Firstly, let us be in no doubt that despite the recent furore regarding this most contentious of issues, hanging will return to Trinidad and Tobago. A government that has displayed the willingness to invoke a State of Emergency has proven its culture of enforcing the ultimate tools in its fight (or should that be "flight" given the "plane" talking of Mr Ewatski that shares equal billing in the bacchanal spotlight?) against crime.

Regardless of Mr Warner's jumping the gun with his campaign to resume hangings and the subsequent muzzling from upon high, there is too much bloodlust amongst his colleagues in Cabinet —who have in turn whipped up frenzy amongst the public to let loose the noose—for the People's Partnership not to bow to public opinion. With the murder toll at an alarmingly familiar rate, the Government will feel that they have little choice.

So what if Dr Rowley does not currently support the "resumption bill" as part of the PNM's grand scheme to regain power by living up to their "Opposition" title by opposing everything put before them? The hanging issue has already gained too much momentum to have any other result than the resumption that Minister Warner was willing to campaign for night and day. Therefore, Dr Rowley will not be able to risk losing supporters by appearing weak on capital punishment while the murders escalate. Thus, the People's Partnership will get their way.

The Prime Minister handled the Warner hanging issue well, even if it confirms the burgeoning rift post-FIFA revelations. Though it is the stated aim of the Government to enforce the hanging law, there are proper procedures to follow and it is crucial, especially with a coalition government, to at least appear to have unified policies, having agreed to these in whatever manner behind the closed doors of Cabinet meetings.

For an issue as emotional as capital punishment, the lone ranger saving the day while the party twiddles its thumbs just will not do. However, what is good for Jack is also good for Herbert—he of the "hang them in public" campaign—and one wonders if the PM will also "request" that the Minister of Justice curtail his own ropey enthusiasm in public, until the People's Partnership can say in unison "hang dem high!" Perhaps his role of public outspokenness is too crucial in keeping the public on-side for him to be asked to back down.

Will the first spate of executions prove to be the deterrent that the pro-hanging supporters expect it to be? The criminals have to fear being caught in the first instance, before they can fear an eye for an eye strategy taking hold. If there are 300-plus murders in a year coupled with 10 to 15 executions (based on the homicide detection rate), logic would dictate that criminals in T&T will still fancy the odds in their favour and still play the field.

There may be an initial lull in murders when Death Row inmates form an early cull for the hangman but once that number subsides so will the fear factor and then the deterrent. Is the justice system ready for the resumption of hangings? In a history littered with cases being dismissed or delayed and criminals walking free, is our justice system ready to tighten its practices to ensure that decisions are met as swiftly as the current bloodlust dictates?

Culturally, are we ready to accept that those same judicial inefficiencies will lead us to becoming the type of society where the inevitable miscarriages cannot be reversed? Will we comfort ourselves that the innocent people killed as part of the retribution drive will form the collateral damage?

Also, in nations where the death penalty is carried out there is an almost zero tolerance for all crime—Singapore and its caning punishment for littering comes to mind—T&T cannot remain lax on some relatively petty crimes at one end of the scale while practising definitive vengeance at the other end. Capital punishment should form part of a wider escalation of disciplinary measures that target all levels of crime.

If the nation expects convictions for murderers, it has to understand that witnesses will play a major part in achieving this. Thus far, unless it has been implemented in secrecy, the nation does not have an adequate witness protection programme. This is not necessarily the fault of succeeding regimes as the small geographical area and population of the country means that this is difficult to implement. But as this is a crucial factor in the capital punishment arena, thought must be given to enacting a credible and effective witness protection programme that can ably support the process through to hanging.

Is the Government willing to bypass the appeals and stays of execution that will abound and tighten the rope immediately to drive its point home a la 1999? Surely it knows that the Privy Council in Britain will again become heavily involved as lawyers earn their fees by approaching the final Court of Appeal. In the midst of visits to boost trade with T&T, the PM will need to be prepared to answer difficult questions from nations that will view the resumption of hangings as a regressive step.

Mr Warner took the emotional approach and was hung out to dry, yet despite his differences with his colleagues and the politicising of the issue, they all want the same result. Hence the declaration that hanging will resume.

As per the points outlined above, it is better that the Government and Opposition change course and take the logical approach to their inevitable implementation of capital punishment. If this nation wants to add to the taking of life already practised on a daily basis, it needs to have the sound infrastructure behind its desire for retribution, whether or not retribution is the correct card to play.

* Sheldon Waithe has a degree in business and writes on sport and politics for T&T and UK publications