Don’t mess with the death penalty

By Tyler Wolfe

The Conservative government may be starting Canada on the path back to the archaic practice that is capital punishment. Two recent decisions by the Harper government certainly seem to be steps–baby steps perhaps, but steps nonetheless–toward that end.

It was announced that Canada’s “New Government” would no longer seek to have the death sentence commuted for Canadians who have gone through a fair trial in a democratic country Nov. 1. A week later, they followed this up with the announcement that Canada would not co-sponsor a resolution in the United Nations General Assembly calling on a global moratorium on the death penalty. These two decisions, made on a whim by the Conservatives without a Parliamentary debate, go against decades of Canadian foreign policy.

The decision to no longer seek to have the death penalty commuted stems from the case of an Albertan on death row in Montana. Robert Allen Smith is facing execution by lethal injection for murdering two Blackfoot men in August 1982 and his fate now seems sealed. That there is growing concern about the use of lethal injection and whether or not it is a humane way for the state to execute someone is not the issue here. Nor is the argument by opponents of capital punishment–that there is always the risk that an innocent person will be killed–relevant in this case: Smith has admitted his guilt; he is a cold-blooded killer.

Canada’s use of capital punishment was formally abolished in 1976 and this position was reaffirmed in a parliamentary vote which saw the Mulroney government’s bill to reintroduce its use defeated by the opposition in 1987. Aside from abolishing it within Canada, the federal government is obliged to ensure that they will not extradite Canadian citizens if there is a possibility they will face the death penalty in the host country. As mentioned, until recently, it has been the policy of the feds to attempt to have Canadian sentences commuted from execution to life in prison.

Back to Smith. He is a citizen of Canada and as such, our government is responsible to look after his well being, to a degree. Don’t let the fact he is a dastardly murderer and the emotions associated with this cloud your judgement. This policy was intended for criminals such as him. Our society has proclaimed we do not support state-sanctioned murder and it is the government’s responsibility to see this through by lobbying for a stay of execution.

Harper and his ministers have attempted to deliberately confuse the issue, stating they don’t think it would be in the best interest of Canadians to bring Smith and others like him back to Canada where they would face lenient parole conditions and may end up as a threat back on Canadian streets. This is a clear diversionary tactic. No one is calling for either extradition nor clemency for Smith. Simply, the policy has always been to attempt to have the sentence commuted to life in prison and that is what the government should be lobbying for in Smith’s case.

The decision to no longer get involved in these cases has been met with opposition from a number of fronts, including all three opposition parties as well as the Green Party and, not surprisingly, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. Has Harper’s party forgotten their minority status in Parliament? The second decision, to no longer co-sponsor the UN resolution calling on a global moratorium on capital punishment is strictly symbolic. But it is what the symbolism represents that causes unease. If the minority Conservatives, lacking a clear mandate or support from the other parties, feels comfortable enough to change decade-old policy, they may have something more daunting up their sleeve if they ever were to attain a majority.