This Wednesday, December 10, is designated World Human Rights Day and as such it is an appropriate time to reflect over the next two weeks on the extent to which Barbados’ human rights record is consistent with the benchmarks and traditions which can be identified in any long-standing democracy.
This critique is by no means intended to be comparative. Certainly there is a relevance to comparative analysis of human rights issues but there is also a danger in the assumption that Barbados is doing well simply because others are doing worse. On this occasion the intention is to assess our performance based on objective benchmarks, to which we have subscribed as a nation and which we therefore agree are not only appropriate ideas to which we ought to aspire, but also standards of behaviour which we have pledged before the international community to uphold.
The focus therefore is placed on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the Covenant) which Barbados acceded to in 1973 with reservations that were deemed necessary to protect some laws from censure. The extent to which these reservations may themselves be indicative of areas in which we have fallen short of noble objectives is an issue that is best perused separately. Notwithstanding, our accession to this covenant as a nation means that we have subjected ourselves to a periodic review where both our laws and practices are held up to scrutiny by the UN Human Rights Committee.
This is a long process, which includes a phase where local and international non-governmental organisations comment on the extent to which we are either a “paragon of virtue” or alternatively have “fallen short of the glory” and an opportunity for Barbados to respond to criticisms before the committee offers its “concluding observations”. The last such set of observations were offered in 2007 and make interesting reading. Barbados was first chided for the fact that it had last reported to this committee in 1991 and therefore 18 years had elapsed since the previous report, which was inconsistent with the timeline of our reporting obligations. This tardiness speaks volumes about the extent to which such matters are a priority for the Government of Barbados.
Substantively, Barbados was commended in 2007 for:
• Adopting the Penal System Reform Act;
• Establishing the Police Complaints Authority;
• Adopting the Evidence Act; and
• Implementing UN basic principles on the use of force and firearms by law enforcement officials.
These initiatives reflect a significant effort on the part of Barbados to modify its legal and police procedures in the direction of international best practice to protect the rights of individuals here. However, the committee also commented negatively on several issues which continue to be problematic today, seven years since its last intervention. As they prepare for the next review of Barbados performance before the committee, non-governmental stakeholders have recently raised these outstanding issues again.
Among the more contentions of such issues is the suggestion that Barbados ought to abolish the death penalty, but that if we are to retain it, we should at least abolish the mandatory death sentence for murder, consistent with article 6 of the Covenant. In fairness, we have only just recently introduced legislation into our Parliament which seeks to abolish the mandatory death penalty.
The larger issue is, however, another matter which is buttressed by considerable support in the public domain. Sadly, successive governments have conspicuously avoided an outright rejection of the death penalty in deference to well-known public support, although it is unlikely that a majority of parliamentarians or lawyers (if asked) would themselves support it. The issue is complex, with imperfections of our justice system which inadvertently targets the lower socio-economic groups playing an important role, but there has hitherto been a lack of political will to confront public opinion or engage in a process of education to encourage greater understanding. It is therefore highly likely that for the time being, the abolition of the mandatory death sentence in case of murder will be as far as we will go on the issue of the abolition of the death penalty.
Peter W. Wickham ([email protected]) is a political consultant and a director of Caribbean Development Research Services (CADRES).
