the Jamaica government said it wanted legislators to debate the issue of the death penalty

the Jamaica government said it wanted legislators to debate the issue of the death penalty and dismissed suggestions that it did not have the political will to carry out executions. Attorney-General A.J. Nicholson told the Senate that it was time for Parliament to debate the matter arguing that "Jamaica cannot afford to be in limbo on a matter of such real and present importance". He dismissed the view that the government did not have the political will to resume executing persons convicted of capital crimes, insisting that the issue was much more complex. Nicholson noted that in recent times, Barbados had had to amend its constitution to override decisions made by the Privy Council regarding the death penalty. He said the Privy Council had been inconsistent in its rulings on Caribbean death penalty cases and this had made it difficult for governments to legislate on the matter. Nicholson pointed to a ruling earlier in the year in the case of Lambert Watson, where the Privy Council ruled that it was inhumane for governments to impose mandatory sentences in capital murder cases. He said such a ruling affected other Caribbean states. In July, the Privy Council ruled that the use of the mandatory death sentence in Jamaica was illegal. The Jamaica case involved Watson, who was sentenced to death for the 1997 murders of his common-law-wife and their daughter. In reviewing the matter, the Privy Council found that the 1992 Offences Against the Person Act, which introduced the mandatory death sentence for capital murder was inconsistent with section 17(1) of the Jamaica constitution. According to the law lords, any death sentence passed since the Act was introduced in 1992 must be held to be illegal. The judgement meant that all those sentenced to death since 1992 would have their case returned to the Supreme Court for sentencing.