[Deathpenalty] death penalty news-----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

April 25



BARBADOS:

A case for the CCJ - Pt 3From the death penalty to the Canadian example


In Lennox Ricardo Boyce and Jenny Joseph v. The Queen (Privy Council
Appeal no. 99 of 2002) Lord Hoffman, in giving the majority opinion
upholding the mandatory death penalty as constitutional, said at paragraph
70 "All that matters is whether the mandatory death penalty and the
executive clemency of mercy are in accordance with the constitution of
Barbados. In their Lordships opinion, they are."

At paragraphs 2 and 26 Lord Hoffman opined, "The language and purpose of
s. 26 are so clear that whatever may be their Lordships views about the
morality [inhumane or barbaric] or efficacy of the death penalty, they are
bound as a court of law to give effect to it."

The law decreeing the mandatory death penalty was an existing law at the
time when the (Barbados) Constitution came into effect and therefore,
whether or not it is an inhumane or degrading punishment, it cannot be
held to be inconsistent with section 15 (1). It follows that despite
section 1, it remains valid.

The sections referred to in the Barbados Constitution are identical to the
provisions in the St. Vincent & the Grenadines Constitution which called
for interpretation in Spence case. This prompted me to write and publish
the article "Quo Vadis Spence and Hughes."

In Spence, I wrote at paragraph 166, "Some people may regard the mandatory
death penalty and the death penalty as barbaric, but it is for the people
to influence Parliament to bring about the change. It is not the duty of
the judge to amend the law to bring about that change (a view echoed by
Lord Hoffman in paragraph 2 above). I may add that I am firmly of the view
in a truly democratic society, the laws must reflect the wishes of the
people and to change the law with rapidity, is tantamount to anarchy.
Stability in the law is the bedrock of our stability."

I now refer to a paper presented at the symposium by Brian Finlay Q.C.
Canada and Frank Walwyn, 2 distinguished practitioners from the Canadian
Bar. In that paper  "A talk on abolishing Canadian Appeals to the Privy
Council"  they highlighted the "struggle" the Canadian Supreme Court had
with the Privy Council.

Canada has a Federal system of government. It is a Federal State comprised
of 10 provinces and three territories. Canadas Constitution came into
effect in 1867  The British North American Act (BNA). The Supreme Court of
Canada was established in 1875, by the Supreme Court and Exchequer Act of
that year. There was an amendment to that Act in the same year. This
amendment was meant to establish the Supreme Court of Canada as the court
of final resort. This amendment, clause 47 mandated that the Supreme Court
of Canada "shall in all cases be final and conclusive."

However, the Supreme Court of Canada did not attain that status of being
the court of final resort until 60 years later, in 1947.

Thanks to the decisions of the Privy Council! Prior to the enactment of
the Supreme Court Act 1875 and the amendment  clause 47, the Imperial
Parliament of  Britain had passed the Judicial Committee Act of 1833 which
created the Judicial Committee as a body  the body of the Privy Council to
hear all appeals from the colonies that would go to the King in Council. A
further Judicial act of 1844 which authorised the judicial committee to
hear appeals from any court within a British Colony. Finally, the UK
Parliament passed the Colonial Laws Validity Act 1865 which reaffirmed the
supremacy of imperial statutes over colonial legislation.

Messrs Finlay Q.C. and Walwyn in their paper wrote, "The triumvirate of UK
legislation ensured that, although clause 47 remained on Canadas statute,
it would stand as an inoperative toothless clause."

At that time, Canada's judicial structure was such that each of Canadas 10
provinces had its own Court of Appeal. The Judicial Committee 1844
authorised the Judicial Committee to hear appeals from any court within a
British colony. The result was that appeals went from the provinces direct
to the Privy Council.

Messrs Finlay Q.C. and Walwyn inform us, "From 1879 until the turn of the
century there were 103 appeals from Canadian courts to the Privy Council
1/3 of Canadian appeals were from the Supreme Court of Canadian decisions,
leaving 67 instances where the appellant avoided the court (the Supreme
Court) entirely, going directly from the provincial courts to the Privy
Council.

