Source: http://www.deathpenaltyworldwide.org/country-search-post.cfm?country=Grenada
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 04:59:23
Document Index: 131966068

Matched Legal Cases: ['art. 230', 'art. 322', 'art. 325', 'art. 230', 'art. 230', 'art. 2']

The Death Penalty in Grenada
Information current as of: April 2, 2011
Grenada. [1]
Abolitionist de facto. Grenada’s last execution was in 1978. [3]
[1] U.S. Dept. of State, Background Note: Grenada, http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2335.htm, Jan. 7, 2011.
[3] Amnesty Intl., Death Penalty: Countries Abolitionist in Practice, http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty/countries-abolitionist-in-practice, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011. An additional review of Amnesty International’s reports revealed no executions, nor any reports on Antigua and Barbuda, over the last decade. See Amnesty’s publications database at http://www.amnesty.org/en/ai_search.
[4] Richard Clark, Capital Punishment in the Commonwealth, Capital Punishment U.K., http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/common.html, last accessed Jan. 17, 2011.
103,930. [2]
One man is on death row in Grenada. [3]
(This question was last updated on May 2, 2018.)
Executions in 2019 to date (last updated on April 17, 2019)
1978. [17]
[2] U.S. Dept. of State, Background Note: Grenada, http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2335.htm, Jan. 7, 2011.
[3] Amnesty Intl., Death Sentences and Executions in 2017, p. 12, ACT 50/7955/2018, Apr. 12, 2018.
[5] Amnesty Intl., Death Sentences and Executions 2018, p. 13, 50/9870/2019, Apr. 10, 2019.
[6] Amnesty Intl., Death Sentences and Executions 2017, p. 12, ACT 50/7955/2018, Apr. 12, 2018.
[7] Amnesty International, Death sentences and executions in 2016, ACT 50/5740/2017, Apr. 11, 2017.
[9] Amnesty Intl., Death Sentences and Executions in 2014, ACT 50/001/2015, Mar. 31, 2015.
[10] Amnesty Intl., Death Sentences and Executions in 2013, ACT 50/001/2014, Mar. 26, 2014.
[11] Amnesty Intl., Death Sentences and Executions in 2012, ACT 50/001/2012, Apr. 9, 2013.
[12] Amnesty Intl., Death Sentences and Executions in 2011, ACT 50/001/2012, http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ACT50/001/2012/en, Mar. 27, 2012.
[13] Amnesty Intl., Death Sentences and Executions in 2010, p. 5, ACT 50/001/2011, Mar. 28, 2011.
[14] Amnesty Intl., Death Sentences and Executions in 2009, p. 6, ACT 50/001/2010, Mar. 30, 2010.
[15] Amnesty Intl., Death Sentences and Executions in 2008, p. 8, ACT 50/003/2009, Mar. 24, 2009.
[16] Amnesty Intl., Death Sentences and Executions in 2007, p. 6, ACT 50/001/2008, Apr. 15, 2008.
[17] Amnesty Intl., Death Penalty: Countries Abolitionist in Practice, http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty/countries-abolitionist-in-practice, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
The 1987 Criminal Code as written mandates the death penalty for murder and does not recognize aggravated murder as a separate offense. [1] Case law restricts the death penalty to aggravated murder. [2]
Treason. [3]
We did not find the laws or regulations of the armed forces. There are some references to the law of England in force “for the time being” [4] that could affect interpretation of the law, but we do not know how the phrase would be applied. [5]
No. Despite the Criminal Code’s mandatory death penalty for all murder, [6] Grenada’s courts have applied a discretionary sentencing standard for aggravated murder. [7] The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (Grenada’s highest constitutional court) recently confirmed that Article 230 of the Criminal Code must be interpreted as a discretionary standard and that individuals who did not have the opportunity to fully contest the constitutionality of a mandatory sentence of death must be resentenced. [8]
Although the Criminal Code states that the death penalty is mandatory for murder, [9] Grenada’s courts have applied a discretionary sentencing standard for aggravated murder, [10] and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (Grenada’s highest constitutional court) recently confirmed a discretionary standard. [11]
Grenada’s last execution was in 1978. [12]
Grenada’s national law forbids the execution of individuals for crimes committed while under the age of 18, [13] and Grenada has ratified the ICCPR, [14] CRC [15] and ACHR, [16] which prohibit that practice.
