We continue to work on strategies to ensure that any application of the death penalty complies with international human rights law. Much of this work takes place at international level – in individual and group applications to international human rights tribunals, including the United Nations Human Rights Committee and regional human rights bodies.
The DPP’s Saul Lehrfreund (left) and Parvais Jabbar appear before the International Commission against the Death Penalty in Madrid in June 2011
‘ Cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment’
THE CASE OF BOYCE ET AL In 2007, we represented four prisoners under sentence of death in Barbados before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) in Costa Rica.
Lennox Boyce, Jeffrey Joseph, Fredrick Benjamin Atkins and Michael Huggins were convicted of murder and sentenced to death by the Supreme Court of Barbados. Mr Atkins died in prison in 2005.
The IACHR found that the mandatory death sentence imposed on all those convicted of murder in Barbados violates the right to life, as it is arbitrary and does not limit the death sentence to the most serious crimes. The Court also ruled that the prison conditions endured by the applicants constituted cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in violation of the American Convention on Human Rights.
In February 2009, the Barbados Government confirmed its intention to comply with the Order of the Court in full. The death sentences of Lennox Boyce, Jeffrey Joseph and Michael Huggins were all commuted. Barbados has also undertaken to abolish the mandatory aspect of the death penalty.
‘Right to a fair trial violated’
THE CASE OF TYRONE DACOSTA CADOGAN Since the ruling in the Boyce et al case (see above), we have continued to advise prisoners facing the death penalty in Barbados. In collaboration with lawyers from Barbados and Trinidad, we represented Tyrone DaCosta Cadogan before the Inter- American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.
The IACHR granted provisional measures to protect Mr Cadogan from execution while his case was pending. The DPP argued that Mr Cadogan’s right to a fair trial had been violated by the failure of the state to provide him with a psychiatric assessment. We
instructed Dr Timothy Green, a clinical psychologist, to travel to Barbados and assess Mr Cadogan and prepare a detailed psychology report. Dr Green’s report was submitted as evidence that Cadogan is mentally impaired; expert evidence was also provided by Edward Fitzgerald QC and Professor Nigel Eastman.
In September 2009, the Court again ruled that the mandatory death penalty for murder was a violation of the American Convention of Human Rights and went on to find that psychiatric evidence must always be obtained in capital cases. The Court therefore ordered that the death sentence imposed upon Mr Cadogan be quashed and ordered a hearing for his re-sentencing.
This case sends a clear message to states which retain the mandatory death sentence that it is a cruel punishment which violates the universal prohibition against the arbitrary deprivation of life. In fashioning an appropriate remedy, the Court has gone further than it has ever done before.”
Douglas Mendes SC Attorney at Law, Trinidad and Tobago
The Death Penalty Project: 2006 – 2011 report 21
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28