Halting rising crime rate:

Is capital punishment the answer?

By Jaliya WIJEYEKOON

The re-imposition of capital punishment or the death sentence has been discussed, debated and argued by various interested parties during the past few years. Due to the increasing crime rate in the country, the public believes that it is imperative that the rulers pay serious attention to this long overdue issue without wasting more time, during which there could be more heinous crimes.

The recent spate of killings reported in the country, such as the Karandeniya doctor's murder and the multiple murders of an Embilipitiya businessman's family, requires the immediate attention of law makers and the public believes that the re-introduction and re-implementation of capital punishment is the answer.

Sri Lanka, with a recorded history of over 2,500 years, had been ruled by a large number of kings, a few queens, chieftains and area leaders before we became a colony of the British Empire in 1815. From those days, some form of judicial administration was practised in the country and the king, chieftain or area leader had the final authority in all administrative functions of the country, province or area.

Wrongdoers or criminals were summoned before the king, questioned, cross-examined and warned or reprimanded. The verdict was meted out then and there based on the seriousness of the crime committed. No room was left for the suspect to defend himself or challenge the judgement delivered by the authority. Innocent parties were often victimised by some of the verdicts given by the kings.

When the death sentence is passed on a criminal, he or she is kept in isolation, away from other prisoners. He or she is reminded of his or her crime almost everyday prior to the date of his or her hanging by the prison authorities. This particular exercise had proved that notorious criminals had become extremely timid and started pleading for their life. Such a scenario has a psychological impact on the other prisoners and miscreants in society which leads to a reduction of crimes in the country.

At the same time, there had been instances when culprits escaped punishment, deceiving the kings through their crafty talk and shrewd demeanour. Even during those ancient days, the punishments meted out were different from offence to offence and crime to crime. However, the verdict always rested in the hands of the king.

The death sentence was the punishment for all grave crimes committed by the countrymen. No mercy was shown by the kings on anybody who was found guilty and the death sentence was passed instantly.

Death sentence

The modus operandi of meting out capital punishment was decided by the king - e.g. Beheading, stoning to death, trampling by elephants, impaling or burning to death. Those crude methods of punishment were meted out on criminals, either at an open esplanade or at a public venue, for the countrymen to watch, assuming that it would deter others from indulging in criminal activities. Inhuman punishments of this nature had been imposed on criminals by our ancient rulers from time immemorial.

After we became a colony of the British Empire in 1815, a complete and comprehensive change took place in all aspects and spheres of the country and in the lives of the people. The British rulers introduced their own civil administrative system. Among the major changes they made in our civil society, the introduction of a judicial system was of paramount importance. As an integral component of the judicial system, capital punishment came to be enacted by the British rulers by way of hanging.

After gaining independence from imperial bondage in 1948, local political leaders too continued with the same system and capital punishment was meted out on criminals duly convicted by the judiciary.

Capital punishment abolished

S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, the fourth Prime Minister of Independent Ceylon, who came into power with a convincing majority with his ideology and charisma, abolished capital punishment in 1955 with the Buddha Jayanthi celebrations, amidst severe objections from his own party stalwarts.

Prime Minister Bandaranaike was assassinated in 1959 and Sirimavo Bandaranaike became the premier. She immediately reintroduced capital punishment which remained in practice until the late seventies.

When the death sentence is passed on a criminal, he or she is kept in isolation, away from other prisoners. He or she is reminded of his or her crime almost everyday prior to the date of his or her hanging by the prison authorities. This particular exercise had proved that notorious criminals had become extremely timid and started pleading for their life. Such a scenario has a psychological impact on the other prisoners and miscreants in society which leads to a reduction of crimes in the country.

Law becomes defunct

Capital punishment remained in force until the late seventies and when J.R. Jayewardene became President, the death sentence on criminals became completely defunct although the law was in force.

The death sentence had annually been passed on a number of criminals in the past and there had been agreements and disagreements and different lines of thought on some of these verdicts. The main allegation against some of these judgements was that innocent parties had been victimised due to various lapses while the real culprits had gone scot-free using the undue influence of the police and sometimes retaining top legal luminaries to defend themselves.

However, it is not fair for anybody to accuse or point fingers at lawyers since their job is to look after the interests of their clients, whether the client is right or wrong. When we study trial reports and verdicts delivered and subsequent developments and findings, we cannot outright reject the fact that there had been incorrect judgements and innocent parties had been victimised in the past. Their families had fallen into dire straits and ended up destitutes on the streets.

We have also seen instances of criminals, who had been convicted more than once or twice, being pardoned and released after a short period, committing more heinous crimes, sometimes even multiple murders. If capital punishment had been meted out at the first instance, itself, such unfortunate subsequent crimes could have been avoided.

There is no doubt that we are a cultured, civilised and affable society and respect the right of life of everyone. But scrutinising, observing and investigating the crimes committed by certain underworld gangsters and organised goons, most say that it is absolutely necessary that capital punishment be imposed forth with for the greater good of the public of the country.

However it is extremely important that fair judgements are given after scrutinising all details, facts and figures, substantial evidence, circumstances in which the crimes are committed and the mentalities of the parties involved.

It is suggested that capital punishment be meted out on criminals with the unanimous agreement of the jury, so that interested parties will not be compelled to make humble requests to grant undue amnesties on the 'convicted criminals'.

Sri Lanka's system of Presidential pardon has been copied from the American system, The spirit of the pardon need to be qualified to give it a decent face.

One might consider a miscarriage of justice, lack of substantial evidence or a divided decision on the bench of judges as important aspects to consider an amnesty. However, certain amnesties had been subjected to controversy and criticism.

Different crimes

It is common today to hear of different types of crimes such as cold-blooded murders, rapes, abductions and torture committed by goons. Most of them are premeditated, previously planned and well-organised due to long-standing animosities, hatred, jealousy, money and sexual tension.

More often than not, we hear of innocent small children being molested and sexually abused by sex maniacs and perverts. If the facts are proven beyond any reasonable doubt, there should not be any mercy and capital punishment should be meted out on these criminals soon after the trial is over.

Though capital punishment has been in force, it had not been implemented since the late seventies. There may have been hundreds and thousands of criminals during the last three and a half decades who had been sentenced to death after judicial proceedings. But none were hanged; some are still in prison and some may have got general amnesties.

It is the general belief that some re-convicted criminals enjoy a normal life while serving their prison sentences through their personal influence with prison authorities.

It is said that some hardcore criminals who had been involved in drug businesses spend lavishly on officials and plan other crimes from inside the prison. Most convicts who have been sentenced to death over the past few years know very well that they will not be hanged and may even be freed after sometime based on 'good conduct and behaviour'.

They get quite used to prison life. It is doubtful if they become 'good citizens' after serving a long period behind bars.

When capital punishment was regularly practised in the past, the crime rate in the country was not as high as at present. Would-be criminals were aware that if they are found guilty that they would go to the gallows.

The official announcement about the re-imposition of the death sentence was made sometime back and immediately there was a significant drop in the crime rate in the country.

The re-implementation of capital punishment is a sensitive and complicated matter as it entails both advantages and disadvantages. However, it is high time that the re-imposition of the death penalty is seriously considered to combat the ever increasing crime rate in the country.