An eye for an eye this Christmas

My use of the word “return” is somewhat problematic here since the death penalty in itself has never left us and Trinidad and Tobago, according to Amnesty International, remains one of only 52 countries in the world, of which nine are Caribbean, that still permit the death penalty.

The fact that there has been no execution in TT since 1999, when within a six-week period ten people were hung — between June and July — is neither here nor there.

But what is the logic of such a call by a trained religious and pastoral leader? We are faced everyday with suicide bombers who quite obviously are not deterred by the fear or threat of their own death. Would capital punishment stop one such attack? Do young men and women who participate in or initiate brutal crimes fear losing their lives? If they did would they so openly wage war with each other and take part in activities that so often lead to gang violence and murder? Or are their lives simply not worth living anyway in their eyes? Young men from certain neglected districts in TT accept that their lives may in fact be quite short. They may even have a death wish. There is no respect for human life in this country, anyway, so what will death by hanging achieve? Of course one of the problems facing religious movements and churches worldwide at present is a growing conservatism, often masked by a veneer of righteousness and a call for moral justice.

But is this call for justice for victims simply another way of approving the inclination for revenge and retribution that is so much part of our Trinidadian culture? It goes something like this: if someone does something to you, “you go do for them.” But you won’t do it directly. There is a network made up of extended family and friends that is part of the very fabric of our institutions that will ensure retribution.

We see this system of networking within every part of our society — from banks to universities to government ministries and yes the police force. Vengeance is fuelled by well-oiled connections. It is one of the reasons why we have become a society that accepts all manner of unjust events at every level of society. There may be talk for a while, but no one actually does anything. The fear of retribution coupled with the need to protect one’s own is always there.

You do something to me and I will make sure that you suffer because I am well connected.

So why not go one step further and apply this logic of revenge and retribution to the justice system? But is this not one of the fundamental reasons in Trinidad why good men and women remain silent? What does it say of our society when the murder of a bright young woman opens the door for bigotry and inhuman treatment? Perhaps in this culture of impunity that we have created because of our network of affiliations, there needs to be a different and more thoughtful and analytical approach to crime rather than an emotional response to terrifying acts.

Before we begin meting out punishment on the basis of a vengeful God let us try and identify and change some of the chronically imbedded attitudes that generate and enable such acts of brutality.

For this Catholic priest who should know better, an eye for an eye and a life for a life is the cure for mounting senseless violence in this country. Should heinous crimes such as brutal rape be so punished? The logical response, if “retribution” must come “in a form of punishment to suit the crime”, I guess, should be, let us have castration. An eye for an eye.

Some might well agree.

In thinking about the very idea of an eye for an eye this Christmas I wonder about the Christian principle of salvation, which is why we celebrate Christmas in the first instance. Since Christians believe that every sinner has the possibility of repentance and salvation because Christ was born, what happens when this possibility is taken away? In Catholic terms, does the State then become responsible for a loss of a soul? And what of people who may have been convicted and later found to be innocent? What remedy and logic should we apply here? There are many sides to this matter of capital punishment.

For example, one of the problems surrounding the death penalty is that people who spend protracted periods of time on death row may argue that this in itself constitutes inhuman and degrading treatment.

“The death row phenomenon” evolved as a concept from a 1989 extradition hearing concerning German citizen Jens Soering. He fled to the UK and argued that if he returned to the United States where he was wanted for capital murder he would be exposed to lengthy periods between sentencing and execution. The European Court of Human Rights agreed that to allow his extradition in his particular circumstances would be in breach of his human rights.

Given the protracted time spent by individuals in the remand yard in Trinidad, for crimes they may or may not have committed, we could say that these inhuman conditions already exist.