international obligations and stand to lose financial aid from countries vehemently opposed to capital punishment? Or, is all this conscience voting on capital punishment just a way of cooling an enraged nation?

I have many decent, Christian friends that cry out for the resumption of hanging. Too many innocent lives have been brutally terminated. Too many elderly people have been murdered. Too many helpless little children have been abducted, violated, savagely murdered, mutilated and thrown away like garbage. We certainly can't sit idly by, but is hanging really the answer? I don't think so.

Not a deterrent

Many countries are convinced that capital punishment is not a deterrent to murder. They substantiate this with studies carried out in many parts of the world and in the United States of America where capital punishment was prohibited yet the murder rate declined. They cite vigorous social intervention as a major factor in crime and murder reduction.

If Parliament decides to retain the death penalty, who will swing from the end of our rope? Given our level of corruption and very deficient security and justice systems, we would certainly end up hanging some innocent young men that cannot afford high-powered legal teams to defend them. We would end up hanging minions and not the masterminds that will easily recruit more killers from our seething slums. With our social inadequacies, prejudices and more, 99.99 per cent of those hanged will be poor, black, young men warped and abandoned by society.

Easy way out

Hanging is a desperate attempt at finding the easy way out of our serious social ills.

First we must instil discipline in society (to show that actions have consequences), then, we must institute social changes (to give youngsters viable alternatives to gang membership and a future) and, perhaps most of all, we must apprehend offenders (something that we are consistently failing to do). These are far better deterrents than hanging.

Dr Garth A. Rattray is a medical doctor with a family practice. Feedback may be sent to garthrattray@gmail.com or columns@gleanerjm.com.