Govt contradicts self on death penalty – Nandlall

Former Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister Anil Nandlall said Government has found itself between a rock and hard place, with its position on the death penalty in Guyana, as the recent passage of the Anti Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) Amendment Bill showed that it otherwise supported the penalty.
Nandlall argued that Government, through Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister Basil Williams, had inserted some 14 mandatory death penalty offences in the last AML/CFT Bill, which, incidentally was rushed through all three readings in Parliament, recently.
President David Granger last Thursday said that he, at this point, did not support the death penalty in Guyana. In fact, his words were that he had no intention of executing anyone.
Nandlall, a front bencher of the parliamentary Opposition, contends that the Government’s stance was rather contradictory.
During the debate, Nandlall argued that the death penalty was not a penal measure that the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) insisted upon. He argued too that many countries like France and the United Kingdom (that are FATF-compliant do not have the death penalty in their laws.
According to Nandlall, the 14 mandatory death penalty cases in a singular Bill will put Guyana in conflict with previous postures adopted at the United Nations and Organisation of American States.
He said he had enquired whether that was the posture the Government of Guyana wished to adopt on the death penalty in the year 2016, having regarded the international climate on this issue.
“Of course, my presentation was ignored. The Bill was passed and assented to by the President. On the 22nd of May, 2016, the Guyana Times newspaper carried a bold headline which read “Guyana in a diplomatic dilemma over death penalty… FATF requirement vs UN commitment”. Exactly as I predicted. Today, the <<<Guyana Times>>> headline reads, “I have no intention of executing anyone” – President Granger”. “
This disclosure, he said, raises the following questions: whether the Attorney General did not consult with the President before he inserted 14 mandatory death penalty offences on this Bill, or whether the AG was “acting on a frolic of his own”, whether the President knew that he was assenting to a Bill that imposed mandatory death penalty for 14 different offences, and whether the Attorney General was not advised that it was not open to the President to assent to Bills, make them into laws and then publicly declare that he will abdicate the responsibilities which those laws impose upon him. He said the situation is confusing.
Last week, the Head of State made his position clear on the death penalty in Guyana, noting that he has no intention of executing anyone.
Although the death penalty remained enshrined in Guyana’s laws, there has not been any execution for decades. According to the President, the death penalty remains on the statute books, but Government is yet to pronounce on whether it will be abolished or not.
“I don’t have any intentions of executing anyone. Some people feel that the death penalty is a deterrent; some feel that it is not, but I do not have any intentions of approving the execution of anyone.”
He said some people think that “it is best on the books as a last resort. There is a difference and there is no single statement out of the Government whether it will abolish the death penalty or not. In due course, we will arrive at a position…”
Guyana has committed to join the worldwide efforts to abolish capital punishment, which is deemed inhumane and completely ineffective in deterring crime. Guyana has not abolished the penalty, but there is a moratorium on its use, despite the fact that criminals are still being sentenced to death. Guyana’s last execution was in 1997.
One hundred and fourteen countries have abolished the death penalty, either by law or by practice, according to statistics from a report compiled by Amnesty International.