Signed, sealed and delivered: Sirisena’s writ to make 4 swing

But if the going gets tough, the President has an escape route to hang off his decision

Well, it’s as if President Sirisena doesn’t have his plate full and much to chew about than think of embarking on a judicial killing spree at this time and hour, breaking a 43- year moratorium on hanging those on death row.

In the aftermath of Easter Sunday’s bombing carnage, which killed over 200 and left the Lankan economy in shatters, when this nation’s catastrophe invited unsolicited international sympathy and understanding, Sirisena’s decision to exercise his presidential prerogative and sign the death warrant to make four on his death list swing has served only to repel the sympathy and provoke the world’s wrath in its stead.

This Wednesday at a meeting with media heads, President Maithripala Sirisena said he had already signed the papers for the execution of four convicts, who had been sentenced to death over drug offences. When asked how many, he declared with special gloat, he had chosen four to be hanged. “I have already signed the papers, it has been delivered and the hangings will be carried out soon.”

This macabre announcement that the President had decided to carry out the death sentence which five presidents before him had refrained from ordering, made even those who were for capital punishment pose the question: “Why the rush? To prove what? 200 innocent lives had been lost in a premeditated attack by Muslim extremists. Will the blood of the innocent killed by Muslim terrorists be ever compensated, be ever atoned by premeditated judicial murder of those guilty of drug related offenses by presidential fiat?

And in the wake of the presidential declaration that he had already signed the necessary paper for judicial execution and that only the hangman’s noose waited the chosen four at a time and place already appointed, an avalanche of national and international protests hurled down on the presidential decision.

It came at a time when Lanka had regained her seat at the table in civilised nations: A Buddhist nation which pays respect to the Buddha’s dictate that all life on earth is sacred and not beyond redemption. A prime example is that of Angulimala who, even after he had committed nine hundred and ninety-nine murders to gather a garland of thousand thumbs to be presented to his school teacher, was visited by the Buddha of universal compassion and redeemed.

Here are a few examples of the world’s shock, horror and abomination of Sirisena’s decision to exercise his presidential fiat, at a time when the nation seeks international aid , goodwill and sympathy to build anew on the rubble Easter Sunday’s carnage caused. But like some sudden Tsunami wave, caused by some quake deep in one man’s heart, the sympathy, the goodwill and the willingness to help Lanka rise from her ashes, seems to be suddenly swept away.

Especially when Sri Lanka is a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which sets the abolition of the death penalty as the goal to be achieved by countries that still retain this punishment.

In fact, Sri Lanka voted in favour of a global moratorium on the use of the death penalty at the UN General Assembly just six months ago.

Here’s a sample offering of the reactions locally and world over to the presidential determination to hang another human being for whatever reason.

Amnesty International led the vanguard when it said on the same day the president declared he had signed the death warrant on four. It said: “Executions for drug-related offences are unlawful. They do not meet the threshold for “most serious crimes”– such as an intentional killing – to which the use of the death penalty must be restricted under international human rights law. It is not clear what the circumstances of their convictions and sentencing are. By keeping these plans secret, the Sri Lankan government is preventing access to vital information to ensure that vital safeguards put in place by the international community to make sure that the rights of those facing the death penalty are fully protected. Executions for drug-related offences are unlawful. They do not meet the threshold for “most serious crimes”– such as an intentional killing – to which the use of the death penalty must be restricted under international human rights law.”

The following day Britain made her stance clear. It said: “the implementation of the death penalty in Sri Lanka would inevitably make it more difficult for the UK to cooperate on law enforcement issues, including counter- terrorism. It would require the UK to review its technical assistance programmes on relevant policing, defence and other security issues if the death penalty was implemented. A reversal of this policy would be a regressive step that would harm Sri Lanka’s international standing and its reputation as a tourist destination and growing centre for business.

Canada followed suit. She said: “We strongly and unequivocally oppose the use of the death penalty in all cases. This form of punishment is incompatible with human dignity and can lead to irreversible miscarriages of justice. No justice system is immune from error. Further, the resumption of executions could attract global attention and would do little to rebuild Sri Lanka’s image as a peaceful and welcoming destination for travellers and investment.

So did the European Union express its displeasure at the decision with the threat to withdraw the GSP status it granted to over five hundred local products only last year, a victory won after a long and hard fought battle to convince the European Union countries that after the human rights violation record of the previous Rajapaksa regime, Lanka was on the mend. The EU statement said: “While stating that resuming death penalty would send a wrong signal to the world, the European Union (EU) today said it would continue to monitor Sri Lanka’s effective implementation of the international conventions relating to the GSP+ commitment.

Even billionaire businessman Richard Branson twittered: “Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena wants to bring back the death penalty in Sri Lanka. I hope he takes a cue from the Maldives president and decides otherwise. Executions can be devastating and are never the solution. The wonderful people of Sri Lanka deserve better than this.” Apart from his tweet, a government source, it is reported has confirmed receiving an official letter to the government.

The UNP said it was not agreeable to President Sirisena's decision to implement death sentence. "The death sentence was abolished by the late President J R Jayewardene and it was continued by the late Presidents R Premadasa and D B Wijetunge. Even President Chandrika Kumaratunga continued this policy," the party said

So did former President, who though the

UNP did not include him in its list of presidents did not exercise his prerogative to commit judicial murder by signing the death warrant, join in the protest and state: “the lucrative heroin trade couldn’t be eradicated only by resuming judicial executions.” I am opposed to the resumption of judicial executions under any circumstances.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) said the application of the death penalty may impede international cooperation to fight drug trafficking. The UNODC said since there are national laws that do not allow the exchange of information and extradition with countries which impose capital punishment for the offences concerned, international cooperation to fight drug trafficking could be hampered. In the face of all this protest, President Sirisena called the United Nations SecretaryGeneral António Guterres over the phone and explained his decision to implement the death penalty in Sri Lanka. He said the death penalty should be implemented to protect the nation and future generations. “The life of schoolchildren, university students and the youth are at risk because of the proliferation of drug trafficking. If we are to protect them, the death penalty should be carried out against drug traffickers. I consider those opposed to this move as people who are aiding and abetting the drug traffickers.”

In other words, Amnesty International, Britain, Canada, the European Union, Richard Bransoin, the UNP, Mahinda Rajapaksa, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime ( UNODC) along with a majority of this country who are opposed to the death penalty as a matter of principle are aiding and abetting drug traffickers?

But fear not. The president’s threat to carry out the death penalty may turn out to be just a red herring. The ace up his sleeve was revealed on the same day he revealed he had signed the four death warrants. After all, the international and local hullabaloo created it may only be a storm in a tea cup that dies in it. For, the President had already planned his escape route when he said at the end of his hanging declaration that those identified by him for execution can appeal to him for his consideration.

PS: The great height leaders reached and kept

Were not attained by sudden flight

For they while their citizens slept Were planning whom to hang that night