Overdue | Pride

On my shared items I have added a note from elPeriódico, the Guatemalan newspaper I use almost exclusively to keep connected and informed about what's up in my motherland. This is my interpretation and reaction of the news as a self-exiled middle-class Toronteco. The news headline reads as follows (my own translation from Spanish):

Presidents vetoes restitution of death penalty

Executive affirms that the decision is based in the fact that the decree violates six articles of the Constitution and because it would freeze relations with supportive countries

A couple of notes: (1) How hard it is to translate a headline from the beautiful Spanish language into the practical English language. (2) The "executive" refers to the section of the government headed by the president and conformed by the different ministries in charge of the actual functioning (execution) of the government, as opposed to the "legislative" (in charge of spitting out laws) and the "judicial"(in charge of enforcing the laws through the different courts).

I honestly have to say that I have not followed this issue closely. Apparently, the previous Guatemalan government left the death penalty "in the air" and it was up to the new government to figure out what to do with it. It seems that the "legislative", that is the Congress, approved the restitution of the death penalty. Both the current "executive" and the "legislative" are dominated by the same party, thus it is interesting that the president vetoes something approved by his own party. However, that is his prerogative and I simply can applaud any sign he can give of being "in power".

During my quarter of a century growing up in Guatemala the death penalty was a non-issue. It existed, it was enforced every now and then, it was even broadcast on the news at noon. I learned compassion, thought, through the eyes of my Tía Luz who served somewhat as our nanny and to whom I am in debt for who I am almost as much as my parents. Her reaction to anyone being incarcerated or taking in by police, or worse, anyone who was in death row was Pobrecito ("poor little guy"). Compassion for a criminal is something that is not often seen, particularly in Guatemala where the sole mention of the "Human Rights" in relation to common criminals provokes the outcry of the general public as a way of letting people get away with their wrongdoings. Now that I think about it to put it in black and white pixels Human Rights have so many different meanings in Guatemala. On one side we have the issue of the genocide of those who were fighting against the government (blowing up the extremely necessary and scarce infrastructure of the country, I must say to echo my "maternal" point of view); those who are seen by the international community as criminals against humanity, the masterminds and executors of the massacres during the civil war and even after the peace accords of 1996. And then we have the Human Rights of the common criminal (or even the organized one) which are completely disregarded by the common public. Linchamientos ("lynching") was (is?) a usual way of the people of taking the law into their own hands, as democratic as an open town hall. Out of frustration, the general public chased the criminal (be it someone who was stealing a pair of sunglasses or someone being suspected or trying to kidnap a baby), beat him/her up almost to death, until "the authorities" arrive. Is in this context that Human Rights are looked down by Guatemalans, not in the context of the massacres.

Thus, this double standard (death people have Human Rights, but criminals barely alive don't) permeates the discussion of the death penalty in my dear motherland. The compassion instilled by my Tía Luz and encouraged by this country I live in now (my brother calls it my "godmother"-land) have created a very clear position about the death penalty: It is NEVER justified. To give anyone (the people, the judges, the government, the church) the power to decide over someone else life is to give them absolute power, and you know what the saying says, human nature will tend to be corrupted by this power. The death penalty is there along the proliferation of nuclear weapons, is better not to have them regardless of their appeal and potential "usefulness". Revenge is usually the motor behind those who cry for the death penalty, not justice and neither it is the welfare of the many (even though "getting rid" of a few bad apples might seem "good" for society).

In a couple of occasions I have been reminded in Canada that my country of origin still practices the death penalty and thus it is placed within the box of "medieval" justice systems (along with our big partner to the South). And that is why today I feel pride to share the news that come from my motherland. A president, regardless of the public opinion and the political cost, is saying that the death penalty has no place in a modern civilized society, it is unconstitutional (although so it is abortion, but that is a horse of a different colour) and in order to be part of the global village Guatemala has to find real solutions to its problems with violence and crime. Violence cannot fight violence. Today I am proud of this overdue position.

What do you think about the death penalty? Is it still applied where you live? Isn't it just a short-term lazy measure to combat criminality? Who has the moral solvency to decide over the life of someone else?