Grenada has ratified the ICCPR [17] and the ACHR, [18] which prohibit the execution of pregnant women. We did not find the Code of Criminal Procedure, which would typically set forth exclusions for pregnant or nursing women.
We did not find Grenada’s law on this subject, but on at least one occasion, Grenada’s courts have considered whether an individual’s intellectual disability prevented him from fully understanding the nature and consequences of his actions such that he could not be found criminally responsible or could not be liable for the same punishment as an ordinary individual. [19]
We did not find Grenada’s law on this subject, but Grenada is a common law jurisdiction and common law recognizes that where an individual’s mental illness prevents him from understanding the nature and consequences of his acts, he may not be held criminally responsible. One case suggests a partially responsible individual might still face lesser penalties. [20]
Grenada has ratified the ACHR, which prohibits the execution of individuals over the age of 70 years. [21]
Grenada’s Constitution does not provide that treaties have the force of national law, [22] and we do not know whether Grenada has fully enacted the rights implied by its international and regional treaty obligations. We did not locate Grenada’s Code of Criminal Procedure—we believe that fuller access to the law would clarify the exclusions Grenada applies.
[1] Grenada Criminal Code of 1987, art. 230, amended by Act 36 of 1993.
[2] Barry v. Queen, paras. 60-62, Criminal Appeals No. 5, 9 & 10 of 2004, ECSC Court of Appeal, May 14, 2007; Hughes and Spence v. Queen, para. 44, Appeals No. 14 of 1997 and 20 of 1998, ECSC Court of Appeals, Apr. 2, 2001.
[3] Grenada Criminal Code of 1987, art. 322, amended by Act 36 of 1993.
[4] Grenada Criminal Code of 1987, art. 325, amended by Act 36 of 1993.
[5] For instance, assuming the phrase targets England’s law on a specific date, we do not know when the clause was written, or whether it would refer to the 1987 reenactment of the Criminal Code, or else the original 1958 Grenada code. It may be more likely that the phrase refers to England’s laws in 1958, or else provisions for the death penalty would be contradictory.
[6] Grenada Criminal Code of 1987, art. 230, amended by Act 36 of 1993.
[7] Barry v. Queen, paras. 60-62, Criminal Appeals No. 5, 9 & 10 of 2004, ECSC Court of Appeal, May 14, 2007. For further case law, reference the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court’s judgments at http://eccourts.org/judgments.html.
[8] Coard v. A.G. of Grenada, para. 34, Appeal No. 10 of 1996, JCPC, Feb. 7, 2007.
[9] Grenada Criminal Code of 1987, art. 230, amended by Act 36 of 1993.
[10] Barry v. Queen, paras. 60-62, Criminal Appeals No. 5, 9 & 10 of 2004, ECSC Court of Appeal, May 14, 2007. For further case law, reference the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court’s judgments at http://eccourts.org/judgments.html.
[11] Coard v. A.G. of Grenada, para. 34, Appeal No. 10 of 1996, JCPC, Feb. 7, 2007.
[12] Amnesty Intl., Death Penalty: Countries Abolitionist in Practice, http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty/countries-abolitionist-in-practice, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[13] Grenada Criminal Code of 1987, arts. 230, 322 amended by Act 36 of 1993.
