April 18
CANADA:
Death row inconsistency sending 'mixed messages'
The Canadian government's urgent appeal to stop Iran from executing a Canadian
citizen imprisoned there may be blunted by its "grudging" support for another
condemned Canadian - Montana death-row inmate Ronald Smith - says the former
top federal bureaucrat responsible for protecting Canadian citizens abroad.
Gar Pardy, the retired head of the consular affairs division at the Department
of Foreign Affairs, said the Conservative government's "hypocritical" approach
to deathpenalty cases in different countries is sending a mixed message to the
world and potentially impairing the efforts of diplomats to effectively lobby
other jurisdictions to spare the lives of Canadians facing execution beyond our
borders.
That view is echoed by the Canadian arm of Amnesty International, which is also
pressing Iran to commute the death sentence of Hamid Ghassemi-Shall, an
Iranianborn Canadian citizen accused of espionage in his birth country and held
in jail there since 2008.
"Canada is gravely concerned by indications that the execution of Mr.
Ghassemi-Shall may be carried out imminently," Foreign Affairs Minister John
Baird and Consular Affairs Minister Diane Ablonczy said in a joint statement
issued Sunday.
"Canada urgently appeals to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran to
grant clemency to Mr. Ghassemi-Shall on compassionate and humanitarian
grounds."
Prime Minister Stephen Harper also warned Iran during his trip this week to
Chile that "the whole world will be watching, and they will cast judgment" if
Ghassemi-Shall is executed.
But both Pardy and Aubrey Harris, Canadian co-ordinator of Amnesty's campaign
to abolish the death penalty, said the government's urgent tone in the
Ghassemi-Shall case contrasts so sharply with its approach in the Smith case
that it undermines Canada's international messaging on capital punishment.
Canada is merely "going through the motions" in its advocacy for Smith, said
Pardy, referring to a weakly worded letter Baird recently sent to the Montana
parole board that drew opposition fire for making no mention of Canada's 1976
abolition of the death penalty and stressing Smith's violent history rather
than his record of rehabilitation in prison.
A Foreign Affairs spokesperson also told Postmedia News last week that while
the Canadian government will send an observer to Smith's clemency hearing in
Montana on May 2, no federal representative will voice Canada's opposition to
the death penalty in principle.
"Canadian courts and Canadian law have long recognized the death penalty as a
violation of human rights," said Harris, arguing that Canada's stance should be
consistently and insistently against capital punishment in all cases where
Canadian citizens are at risk of execution.
"When a Canadian is at risk of the death penalty there is therefore an
obligation - morally and in many instances legally - for the Canadian
government to speak out and act to protect the rights of Canadians."
In 2007, the Conservative government abruptly announced it was halting Canada's
long-standing efforts to win clemency for Smith, who had confessed to killing 2
Montana men in 1982 but went on to wage a long legal battle to avoid execution.
At the time of the policy change - justified by Harper as more consistent with
his party's tough-oncrime agenda - the government said it would judge future
clemency bids on a "case-by-case basis" and that Canadians sentenced to death
in democratic countries with the rule of law (such as the U.S.) would no longer
automatically get diplomatic support to avoid execution.
In 2009, however, the Federal Court of Canada ruled the government's handling
of the Smith case "unlawful" and ordered it to resume lobbying Montana
authorities to spare the Alberta-born killer's life.
While the Canadian government has since complied with that court order, the
evident lack of intensity in its efforts on Smith's behalf has sparked
criticism.
Alex Neve, secretary general of Amnesty International-Canada, described Baird's
letter to Montana as "deeply disappointing."
The federal NDP's justice critic, Jack Harris, called it a "deplorable"
indication of the Conservative government's ambivalent stance on capital
punishment, and Liberal MP Dominic LeBlanc said the "weak" and "cynical" letter
could effectively sink Smith's bid to avoid death by lethal injection.
Pardy said Canadian diplomats' "hands are tied" when it comes to lobbying their
foreign counterparts to spare a Canadian citizen's life.
If the Canadian government loudly and automatically advocated against capital
punishment in all cases, said Pardy, it would make it easier for Canadian
officials abroad to do their job.
