Death: Is it an effective deterrent?

By Duleep Samarasinghe, Ruhani Perera and Laila Nasry

Six days ago, on May 31, three youths sat si-lently listening to their fate being decided for them.

In another time and place they might have been on the brink of a bright future. But here they were in the High Court in Hulftsdorp. The lights and fans were switched off and all those in the court ordered to stand. Amidst pin-drop silence came the verdict.......death.

Convicted by a three-judge trial-at-bar of the abduction, gang-rape, robbery and murder of Rita John Manoharan, the youth, Warnakulasuriya Palihakkarage Ajith Fernando, Kurukulasuriya Balappuwaduge Basil Mendis and Chaminda Kumara Fernando were referred to the Welikada prison pending the date and time of their execution as ordered by the President.

Newly-wed Rita John Manoharan (29), an Indian was abducted by the convicts on October 11, 1998, while she was out walking on the beach with her Sri Lankan husband at Crow Island, Modera.

She was in Sri Lanka on her honeymoon. Later her tortured and mutilated body was found in the marsh.

Soon after her body was found, civil society was in an uproar, shouting for justice to be meted out to the perpetrators of this heinous crime. And now the verdict is in.

Capital punishment has always been considered an effective deterrent.

Various forms of capital punishment - beheading, forcibly seating the condemned on a long, sharp spike or tying the culprit on two bent "thal" trees - have been used since the times of the ancient kings. Gradually it has changed to more "humane" methods - hanging in Sri Lanka and the electric chair in the West.

But in Sri Lanka capital punishment has not been implemented after June 22, 1976, when Embilipitiye Chandradasa alias "Honda Papuwa" was hanged.

Is capital punishment a necessity to deter one person from taking another's life? Do we need this deterrent to keep society "civil"? This is what The Sunday Times found.

Karunawathie, a parking attendant believes that it is fitting for the three accused in the Rita John case to be sentenced to death. Most of the men around her, mainly bus drivers and conductors, echoed her opinion. "They have committed a crime and it is only fair that they pay for it. I would be of the same opinion even if I were one of the accused," said Ajith Priyantha, a taxi driver from Dehiwala.

Although the Universal Declaration of Human Rights insists that "everyone has the right to life, liberty and security," the other view is that to maintain an orderly society, stringent action is essential. Such support in favour of capital punishment stems from the fear that life imprisonment is inadequate. The second school of thought is that though imprisonment would leave room for rehabilitation, it could also allow hardened criminals the chance to manipulate the prison system.

A university student who is against life imprisonment said, "As a woman I feel that the death penalty is effective because it serves as a deterrent. Thus women can feel secure."

Many people hold the view that the Sri Lankan system of justice is such that the offender knows only too well that whether he slaughters one person or 20 the penalty is the same - a nice long "rest" at the expense of the taxpayer. It is this indifference on the part of the offender that has resulted in an outcry. For the average man, woman or child justice lies within clear boundaries.

They commit violent crimes and in prison they have "raja sepa" (live in the lap of luxury), said Chamara a schoolboy, while his friends nodded their heads. People believe that the punishment meted out to the offender must be of the same magnitude and severity as that of the crime. It is only then that the scales are balanced.

Sumana, who has worked in the Middle East as a housemaid, thinks that safeguarding human rights is not going to guarantee a just society. "In Saudi the crime rate is low because punitive measures are equal to the crime," she explains. Most believe that those convicted of murder deserve the death penalty. Many questions arise thereafter.

Should the death penalty be imposed on all who are found guilty of murder or should it be reserved for those who commit brutal murders? What about the human rights of the offenders, their fundamental right to life?

Liberals believe that state-imposed capital punishment is a violation of human rights and an affront to the liberty, dignity and integrity of human beings.

Professor Thamilamaran, human rights advocate, said, "The death penalty addresses only the symptoms of a decadent society and not its root causes." Some say the death penalty is not the way to reduce crime. "I believe in forgiveness. Man has no right to give that kind of harsh justice. There should be rehabilitation," schoolgirl Harini says.

Overall, the picture seems to be clear. Today, the goriest of crimes are committed for the simplest reasons. But the question that lingers is whether the implementation of the death penalty will make society any safer from crime.

The verdict is given

An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth or justice tempered with mercy. What should it be? The court has given its verdict......it's death for the murder of beautiful Rita John Manoharan.

At the time she was abducted, gang-raped, robbed and murdered, the country was shocked. Shocked that there were among us, people who could murder in cold blood, a defenceless woman who begged for her life after being gang-raped. So should the death penalty be implemented?

"It should," says the Executive Director of Women in Need (WIN), Savithri Wijesekera. "I personally think they deserve to be punished severely."

"Some argue that the death penalty has not stopped crime, but I think capital punishment will put fear into people to think twice before committing such a horrendous crime," she says.

Ms. Wijesekera emphasised that Rita John, an innocent woman who was walking on the beach was brutally murdered.

"They raped her, but did not stop there. They murdered her. Now they've got a fair hearing and they've been found guilty."

The accused seem to think that "life is cheap". They did not have any sense of responsibility. The implementation of the death penalty will show people that just because you don't know a person you can't take that person's life," she said.

"They must be punished, but that must be done with humanity," stresses the Joint Co-ordinator of Women and Media Collective, Sunila Abeysekera. Ms. Abeysekera, a human rights activist, is opposed to the implementation of the death penalty, which she says has not been a deterrent against crime. "We do not have the right to take another's life."

The convicted should be punished. We should use the humanity in us to create a process of rehabilitation through this punishment which could come in the form of isolation or removal from civic society by imprisonment, she said.

They should have enough time to contemplate the enormity of their crime. In the modern world psychopathic behaviour needs to be recognised and treated in such a manner, said Ms. Abeysekera whose organization led a major demonstration calling for justice, after Rita's murder.

There are many dangers when implementing the death penalty. There could be a miscarriage of justice. Human error also cannot be ruled out, she added.

The decision whether to implement the death penalty in this case has to be taken by President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumara-tunga.

-Kumudini Hettiarachchi

More Plus

Return to the Plus Contents