[14] Status, Declarations, and Reservations, ICCPR, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, Dec. 16, 1966, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-4&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[15] Status, Declarations, and Reservations, CRC, 1577 U.N.T.S. 3, Aug. 20, 1989, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-11&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[16] Status, Declarations, Reservations, Denunciations, Withdrawals, B-32: Amer. Conv. on Human Rights, Pact of San Jose, Costa Rica, Nov. 22, 1969, http://cidh.oas.org/basicos/english/basic4.amer.conv.ratif.htm, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[17] Status, Declarations, and Reservations, ICCPR, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, Dec. 16, 1966, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-4&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[18] Status, Declarations, Reservations, Denunciations, Withdrawals, B-32: Amer. Conv. on Human Rights, Pact of San Jose, Costa Rica, Nov. 22, 1969, http://cidh.oas.org/basicos/english/basic4.amer.conv.ratif.htm, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[19] Gilbert v. Queen, para. 18, Criminal Appeal No. 11 of 2001, ECSC Court of Appeals, Nov. 25, 2002.
[20] Jacob v. Queen, p. 8-9, Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 1994, ECSC Court of Appeals, Dec. 8, 1997.
[21] Status, Declarations, Reservations, Denunciations, Withdrawals, B-32: Amer. Conv. on Human Rights, Pact of San Jose, Costa Rica, Nov. 22, 1969, http://cidh.oas.org/basicos/english/basic4.amer.conv.ratif.htm, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[22] The Grenada Constitution Order, Dec. 19, 1973.
Sep. 6, 1991. [2]
Yes. [8]
Jul. 14, 1978. [9]
Yes. [10]
Jul. 14, 1978. [11]
Against. [15]
Against. [18]
Against. [21]
Yes. [22]
Against. [24]
Yes. [25]
No. [26]
Against. [27]
Yes. [28]
No. [29]
Against. [30]
Yes. [31]
[1] Status, Declarations, and Reservations, ICCPR, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, Dec. 16, 1966, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-4&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[2] Status, Declarations, and Reservations, ICCPR, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, Dec. 16, 1966, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-4&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[3] Status, Declarations, and Reservations, ICCPR, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, Dec. 16, 1966, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-4&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[4] Status, Declarations, and Reservations, Optional Prot. to the ICCPR, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, Dec. 16, 1966, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-5&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[5] Status, Declarations, and Reservations, Optional Prot. to the ICCPR, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, Dec. 16, 1966, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-5&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[6] Status, Declarations, and Reservations, Second Optional Prot. to the ICCPR, Aiming at the Abolition of the Death Penalty, 1642 U.N.T.S. 414, Dec. 15, 1989, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-12&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[7] Status, Declarations, and Reservations, Second Optional Prot. to the ICCPR, Aiming at the Abolition of the Death Penalty, 1642 U.N.T.S. 414, Dec. 15, 1989, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-12&chapter=4〈=en, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[8] Status, Declarations, Reservations, Denunciations, Withdrawals, B-32: Amer. Conv. on Human Rights, Pact of San Jose, Costa Rica, Nov. 22, 1969, http://cidh.oas.org/basicos/english/basic4.amer.conv.ratif.htm, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[9] Status, Declarations, Reservations, Denunciations, Withdrawals, B-32: Amer. Conv. on Human Rights, Pact of San Jose, Costa Rica, Nov. 22, 1969, http://cidh.oas.org/basicos/english/basic4.amer.conv.ratif.htm, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[10] Status, Declarations, Reservations, Denunciations, Withdrawals, B-32: Amer. Conv. on Human Rights, Pact of San Jose, Costa Rica, Nov. 22, 1969, http://cidh.oas.org/basicos/english/basic4.amer.conv.ratif.htm, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[11] Status, Declarations, Reservations, Denunciations, Withdrawals, B-32: Amer. Conv. on Human Rights, Pact of San Jose, Costa Rica, Nov. 22, 1969, http://cidh.oas.org/basicos/english/basic4.amer.conv.ratif.htm, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[12] Status, Declarations, Reservations, Denunciations, Withdrawals, A-53: Prot. to the Amer. Conv. on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty, Jun. 8, 1990, http://cidh.oas.org/basicos/english/basic8.death%20penalty%20ratif.htm, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[13] Status, Declarations, Reservations, Denunciations, Withdrawals, A-53: Prot. to the Amer. Conv. on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty, Jun. 8, 1990, http://cidh.oas.org/basicos/english/basic8.death%20penalty%20ratif.htm, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[14] U.N.G.A., 71st Session, Promotion and protection of human rights: human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, paras. 54-71 U.N. Doc. A/71/484/Add.2, Dec. 6, 2016.