(source: The Regina Leader-Post)
**********
Tories criticized for vastly divergent reactions to Canadians on death row
The Canadian government's urgent appeal to stop Iran from executing a Canadian
citizen imprisoned there may be blunted by its "grudging" support for another
condemned Canadian — Montana death-row inmate Ronald Smith — says the former
top federal bureaucrat responsible for protecting Canadian citizens abroad.
Gar Pardy, the retired head of the consular affairs division at the Department
of Foreign Affairs, said the Conservative government's "hypocritical" approach
to death-penalty cases in different countries is sending a mixed message to the
world and potentially impairing the efforts of diplomats to effectively lobby
other jurisdictions to spare the lives of Canadians facing execution beyond our
borders.
That view is echoed by the Canadian arm of Amnesty International, which is also
pressing Iran to commute the death sentence of Hamid Ghassemi-Shall, an
Iranian-born Canadian citizen accused of espionage in his birth country and
held in jail there since 2008.
"Canada is gravely concerned by indications that the execution of Mr.
Ghassemi-Shall may be carried out imminently," Foreign Affairs Minister John
Baird and Consular Affairs Minister Diane Ablonczy said in a joint statement
issued Sunday. "Canada urgently appeals to the Government of the Islamic
Republic of Iran to grant clemency to Mr. Ghassemi-Shall on compassionate and
humanitarian grounds."
Prime Minister Stephen Harper also warned Iran during his trip this week to
Chile that "the whole world will be watching, and they will cast judgment" if
Ghassemi-Shall is executed.
But both Pardy and Aubrey Harris, Canadian co-ordinator of Amnesty's campaign
to abolish the death penalty, said the government's urgent tone in the
Ghassemi-Shall case contrasts so sharply with its approach in the Smith case
that it undermines Canada's international messaging on capital punishment.
Canada is merely "going through the motions" in its advocacy for Smith, said
Pardy, referring to a weakly worded letter Baird recently sent to the Montana
parole board that drew opposition fire for making no mention of Canada's 1976
abolition of the death penalty and stressing Smith's violent history rather
than his record of rehabilitation in prison.
A Foreign Affairs spokesperson also told Postmedia News last week that while
the Canadian government will send an observer to Smith's clemency hearing in
Montana on May 2, no federal representative will voice Canada's opposition to
the death penalty in principle.
"For governments out there, like Iran or Saudi Arabia, they would certainly
know Canadian policy makes a distinction (between death penalty cases) and
would, I assume, act accordingly," said Pardy.
"Canadian courts and Canadian law have long recognized the death penalty as a
violation of human rights," added Harris, arguing that Canada's stance should
be consistently and insistently against capital punishment in all cases where
Canadian citizens are at risk of execution. "When a Canadian is at risk of the
death penalty there is therefore an obligation — morally and in many instances
legally — for the Canadian government to speak out and act to protect the
rights of Canadians."
In 2007, the Conservative government abruptly announced it was halting Canada's
long-standing efforts to win clemency for Smith, who had confessed to killing 2
Montana men in 1982 but went on to wage a long legal battle to avoid execution.
At the time of the policy change — justified by Harper as more consistent with
his party's tough-on-crime agenda — the government said it would judge future
clemency bids on a "case-by-case basis" and that Canadians sentenced to death
in democratic countries with the rule of law (such as the U.S.) would no longer
automatically get diplomatic support to avoid execution.
In 2009, however, the Federal Court of Canada ruled the government's handling
of the Smith case "unlawful" and ordered it to resume lobbying Montana
authorities to spare the Alberta-born killer's life.
While the Canadian government has since complied with that court order, the
evident lack of intensity in its efforts on Smith's behalf has sparked
criticism.
Alex Neve, secretary general of Amnesty International-Canada, described Baird's
letter to Montana as "deeply disappointing."
The federal NDP's justice critic, Jack Harris, called it a "deplorable"
indication of the Conservative government's ambivalent stance on capital
punishment, and Liberal MP Dominic LeBlanc said the "weak" and "cynical" letter
could effectively sink Smith's bid to avoid death by lethal injection.
Pardy said Canadian diplomats' "hands are tied" when it comes to lobbying their
foreign counterparts to spare a Canadian citizen's life. If the Canadian
government loudly and automatically advocated against capital punishment in all
cases, said Pardy, it would make it easier for Canadian officials abroad to do
their job.
