The Tribune

By LYNAIRE MUNNINGS

Tribune Staff Reporter

lmunnings@tribunemedia.net

FREE National Movement leader Michael Pintard called for legal amendments to redefine “the worst of the worst” to increase the chance that courts would uphold the death penalty.

However, he rejected FNM Senator Darren Henfield’s proposal to replace the Privy Council with the Court of Appeal as the highest judicial authority for capital punishment matters.

The death penalty has not been carried out in The Bahamas since 2000, and in 2006, the Privy Council ruled that mandatory death sentences for murder were unconstitutional. 

 After Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis said recently that capital punishment is “not a solution,” Mr Pintard argued that capital punishment is both a deterrent and a moral necessity.

“When asked tough questions about what some may consider extreme measures, they start vacillating and stammering,” he said about the Davis administration. “We are clear. We are not clueless. We understand that no one measure is going to end crime in The Bahamas, but those measures, all combined, will increase our chances to succeed from prevention all the way through to rehabilitation.”  

 As usual after especially heinous crimes, calls for resuming capital punishment increased after the recent rapes and murders of a 12-year-old girl and 72-year-old woman.

 Acknowledging the public’s call for the death penalty, Mr Pintard said while some offenders may not be deterred by the threat of execution, others might reconsider their actions when faced with the possibility of losing their life. 

 He said: “Capital punishment is on our books. We don’t try to serve people some fallacy that all crime stops after this is carried out, but we do say clearly and simply, we support capital punishment for the role it could play as a deterrent as well as punishment.” 

 “We believe the court should have discretion in these matters,” he said. “But we also believe there should be clear definitions of what constitutes the worst of the worst. This is something the executive and Parliament should examine, without diminishing the authority of the judiciary.”

 Senator Michela Barnett-Ellis echoed Mr Pintard’s view, calling for the introduction of sentencing guidelines.

 “Sentencing guidelines give judges discretion, but also set clear parameters for sentencing,” she said.