Barbadians convicted of domestic terrorism that results in a death could face the death penalty or life imprisonment, Attorney General Wilfred Abrahams told the House of Assembly recently as he introduced the Domestic Terrorism Bill, 2026.
He said the legislation does not create a blanket redefinition of serious crime as terrorism. Instead, it establishes an additional offence that applies when serious criminal conduct terrorises the public, is carried out with reckless disregard for public safety, is motivated by certain forms of bias, or involves particularly dangerous activity threatening the wider community.
Under the Bill, where an act of domestic terrorism results in a death, the offender may be sentenced to death or face life imprisonment. For domestic terrorism involving other serious offences, the maximum penalty is life imprisonment.
Abrahams described the public nature of an act as an aggravating factor that could push a case towards capital punishment. A killing carried out openly, in circumstances designed to spread terror or send a message, would weigh in favour of the death sentence being sought, he said, whereas the same crime committed away from public view would be prosecuted simply as murder.
“You will feel the full weight of the law,” he warned, adding that even if an offender were let off on other counts, a domestic terrorism conviction would still carry its own punishment.
The Attorney General explained the move is anchored to what the Bill defines as a serious criminal offence, one punishable by death, one carrying a potential sentence of five years or more, or one from which property or benefits worth $5 000 or more are derived. He noted that sum was chosen deliberately, saying it is known that individuals have accepted payments as low as $5 000 to carry out violence against others.
To secure a conviction, prosecutors would need to establish either an intent to instill fear in the public or recklessness as to whether such fear would result. The offence is further limited to violent conduct causing death or serious bodily harm, endangering life or creating a significant risk to public safety, typically involving firearms, explosives or similar weapons.
Abrahams said the principal crime must generally occur in a public place. He cited, among other examples, shopping centres, restaurants and bars, bus terminals, parks and beaches, streets, Government buildings and venues for public entertainment, where bystanders are present or likely to be present and exposed to danger.
He offered contrasting scenarios to illustrate the distinction: a gunman opening fire in a crowded food court, a shooter in a bar or a bombing at a public gathering would likely qualify, while a killing inside a private home, a homicide in a deserted location or a fight in a secluded area exposing no one else to danger would not. (BA)