"Some Canadians will get assistance on this issue and some don't," said Pardy.
"When you leave to governments that large area of discretion, this inevitably
leads to discrimination."
(source: Montreal Gazette)
NORWAY:
Breivik wants death penalty or acquittal
Norway's prison terms are "pathetic," mass killer Anders Behring Breivik
declared Wednesday in court, claiming the death penalty or a full acquittal
were the "only logical outcomes" for his massacre of 77 people.
The right-wing fanatic said he doesn't fear death and that militant
nationalists in Europe have a lot to learn from al-Qaida, including their
methods and glorification of martyrdom.
"If I had feared death I would not have dared to carry out this operation," he
said, referring to his July 22 attacks — a bombing in downtown Oslo that killed
eight people and a shooting massacre at a youth camp outside the Norwegian
capital that killed 69.
Breivik's comments, on the third day of his terror trial, came as he was
pressed to give details on the anti-Muslim militant group he claims to belong
to but which prosecutors say doesn't exist as he describes. Several unrelated
groups claim part of that "Knights Templar" name.
The 33-year-old Norwegian acknowledged that his supposed crusader network is
"not an organization in a conventional sense" but insisted that it is for real.
"It is not in my interest to shed light on details that could lead to arrests,"
he said refusing to comment on the group's alleged other members.
The issue is of key importance in determining Breivik's sanity, and whether
he's sent to prison or compulsory psychiatric care for the bomb-and-shooting
massacre that shocked Norway.
If found sane, Breivik could face a maximum 21-year prison sentence or an
alternate custody arrangement that would keep him locked up as long as he is
considered a menace to society. If declared insane he would be committed to
psychiatric care for as long as he's considered ill.
"I view 21 years in prison as a pathetic sentence," Breivik said.
Asked by the prosecutor if he would rather have received a death penalty —
which does not exist in current Norwegian law — he said that made sense.
"I don't wish for it but I would have respected that decision," he said. "There
are only two outcomes in this case that I had respected, that that is the death
penalty or acquittal."
According to Amnesty International, the only country in Europe that still
applies the death penalty is Belarus; two young men were executed there last
month. Norway abolished the death penalty in peacetime in 1905 and for war
crimes in 1979.
Breivik claims to have carried out the attacks on behalf of the "Knights
Templar," which he described in the 1,500-page compendium he posted online
before the attacks as a militant nationalist group fighting a Muslim
colonization of Europe.
Breivik said it exists but police just hadn't done a good enough job in
uncovering it. The group consists of "independent cells," he added, "and
therefore in the long term will be a leaderless organization."
Prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh pressed him about details on the group, its members
and its meetings. Breivik claimed to have met a Serb "war hero" living in exile
during a trip to Liberia in 2002, but he refused to identify him.
"What is it you're getting at?" Breivik told the prosecutor, then answered the
question himself, saying prosecutors want to "sow doubt over whether the KT
network exists."
The main point of his defense is to avoid an insanity ruling, which would
deflate his political arguments. One official psychiatric evaluation found him
psychotic and "delusional," while another found him mentally competent to be
sent to prison.
Breivik also refused to give details on what he claims was the founding session
of the "Knights Templar" in London in 2002. He conceded, however, that he
embellished somewhat in the manifesto when he described members at the founding
session as "brilliant political and military tacticians of Europe."
Breivik testified that he had used "pompous" language and described them
instead as "people with great integrity."
Bejer Engh challenged him on whether the meeting had taken place at all.
"Yes, there was a meeting in London," Breivik insisted.
"It's not something you have made up?" Engh countered.
"I haven't made up anything. What is in the compendium is correct," he said.
Later, he answered with more nuance.
"There is nothing that is made up, but you have to see what is written in a
context. It is a glorification of certain ideals," Breivik said.
When asked about his faith, Breivik described himself as "a militant Christian"
but added he was "not particularly religious." He said he was a member of
Norway's Lutheran Church, but dismissed its leadership as "pacifist."
