R v Hughes | |
---|---|
Court | Judicial Committee of the Privy Council |
Full case name | The Queen, Appellant v Peter Hughes, Respondent |
Decided | 11 March 2002 |
Citations | [2002] UKPC 12, [2002] 2 AC 259, [2002] 2 WLR 1058 |
Case history | |
Prior action | Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (from Saint Lucia) |
Case opinions | |
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry | |
Keywords | |
Capital punishment; inhuman or degrading punishment |
R v Hughes is a 2002 Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) case in which it was held that it was unconstitutional in Saint Lucia for capital punishment to be the mandatory sentence for murder. [1] The JCPC held that because the Constitution of Saint Lucia prohibits "inhuman or degrading punishment", following a murder conviction, a trial judge must have discretion to impose a lesser penalty than death by hanging; capital punishment may be applied only in those cases that contain aggravating factors as compared to other murder cases.
The case was decided with Reyes v R and Fox v R , cases on the same issue on appeal from Belize and Saint Kitts and Nevis.
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) is the highest court of appeal for the Crown Dependencies, the British Overseas Territories, some Commonwealth countries and a few institutions in the United Kingdom. Established on 14 August 1833 to hear appeals formerly heard by the King-in-Council, the Privy Council formerly acted as the court of last resort for the entire British Empire, other than for the United Kingdom itself.
Capital punishment in the United Kingdom predates the formation of the UK, having been used within the British Isles from ancient times until the second half of the 20th century. The last executions in the United Kingdom were by hanging, and took place in 1964; capital punishment for murder was suspended in 1965 and finally abolished in 1969. Although unused, the death penalty remained a legally defined punishment for certain offences such as treason until it was completely abolished in 1998; the last execution for treason took place in 1946. In 2004, Protocol No. 13 to the European Convention on Human Rights became binding on the United Kingdom; it prohibits the restoration of the death penalty as long as the UK is a party to the convention.
Gregg v. Georgia, Proffitt v. Florida, Jurek v. Texas, Woodson v. North Carolina, and Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U.S. 153 (1976), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. It reaffirmed the Court's acceptance of the use of the death penalty in the United States, upholding, in particular, the death sentence imposed on Troy Leon Gregg. The set of cases is referred to by a leading scholar as the July 2 Cases, and elsewhere referred to by the lead case Gregg. The court set forth the two main features that capital sentencing procedures must employ in order to comply with the Eighth Amendment ban on "cruel and unusual punishments". The decision essentially ended the de facto moratorium on the death penalty imposed by the Court in its 1972 decision in Furman v. Georgia (1972). Justice Brennan's dissent famously argued that "The calculated killing of a human being by the State involves, by its very nature, a denial of the executed person's humanity ... An executed person has indeed 'lost the right to have rights.'"
The Caribbean Court of Justice is the judicial institution of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Established in 2005, it is based in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago.
Capital punishment is a legal penalty in Malaysian law.
Franklin and David Thomas were convicted murderers who were executed by Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG). Their executions, along with that of Douglas Hamlet, are the most recent executions performed by SVG, and questions about the fairness of the Thomas brothers' execution have been raised.
Capital punishment is legal in Tonga, but has not been imposed since 1982. The country's lack of executions puts it into the category of a state abolitionist in practice, where it retains the death penalty in law but has had a formal or informal moratorium for at least ten years. Tonga's low rate of murder convictions forms part of the reason for the lack of executions, as well as its courts’ apparent unwillingness to impose the penalty unless it appears absolutely necessary to do so.
The Judiciary of Barbados is an independent branch of the Barbadian government, subject only to the Barbadian Constitution. It is headed by the Chief Justice of Barbados. Barbados is a common law jurisdiction, in which precedents from English law and British Commonwealth tradition may be taken into account.
Yong Vui Kong v. Public Prosecutor was a seminal case decided in 2010 by the Court of Appeal of Singapore which, in response to a challenge by Yong Vui Kong, a convicted drug smuggler, held that the mandatory death penalty imposed by the Misuse of Drugs Act ("MDA") for certain drug trafficking offences does not infringe Articles 9(1) and 12(1) of the Constitution of Singapore.
