E. Communication Ho. 340/1988, R.W. v. Jamaica fdecision of 21 July 1992, adopted at the forty-fifth session) Submitted by: R.W. (name deleted) Alleged victim: The author State party: Jamaica Date of communication: 23 November 1988 (initial submission) The Human Bights Committee, established under article 28 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Meeting on 21 July 1992, Adopts the following: Decision on admissibility 1. The author of the communication (dated 23 November 1938) is R.W., a Jamaican citizen awaiting execution at St. Catherine District Prison, Jamaica. He claims to be the victim of a violation by Jamaica of his human rights. Facts as submitted by the author 2.1 The author, an ex-policeman, states that he was charged with murder in December 1983 and sentenced to death in June 1984, but claims to be innocent. The author does not provide information about the facts of the crime or the circumstances of his arrest. He alleges that the attorney who represented him during the preliminary inquiry and during the trial did so halfheartedly and without commitment. The lawyer allegedly did not argue the defence in line with the author's instructions. The author claims that as a result of the true facts of the case did not emerge and he was sentenced to death. 2.2 Concerning his appeal to the Jamaican Court of Appeal, the author claims that the Registry of the Court informed him only shortly before 16 May 1985 that his appeal was scheduled to be heard on that date. He immediately sent a letter to his lawyer and informed him that he would like to present new evidence, the nature of which the author does not explain, and to forward grounds of appeal. The lawyer allegedly did not reply. The author himself wrote to the Court of Appeal, stating that he wanted to submit fresh evidence and requesting a postponement of the hearing in order to be able to prepare his appeal more thoroughly. Some days later, he was informed that his application for leave to appeal had been dismissed. According to the author, the new evidence and the grounds of appeal had not been put forward. The author suspects that his lawyer was not even present at the hearing, although he was paid "thousands of dollars" by the author's father. 2.3 After the dismissal of the appeal/ the Governor-General, on an unspecified date in 1985, signed a warrant for the author's execution. Another lawyer, hired by the author's mother, petitioned the Governor-General -343-