[15] U.N.G.A., 71st Session, Promotion and protection of human rights: human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, paras. 54-71 U.N. Doc. A/71/484/Add.2, Dec. 6, 2016.
[16] U.N.G.A., 71st Session, Note Verbale dated 7 September 2017, U.N. Doc. A/71/1047, Sep. 13, 2017.
[17] U.N.G.A., 69th Session, Promotion and Protection of Human Rights: human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, paras. 141, 144, U.N. Doc. A/69/488/Add.2, Dec. 8, 2014.
[18] U.N.G.A., 69th Session, 73rd Plenary Meeting, pp. 17-18, U.N. Doc. A/69/PV.73, Dec. 18, 2014.
[19] U.N.G.A., 69th Session, Note Verbale dated 28 July 2015, U.N. Doc. A/69/993, Jul. 29, 2015.
[20] U.N.G.A., 67th Session, Promotion and Protection of Human Rights: human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, paras. 95-96, U.N. Doc. A/67/457/Add.2, Dec. 8, 2012.
[21] U.N.G.A., 67th Session, 60th Plenary Meeting, pp. 16-17, U.N. Doc. A/67/PV.60, Dec. 20, 2012.
[22] U.N.G.A., 67th Session, Note Verbale dated 16 April 2013, U.N. Doc. A/67/841, Apr. 23, 2013.
[23] U.N.G.A., 65th Session, Promotion and Protection of Human Rights: human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, p. 5, U.N. Doc. A/65/456/Add.2, Dec. 8, 2010.
[24] U.N.G.A., 65th Session, 71st Plenary Meeting, pp. 18-19, U.N. Doc. A/65/PV.71, Dec. 21, 2010.
[25] U.N.G.A., 65th Session, Note Verbale dated 11 March 2011, U.N. Doc. A/65/779, Mar. 11, 2011.
[26] U.N.G.A., 63rd session, Promotion and Protection of Human Rights: human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, U.N. Doc. A/63/430/Add.2, Dec. 4, 2008.
[27] U.N.G.A., 63rd Session, 70th Plenary Meeting, pp. 16- 17, U.N. Doc. A/63/PV.70, Dec. 18, 2008.
[28] U.N.G.A., 63rd Session, Note Verbale dated 10 February 2009, U.N. Doc. A/63/716, Feb. 12, 2009.
[29] U.N.G.A., 62nd Session, Promotion and Protection of Human Rights: human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, U.N. Doc. A/62/439/Add.2, Dec. 5, 2007.
[30] U.N.G.A., 62nd Session, 76th Plenary Meeting, pp. 16- 17, U.N. Doc. A/62/PV.76, Dec. 18, 2007.
[31] U.N.G.A., 62nd Session, Note Verbale dated 11 January 2008, U.N. Doc. A/62/658, Feb. 2, 2008.
