Michael Maharaj, Damien Ramiah, Seenath Ramiah, Samuel Maharaj, Bobby Ramiah, Daniel Gopaul, Richard Huggins, and Mark Jaikaran
In February 2024, the High Court of Trinidad and Tobago granted immediate release to eight people[1] who were all previously on death row: Michael Maharaj, Damien Ramiah, Seenath Ramiah, Samuel Maharaj, Bobby Ramiah, Daniel Gopaul, Richard Huggins, and Mark Jaikaran. In 2002, these men were convicted of the murder of Thackoor Boodram. In 1997, Thackoor had been kidnapped and killed. As capital punishment is the mandatory sentence for murder in Trinidad and Tobago, the men were sentenced to death. Because of the mandatory nature of the sentence, the court was not able to consider their respective roles in the offence, their remorse, or any other mitigation. These men spent 22 years in prison, including five years on death row. Since 2002, The Death Penalty Project has been working on the case alongside lawyers in Trinidad and Tobago and UK barristers from Doughty Street Chambers. The circumstances of their release demonstrate the importance of individualised sentencing within a fair criminal justice system, instead of mandatory sentences. [1] A ninth man was resentenced, but not released by the High Court, due to an unrelated conviction.
Conviction and appeal
After their conviction in 2002, the men appealed in the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (Privy Council) in 2006. Their death sentences were quashed as it would have been unconstitutional to carry them out, due to the time they had already spent on death row. Instead, the Privy Council substituted these with life sentences, with a minimum term set by the authorities of Trinidad and Tobago. The Privy Council passed life sentences on the men, without regard to individual mitigating circumstances. At the time, where a death sentence could not be carried out, it was the practice of the courts in Trinidad and Tobago to commute a sentence of death to life imprisonment.
Approximately 11 years later, the Court of Appeal of Trinidad and Tobago re-opened the case, following fresh evidence that called into question the credibility of a key trial witness. A prosecution witness from the first trial had signed a statement which indicated that much of the evidence he had given was fabricated. By the time of the appeal hearing, the witness could not be found. The Court of Appeal refused to admit the fresh evidence and another appeal was brought to the Privy Council – a process that took 10 years. Whilst their second appeals against conviction were dismissed, the men argued that it had been unfair of the Privy Council to hand down life sentences in 2006.
Resentencing
Over the past decade, the law has changed. The High Court of Trinidad and Tobago now had the power to re-sentence offenders who could not be executed, due to the passage of time and an extended period on death row constituting inhuman and degrading treatment. In 2022, the Privy Council ruled that following such a constitutional breach, they could petition the High Court to fix a lawful sentence, whether a determinate sentence or a life sentence, and crucially, the High Court had to consider all the facts of the offence and the offender.
Having regard to these principles, in 2023, the Privy Council quashed the men’s life sentences, and the question of an appropriate sentence for the men was remitted to the High Court of Trinidad and Tobago.
The High Court judge considered this case in February 2024 to determine whether it was appropriate to re-sentence the men to determinate sentences, or if their life sentences should be upheld. Deciding that a life sentence was inappropriate on the facts of the case, all men received new individualised fixed term sentences of imprisonment, ranging between 30 and 32 years.
The judge reflected crucial individual factors in their new sentences, such as the ages of the men at the time of the offence, if they had demonstrated remorse, and whether they had shown signs of rehabilitation throughout their time in prison, as well as any previous convictions. As their new sentences are retrospective and in consideration of the 22 years that they had already served in prison, these eight men have been released.[1] Another man who was convicted (the ninth Appellant) remains in prison due to other convictions.
The mandatory death penalty
The Death Penalty Project welcomes this decision, the mandatory death penalty will always lead to unlawful treatment. In 2021, we brought a challenge to the constitutionality of the mandatory death penalty in Trinidad and Tobago. It was dismissed by the Privy Council, despite the Government of Trinidad and Tobago’s concession that the mandatory death penalty violates the constitutional right not to suffer cruel and inhuman punishment.
Trinidad and Tobago is the only country in the Commonwealth Caribbean to retain the mandatory death penalty for murder. The continued existence of mandatory death sentences hampers the ability of the judiciary to hand down considered and principled sentences that balance the need for protection of the public with reform and rehabilitation of the offender. Whilst the government had indicated that it intended to legislate to remove the mandatory death penalty, to date, no such legislation has been drafted.
In the case of these eight men, the High Court judge noted the developing principle in the criminal law in Trinidad and Tobago that “…a life sentence is inappropriate when there is the possibility of the prisoner being rehabilitated to the extent that he could be safely returned to society.” As long as the mandatory death penalty for murder remains on the statute-books, judges in Trinidad and Tobago are denied the opportunity to exercise their discretion and consider mitigating circumstances when sentencing offenders. The Death Penalty Project remains steadfast in our commitment to abolish the mandatory death penalty in Trinidad and Tobago, and we continue to work towards abolition alongside lawyers, parliamentarians, and other stakeholders.
The legal team
The team included barristers from Doughty Street Chambers, Edward Fitzgerald KC and Amanda Clift-Matthews, instructed by The Death Penalty Project.
Local representation at the resentencing hearings
Mr Rajiv Persad, S.C. instructed by Ms Vanita Ramroop, Mr Ajesh Sumessar and Ms Jade Martinez for the first Appellant, second Appellant, sixth Appellant and eighth Appellant.
Mr Keith Scotland and Ms Asha Watkins-Montserin instructed by Ms Keisha Kydd Hannibal and Ms Laurina Ramkaran for the third Appellant.
Mr Daniel Khan instructed by Mr Harrynarine Singh for the fourth Appellant.
Mr Kelston Pope instructed by Ms Gabriel Hernandez for the fifth Appellant.
Mr Peter Carter for the seventh Appellant.
Mr Jagdeo Singh instructed by Mr Keston Lewis for the ninth Appellant.
[1] All men were entitled to a reduction of a third of their sentence, a process known as ’remission‘, which is common to all fixed sentences in Trinidad and Tobago.
“I am forever grateful for all that you [The Death Penalty Project team] and Ed [Edward Fitzgerald KC] did for my dad and his co-accused. Today seems so unreal. You all were so instrumental to making this day possible. I am forever grateful!”