Moreover, once under review, the decisions of the provincial courts to the
Privy Council feared much better two thirds of the provincial decisions
were affirmed by the Judicial Committee as compared to only half of those
on appeal from the Supreme Court of Canada."

The reader should come to his/her own reasoned conclusion.

Edward Blake, Canada's then Minister of Justice, in 1876, wrote,
sarcastically, in my view, to Lord Carnarvon, Colonial Secretary at the
time, the following: "I would observe that with the practical operation of
the Federal Constitution of Canada, with the customs and systems which may
have grown out of its working with many of the elements which have been
found most valuable, if not absolutely necessary to a sound decision in
that class of cases, a court composed of English judges cannot possibly be
thoroughly acquainted.

"They may indeed learn from the argument in an isolated case the view of a
particular counsel upon the matter, but the daily learning and experience
which conditions living under the Canadian Constitution acquire is not
theirs, nor can it be effectively instilled into them for the purpose of a
particular appeal  I maintain that this training and learning, which can
be given only by residence on the spot, is of such vital consequence as to
overbalance the advantages from the probable superior mental capacity of
the judges of the London tribunal."

(source: Albert Redhead was appointed a High Court judge in 1985. In 1997,
he was appointed to the Court of Appeal as a justice of appeal. After
retirement, he served as head of the Criminal Division in St. Lucia, until
July 2007----Antigua Sun)






PAKISTAN:

Sarabjit's death sentence could be changed to lifer: Pak


Prisoners facing death row in Pakistan, including Indian national Sarabjit
Singh, are likely to get a reprieve with the government "actively
considering" a proposal to convert capital punishment into life
imprisonment.

"A summary prepared by the interior ministry is at an advanced stage and a
final decision is expected within a few days," a source was quoted as
saying by the Dawn newspaper.

The source said a "major beneficiary" of the move would be Sarabjit Singh,
who was convicted of allegedly carrying out four bomb attacks in Punjab
province that left 14 people dead.

Sarabjit's execution had been set for April 1 after the rejection of his
mercy petitions by the Supreme Court and President Pervez Musharraf. But
later, Musharraf delayed his execution for a month after receiving a fresh
appeal from India so that Pakistan's new government could review his case.

The condemned Indian prisoner's family, which is currently in Pakistan to
meet him, had separately sent a clemency appeal to Musharraf that is also
currently with the government.

Sarabjit's wife Sukhpreet Kaur, daughters Swapandeep and Poonam, his
sister Dalbir Kaur and her husband Baldev Singh have been lobbying
government officials and politicians to secure his release. They have
insisted he is an innocent farmer who strayed across the border in
inebriated condition in 1990.

Foreign Office spokesman Mohammad Sadiq too had said yesterday that the
government was considering the Indian government's appeal for clemency for
Sarabjit and a decision would be taken in "due course".

Sources said certain parameters would be fixed to determine the
eligibility of cases for commutation of death sentences.

Pakistan is currently ranked second in the world by Amnesty International
for the number of convicts facing death. It has over 7,000 prisoners on
death row in jails across the country.

Executions too have increased over the years. Last year witnessed 134
executions, compared to 83 in 2006, 52 in 2005, 21 in 2004 and 18 in 2003.

The ruling Pakistan People's Party has been traditionally soft on the
issue of death sentences.

Executions during the tenures of former PPP governments were rare. Slain
PPP chairperson Benazir Bhutto had pardoned a number of convicts in 1988.

In 1970, the 1st PPP government led by late Zulfikar Ali Bhutto enhanced
life sentence to 25 years from 14 years with the idea that the capital
punishment would be abolished in years to come.

However, this did not materialise and the regime of late Gen Zia-ul-Haq
kept both the death penalty and the increased life sentence intact.

(source: The Times of India)






CHINA:

China hears death row defense by video for 1st time


China's top court has interrogated a death penalty defendant via a video
link for the 1st time since a key legal reform aimed at cutting wrongful
executions, Xinhua news agency said on Friday.

In January 2007, the Supreme People's Court took back power of final
approval on death penalties, relinquished to provincial high courts in the
1980s, and promised to apply the ultimate punishment more carefully.