The Constitution provides: “No person shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in execution of the sentence of a court in respect of a Criminal offence under the law of Grenada of which he has been convicted.” [1]
There have been no executions since 1978. [3] After 2001, when the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (sitting as a Court of Appeal) established an “exceptional and appropriate circumstances” standard for application of the death penalty, [4] Grenada has restricted the death penalty to aggravated murder in the absence of circumstances that call for leniency. [5]
In recent years there have been some cases that may lead to improvements in the right to appeal against a sentence of death on constitutional grounds. Additional prisoners gained the right to appeal against the mandatory death penalty in 2007, [6] and in 2010 the High Court of Justice implied in Queen v. Knight that judicial enforcement of constitutional rights should be speedier. [7] Under Pratt & Morgan v. Jamaica, [8] prisoners are already removed from death row after 5 years (and cannot be executed), and it is possible that Queen v. Knight (2010) will lead to speedier resentencing. [9]
No. Although there is a de facto moratorium on executions, [10] Grenada has rejected recommendations that it institute a de jure moratorium. [11]
In 1993, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council ruled that any prisoner under sentence of death for longer than 5 years had presumptively been subjected to cruel and unusual punishment necessitating commutation of his death sentence. [12] Grenada courts (and other officials in the criminal justice system) apply this principle. [13]
In 2001, the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (Court of Appeals division) determined that the mandatory death penalty contravened protections against arbitrariness and cruel and unusual treatment or punishment, [14] protections assured by Grenada’s Constitution. [15] The JCPC upheld the ECSC’s decision in 2002. [16] The ECSC’s 2001 decision also stated that the death penalty may be “imposed in only the most exceptional and appropriate circumstances,” [17] and subsequent sentencing by Grenada courts shows that they apply that standard. [18]
In 2007, the JCPC accepted an appeal against the mandatory death penalty of some individuals who had, during a brief period in which the JCPC lacked appellate jurisdiction over cases from Grenada, exhausted appellate process on separate issues. The Governor had commuted the sentences of these prisoners (convicted of the murder of Prime Minister Maurice Bishop during the 1983 revolution) to life imprisonment, but the JCPC ruled that such a reduction was insufficient because it did not account for the possibility that the death sentences were inappropriate in the first place. The Court ordered that these individuals be resentenced. [19] All of these individuals have now been released. [20]
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council is Grenada’s highest domestic court, and its jurisprudence can be searched at http://www.privy-council.org.uk/output/Page31.asp.
The Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court serves as Grenada’s Court of Appeals, and its jurisprudence can be searched at http://eccourts.org/judgments.html.
Any capital sentence not issued by court martial is reviewed by the Advisory Committee on the Prerogative of Mercy. A special Minister appointed by the Governor General in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister causes a report of the case and other useful information to be submitted to the Committee, which makes recommendations to the special Minister. That Minister determines “in his own deliberate judgment” whether to advise the Governor General, who must act in accordance with that advice, to exercise the prerogative of mercy. [21]
Capital trials and sentencing are in the High Court of Justice [23] and are appealed to the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court sitting as a Court of Appeal, and then to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. [24] It is unclear from those cases when appeal is as of right and, if so, whether that right is generally respected. The Constitution grants a right of appeal in some cases. [25]
[1] The Grenada Constitution Order, art. 2(1), Dec. 19, 1973.
[2] The Grenada Constitution Order, Dec. 19, 1973.
[3] Amnesty Intl., Death Penalty: Countries Abolitionist in Practice, http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty/countries-abolitionist-in-practice, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[4] Hughes and Spence v. Queen, para. 44, Appeals No. 14 of 1997 and 20 of 1998, ECSC Court of Appeals, Apr. 2, 2001.
[5] Barry v. Queen, paras. 60-62, Criminal Appeals No. 5, 9 & 10 of 2004, ECSC Court of Appeal, May 14, 2007. For further case law, reference the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court’s judgments at http://eccourts.org/judgments.html.
[6] Queen v. Hughes, Appeal No. 91 of 2001, JCPC, Mar. 11, 2002.
[7] Queen v. Knights, paras. 1, 7, 18, 28, Case No. GDAHCR1994/0212, Grenada and West Indies High Court of Justice, May 28, 2010. Note that the prisoner was no longer considered on death row in the 6th year after his conviction, and was moved to general population; finally, the Court recognized the Pratt & Morgan rule.