Ong Ah Chuan v Public Prosecutor is a landmark decision delivered in 1980 by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on appeal from Singapore which deals with the constitutionality of section 15 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1973 ("MDA"), and the mandatory death penalty by the Act for certain offences. The appellants contended that the presumption of trafficking under section 15 of the MDA violated Article 9(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore and that the mandatory death penalty was arbitrary and violated Article 12(1) of the Constitution.
Capital punishment is abolished in the District of Columbia. However, a number of executions were carried out under the District's jurisdiction before abolition. These executions should be distinguished from cases such as the 1942 execution of the six Nazi saboteurs which took place in the District, but under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government.
Fox v R is a 2002 Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) case in which it was held that it was unconstitutional in Saint Kitts and Nevis for capital punishment to be the mandatory sentence for murder. The JCPC held that because the Constitution of Saint Kitts and Nevis prohibits "inhuman or degrading punishment", following a murder conviction, a trial judge must have discretion to impose a lesser penalty than death by hanging; capital punishment may be applied only in those cases that contain aggravating factors as compared to other murder cases.
Reyes v R is a 2002 Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) case in which it was held that it was unconstitutional in Belize for capital punishment to be the mandatory sentence for murder. The JCPC held that because the Constitution of Belize prohibits "inhuman or degrading punishment", following a murder conviction, a trial judge must have discretion to impose a lesser penalty than death by hanging; capital punishment may be applied only in those cases that contain aggravating factors as compared to other murder cases.
Pratt v A-G for Jamaica is a 1993 Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) case in which it was held that it was unconstitutional in Jamaica to execute a prisoner who had been on death row for 14 years. The JCPC held that because the Constitution of Jamaica prohibits "inhuman or degrading punishment", excessive delays cannot occur between sentencing and execution of the punishment. In cases of such excessive delay, the death sentence should be commuted to life imprisonment.
Boyce v R is a 2004 Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) case which upheld the law that sets out a mandatory sentence of death for murder in Barbados.
Matthew v S is a 2004 Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) case which upheld the law that sets out a mandatory sentence of death for murder in Trinidad and Tobago.
Bowe v R is a 2006 Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) case in which it was held that it was unconstitutional in the Bahamas for capital punishment to be the mandatory sentence for murder. The JCPC held that because the Constitution of the Bahamas contains a qualified right to life and prohibits "inhuman or degrading punishment", following a murder conviction, a trial judge must have discretion to impose a lesser penalty than death by hanging; capital punishment may be applied only in those cases that contain aggravating factors as compared to other murder cases.
Capital punishment in Bangladesh is a legal form of punishment for anyone who is over 16, however in practice it would not apply to people under 18. Crimes that are currently punishable by death in Bangladesh are set out in the Penal Code 1860. These include waging war against the State, abetting mutiny, giving false evidence upon which an innocent person suffers death, murder, assisted suicide of a child, attempted murder of a child, and kidnapping. The Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 provides that a person awarded the death penalty "be hanged by the neck until he is dead." For murder cases, the Appellate Division requires trial courts to weigh aggravating and mitigating factors to determine whether the death penalty is warranted.
Capital punishment is a legal penalty in Trinidad and Tobago. The method of execution is hanging. Its last execution was of Anthony Briggs for murder on 28 July 1999. However, the country is still considered "retentionist' due to lack of "an established practice or policy against carrying out executions." Trinidad and Tobago is the only country in the Americas that retains the mandatory death penalty for murder.
Capital punishment is a legal penalty in Uganda. The death penalty was likely last carried out in 1999, although some sources say the last execution in Uganda took place in 2005. Regardless, Uganda is interchangeably considered a retentionist state with regard to capital punishment, due to absence of "an established practice or policy against carrying out executions," as well as a de facto abolitionist state due to the lack of any executions for over one decade.