The reform, prompted by public outcries over a series of high-profile and
wrong death sentences in recent years, had nevertheless greatly increased
the workload of the top court, Chinese media have said.

"The Supreme People's Court judges have had to travel to places across the
country to meet the defendants. It is both time-consuming and costly,"
Xinhua quoted an unnamed official from the top court as saying.

On Friday, the top court questioned Jiang Huaquan, sentenced to death for
drug trafficking in the southeastern province of Fujian, from Beijing
through a video link, Xinhua said.

"Distance interrogation can not only ensure face-to-face communication but
also ... boost efficiency of the final review work maximally," the
official was quoted as saying.

The questioning process would be recorded and judges would still travel to
detention centers to personally meet defendants when necessary, the
official said.

The Supreme People's Court rejected 15 % of the death penalties it
reviewed in 2007, citing poor evidence and procedural errors.

Chinese courts also for the 1st time handed down more suspended death
sentences, usually commuted to life imprisonment on condition of good
behavior, than outright executions last year. The results have been
welcomed by legals scholars.

Rights groups say China executes thousands of people a year, more than any
other country. But the government says it has no plan to abolish capital
punishment and the majority of the public supports death penalty as a
deterrent to serious crime.

(source: Reuters)






JAPAN:

Lawyers for former boxer on death row ask again for retrial


Lawyers for ex-professional boxer and death row inmate Iwao Hakamada filed
a petition for a retrial with a court here on Friday.

The 2nd request for a retrial for Hakamada, 72, was filed with the
Shizuoka District Court on Friday morning in the name of his 75-year-old
sister, Hideko, as Hakamada's physical and mental condition made it
difficult for him to appoint a defense counsel.

Hakamada's first request for a retrial was rejected by the Supreme Court
last month, 27 years after the request was filed with the Shizuoka
District Court in 1981.

Hakamada was sentenced to death for murdering a family of 4, including an
executive of a miso producing company where Hakamada worked, in the
Shizuoka Prefecture city of Shimizu (now part of the city of Shizuoka) in
June 1966. The ruling has been confirmed by the Supreme Court.

The petition for a retrial included newly obtained results of an
experiment that proved the 5 articles of clothing that were found in a
miso tank and were determined by the court to have been worn by Hakamada
at the time of the crime were actually put into the tank by someone else.

The petition also included an expert's opinion that a pair of trousers,
which was 1 of the 5 articles found in the miso tank, were actually too
small for Hakamada to fit his thighs into them.

(source: Mainichi Daily News)



SAUDI ARABIA:

Amnesty International Obtains Secret Video Showing Horror of Beheading in
Saudi Arabia


Amnesty International has received secretly filmed grisly footage of a man
being beheaded in Saudi Arabia. The organization strongly condemns the
execution and calls for the Saudi Arabian government to adhere to the U.N.
moratorium on executions around the world.

The horrific footage shows the condemned man's public execution. He kneels
on a mat while spectators and guards watch. With one strike of the
executioner's sword, his head rolls off and his body collapses in a heap.
Amnesty International has been closely monitoring the prisoner's case, a
Jordanian citizen convicted on drug trafficking related charges; the
footage filmed on a mobile phone is consistent with AI's records.

Executions in Saudi Arabia are generally held in public. Prisoners are
usually sentenced to death following inadequate legal representation.
Saudi Arabia continues to execute prisoners despite the U.N. General
Assembly's adoption of a resolution calling for a worldwide moratorium on
executions on December 18, 2007. The beheading is counter to the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and comes at a time when there is a clear
international trend away from the use of the death penalty.

Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, deputy director of Amnesty International's Middle
East and North Africa program, said: "As a member of the U.N. Human Rights
Council, Saudi Arabia should take a leading role in implementing the U.N.
moratorium on executions and commute all outstanding death sentences."

"Very few countries currently carry out executions, and it is deplorable
that a member state of the Human Rights Council continues to execute
people. Trials are grossly unfair with prisoners getting inadequate or no
legal representation. Foreign nationals are often not even given adequate
interpretation facilities and consequently remain ignorant of the exact
nature of the charges against them or the punishment they face."