[8] Pratt & Morgan v. A.G. of Jamaica, Appeal No. 10 of 1993, JCPC, Nov. 2, 1993.
[9] Queen v. Knights, paras. 1, 7, 18, 28, Case No. GDAHCR1994/0212, Grenada and West Indies High Court of Justice, May 28, 2010. Note that the prisoner was no longer considered on death row in the 6th year after his conviction, and was treated as general population.
[10] Amnesty Intl., Death Penalty: Countries Abolitionist in Practice, http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty/countries-abolitionist-in-practice, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[11] UPR-Info.org, Recommendations and Responses: Grenada, p. 4, http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/Recommendations_to_Grenada_2010.pdf, Jan. 13, 2011.
[12] Pratt & Morgan v. A.G. of Jamaica, Appeal No. 10 of 1993, JCPC, Nov. 2, 1993.
[13] Queen v. Knights, paras. 1, 7, 18, 28, Case No. GDAHCR1994/0212, Grenada and West Indies High Court of Justice, May 28, 2010. Note that the prisoner was no longer considered on death row in the 6th year after his conviction, and was treated as general population; finally, the Court recognized the Pratt & Morgan rule.
[14] Hughes and Spence v. Queen, p. 15-22, Appeals No. 14 of 1997 and 20 of 1998, ECSC Court of Appeals, Apr. 2, 2001.
[15] The Grenada Constitution Order, arts. 2(1), 5(1), Dec. 19, 1973. The ECSC rejected the contention that a bare requirement that a death penalty be applied “in accordance with law” requires nothing more than compliance with the statutory law. The ECSC held that such this “requires the Court to ensure that any procedure which takes away life should be reasonable, just and fair.” Hughes and Spence v. Queen, paras. 51-52, Appeals No. 14 of 1997 and 20 of 1998, ECSC Court of Appeals, Apr. 2, 2001.
[16] Queen v. Hughes, Appeal No. 91 of 2001, JCPC, Mar. 11, 2002.
[17] Hughes and Spence v. Queen, para. 44, Appeals No. 14 of 1997 and 20 of 1998, ECSC Court of Appeals, Apr. 2, 2001.
[18] Coard v. A.G. of Grenada, para. 34, Appeal No. 10 of 1996, JCPC, Feb. 7, 2007.
[19] Coard v. A.G. of Grenada, para. 34, Appeal No. 10 of 1996, JCPC, Feb. 7, 2007.
[20] U.S. Dept. of State, 2009 Human Rights Report: Grenada, Denial of Fair Public Trial, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/wha/136113.htm, Mar. 11, 2010 (note that capital trials are in the High Court).
[21] The Grenada Constitution Order, arts. 72-74, Dec. 19, 1973.
[22] U.S. Dept. of State, 2009 Human Rights Report: Grenada, Denial of Fair Public Trial, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/wha/136113.htm, Mar. 11, 2010 (note that capital trials are in the High Court).
[23] Queen v. Knights, Case No. GDAHCR1994/0212, Grenada and West Indies High Court of Justice, May 28, 2010
[24] Coard v. A.G. of Grenada, Appeal No. 10 of 1996, JCPC, Feb. 7, 2007. See the title page and the case history.
[25] The Grenada Constitution Order, arts. 101-104, Dec. 19, 1973.
Death row is at Her Majesty's Prison in Richmond Hill, St. George's. [1]
We cannot confirm that any prisoners are held under sentence of death. Overcrowding at Her Majesty’s Prison is severe (as of September 2009, 372 prisoners were held although the capacity of Grenada’s prisons allows for only 200 persons), [2] although reportedly conditions are otherwise up to international standards. Women and men are held in different sections of the same facility. [3] Death row is a separate section, and while on death row prisoners are permitted to leave the cell daily only for exercise and sanitary purposes. After 5 years, a death-sentenced prisoner “enjoys privileges and living conditions similar to other inmates of Her Majesty’s Prison.” While this might increase the overcrowding faced by a death-sentenced prisoner, it also means that the prisoner is permitted to be out of his cell for 11.5 hours each day, may participate in sporting, vocational and other activities, and may have a radio and television in his cell. Debatably, the prisoner should be considered no longer on death row (sometimes pending resentencing) after 5 years, although courts may still enumerate any time spent prior to commutation as time under sentence of death. [4]
We did not determine whether any foreign nationals are currently under sentence of death.