Breivik's defensive answers contrasted with the assertive posture he took
Tuesday when he read a prepared statement to the court, boasting that he had
carried out the most "spectacular" attack by a nationalist militant since World
War II.
His stance has angered victim support groups.
"I think what we are watching is the revelation of a sort of fantasy or a
dream," said Christin Bjelland, deputy head of a support group for survivors of
the July 22 massacre.
Breivik said his victims — mostly teenagers at a ruling Labor Party youth camp
— were not innocent but legitimate targets because they were representatives of
a "multiculturalist" regime he claims is deconstructing Norway's national
identity by allowing immigration.
(source: Associated Press)
PHILIPPINES/SAUDI ARABIA:
RP Saudi Embassy debunks reports OFW convict spared from death
The Philippine Embassy in Saudi Arabia yesterday debunked reports that a
Filipino murder convict has been spared from death penalty.
It said Rodelio Lanuza, 37, who had been in prison for 12 years, remains in
death row because the family of his victim has not yet received the blood money
settlement nor did they submit their tanazul or affidavit of forgiveness and
desistance to the court — two major requirements before charges against him are
dropped.
“Until all these steps are completed, Lanuza is not yet spared from the death
sentence,” the embassy said in a statement released by the Department of
Foreign Affairs.
He was convicted for stabbing to death an Arab man, but claimed it was an act
of self-defense.
The embassy also belied that a reconciliation team led by former ambassador
Antonio Villamor was responsible in convincing the aggrieved family to formally
accept the blood money.
“First, the heirs must receive the blood money agreed upon for the settlement
of the private rights aspect of the case. The settlement should then be
recorded by the court and the family will execute a tanazul,” the embassy said.
A tanazul manifests that the accused was indeed forgiven by the family of the
victim.
Once this has been issued, a case file is forwarded to the Emir’s office for
the issuance of a release order.
Philippine Ambassador to Saudi Arabia Ezzedin Tago said the victim’s heirs
“signified their willingness to accept blood money” as early as Feb. 27, 2011,
but they have yet to receive the compensation amounting to 3 million Saudi
Riyals and not 3.5 million as reported in the media.
“Lanuza is still in prison and the process for his release will only commence
once the blood money is settled through the court,” the embassy said.
To avoid confusion regarding sensitive matters such as death penalty cases, the
Philippine government advised the public, especially those who have relatives
with pending criminal cases abroad to rely only on official information from
the DFA or any of its embassies or consulates.
“Inaccurate information published in the news articles might affect the case
considering that the heirs of the victim have yet to formally and forgive Mr.
Lanuza,” the embassy said.
Saudi Arabia, home to at least 1 million Filipinos, adheres to the Shari’a Law
which imposes death penalty for a wide range of offenses and crimes, such as
immorality, murder, sorcery, rape, and drug offenses, among others. Most
executions are carried out by beheading.
Foreigners, including a number of Filipinos, have been executed in Saudi
Arabia.
(source: The Daily Tribune)
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES:
Somali pirates 'should receive the death penalty'
10 Somalis accused of hijacking a UAE ship should receive the death penalty,
the public prosecutor said yesterday.
The Federal Court heard the men were guilty of crimes "repulsive to the human
self" and deserved the maximum penalty available.
The prosecutor recited a verse from the Quran: "The only reward of those who
make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land
will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on
alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land."
He added: "Islam has set Al Haraba [the penalties mentioned in the verse] as
part of Sharia penalties out of concern for society."
The prosecution has presented the case as a ta'azeeri, or secular, crime. This
means the maximum penalty would be a death sentence.
But should the court decide to try the case under Sharia, a public punishment
could take place.
The prosecutor said the men "cut off all the cables for telecoms and
navigation, set up fires ... placed bombs in the chimneys and caused the injury
of two crew members - an Egyptian and a Syrian."
Counter-terrorism units stormed the oil carrier MV Arrilah in April after it
was hijacked in the Arabian Sea, east of Oman, en route from Australia to Jebel
Ali.
Ahmed Al Othali, representing the 10 accused, said the case files did not
include a technical report proving bombs and firearms were used.
He asked for a copy and for the court to adjourn the case. The judge said they
would resume on May 1.
(source: The National)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/deathpenalty@lists.washlaw.edu/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