The footage is a dire reflection of the extensive use of the death penalty
in Saudi Arabia. In defiance of the world community, Saudi Arabia executed
at least 143 people in 2007, including 3 women, and children. Since
January 2008, the figure has already reached 53. This morning (April 25),
3 more people were put to death in Saudi Arabia. All were convicted of
drug related crimes, following trials about which very little is known.
Amnesty International remains gravely concerned for the lives of a number
of prisoners at risk of imminent execution, and has issued urgent appeals
calling for the commutation of their sentences.

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without
exception regardless of the nature of the crime, the characteristics of
the offender, or the method used by the state to kill the prisoner. The
death penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights. It is the
premeditated and cold-blooded killing of a human being by the state in the
name of justice. It violates the right to life as proclaimed in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is the ultimate cruel, inhuman
and degrading punishment.

(source: Amnesty International)






EUROPEAN UNION:

EU appeals to US state of Kentucky to stop executions


The European Union on Friday appealed to the governor of the U.S. state of
Kentucky to commute the execution of a convicted cop-killer.

The EU protested a decision last week by the U.S. Supreme Court to allow
the continued use of lethal injection as a means for carrying out the
death penalty.

The EU also restated its opposition to capital punishment.

The European Union notes with disappointment the U.S. Supreme Court's
decision on this case and renews its call on Gov. Ernie Fletcher to
commute the sentence," an EU statement said.

' It was the second such direct EU appeal in less then a year, after it
called on Gov. Rick Perry to impose a moratorium on capital punishment in
Texas in August.

By approving the most widely used method of lethal injection, the U.S.
Supreme Court cleared the way for American states to end a 7-month pause
in executions.

Almost immediately, Virginia lifted its moratorium on the death penalty.
Mississippi and Oklahoma said they would seek execution dates for
convicted murderers, and other states were ready to follow. Nevertheless
the EU said it strongly encouraged the U.S. to continue the de-facto
moratorium and allow a thorough nationwide debate.

The halt in executions was brought by a court decision to review
Kentucky's lethal injection procedures, which are similar to those in
roughly 3 dozen states.

None of the 27 members of the EU has the death penalty and the bloc
regularly campaigns against executions around the world.

(source: Associated Press)






TAIWAN:

Taiwan must not abolish its death penalty


Liu Chao-shiuan, who was recently named premier by President-elect Ma
Ying-jeou recently announced a list of names that will be part of the new
Cabinet.

Wang Ching-feng, a woman known for her active involvement in social and
political activities has been named minister of justice. Wang has held a
number of high government posts and is highly regarded for her ability and
vision.

The justice minister-designate attracted more attention than most others
included in Liu's lineup of Cabinet members by voicing her opinion on the
death penalty. In an interview she had with the Chinese-language Apple
Daily newspaper after she was designated as justice minister of the Ma
administration, Wang said she personally disapproves of the death penalty.

"Life should not be taken away (from a human being)," she said. "I respect
life. The removal of one life cannot restore a lost life."

Those remarks have triggered much discussion and criticism. One of her
critics is Pai Ping-ping, a famed entertainer. Pai, who has been opposed
to the abolition of the death penalty since her only child was kidnapped
and murdered 11 years ago, urged the justice minister-designate to be
prudent in what she says. The government is the last line of defense in
the protection of the people's interests, Pai said. If the death penalty
is abolished thoughtlessly, society will pass its judgment on it, the
popular singer added.

In April 1997, Pai's 17-year-old daughter, Pai Hsiao-yen, was kidnapped on
her way to school. Despite intensive efforts by the singer and police to
find her, the girl was brutally murdered and her body dumped in a ditch.
The savagery of the murder shocked Taiwan society.

The 3 suspects in the case managed to escape from custody and committed
several more heinous criminal acts, including robberies, murders and
rapes. One of the three kidnappers, Lin Chun-sheng, was shot and killed in
a gun fight with the police. Later, Kao Tien-min killed himself when
cornered by police trying to arrest him. The main suspect, Chen
Chin-hsing, probably the single most notorious criminal in the history of
Taiwan, broke into the residence of a South African diplomat in Taipei and
held his family at gunpoint. He surrendered to the police in the end.

(source: The China Post)