We did not determine whether any women are currently under sentence of death.
We did not find any reports regarding the racial or ethnic composition of death row.
Yes. [5]
Yes. [6]
We did not find any comments on the quality of legal representation.
Grenada’s criminal justice system is reported as independent and fair; [7] while administrative measures somewhat protect the rights of capital convicts, there are serious delays in judicial consideration of convicts’ constitutional rights. [8]
[1] Intl. Center for Prison Studies, World Prison Brief: Grenada, King’s College, London, http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/worldbrief/wpb_country.php?country=64, last accessed Jan 16, 2011; Queen v. Knights, paras. 7, 28, Case No. GDAHCR1994/0212, Grenada and West Indies High Court of Justice, May 28, 2010.
[2] Intl. Center for Prison Studies, World Prison Brief: Grenada, King’s College, London, http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/worldbrief/wpb_country.php?country=64, last accessed Feb 20, 2011.
[3] U.S. Dept. of State, 2009 Human Rights Report: Grenada, Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/wha/136113.htm, Mar. 11, 2010; Intl. Center for Prison Studies, World Prison Brief: Grenada, King’s College, London, http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/worldbrief/wpb_country.php?country=64, last accessed Jan 16, 2011.
[4] Queen v. Knights, paras. 1,6, 7, 18, 28, Case No. GDAHCR1994/0212, Grenada and West Indies High Court of Justice, May 28, 2010
[5] U.S. Dept. of State, 2009 Human Rights Report: Grenada, Denial of Fair Public Trial, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/wha/136113.htm, Mar. 11, 2010 (note that capital trials are in the High Court).
[6] U.S. Dept. of State, 2009 Human Rights Report: Grenada, Denial of Fair Public Trial, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/wha/136113.htm, Mar. 11, 2010 (note that capital trials are in the High Court).
[7] U.S. Dept. of State, 2009 Human Rights Report: Grenada, Denial of Fair Public Trial, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/wha/136113.htm, Mar. 11, 2010 (note that capital trials are in the High Court).
[8] Queen v. Knights, paras. 1,6, 7, 18, 28, Case No. GDAHCR1994/0212, Grenada and West Indies High Court of Justice, May 28, 2010
We did not find any recent observations by the Human Rights Committee. [1]
Members of the Human Rights Council recommended in the 2010 Universal Periodic Review that Grenada ratify the Protocols to the ICCPR, institute a de jure moratorium on executions, commute all death sentences, consider abolition, remove the death penalty from its national legislation, and abolish the death penalty. [2] Grenada largely rejected these recommendations, supporting only the recommendation that it ratify the first Optional Protocol to the ICCPR (which would recognize the jurisdiction of the Human Rights Committee to receive communications and consider petitions from individuals alleging violations of Grenada’s obligations under the ICCPR). [3]
[1] Grenada homepage at the website of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/LACRegion/Pages/GDIndex.aspx, last accessed Jan. 16, 2011.
[2] U.N.G.A., Human Rights Council, Report of the Working Group on the UPR, paras. 71.6, 71.38-48, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/15/12, Jun. 16, 2010; U.N.G.A., Human Rights Council, Decision Adopted by the Human Rights Council, 15/109, Outcome of the UPR: Grenada, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/DEC/15/109, Oct. 8, 2010.
[3] UPR-Info.org, Recommendations and Responses: Grenada, p. 2-4, http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/Recommendations_to_Grenada_2010.pdf, Jan. 13, 2011.