Jan. 25
PHILIPPINES:
Documentary indicts Philippines justice
A gripping documentary about a wealthy young man sentenced to death for the
rape and murder of two sisters has catalysed a movement to expose wrongful
convictions in the Philippines.
The award-winning Give Up Tomorrow follows Francisco Juan Larranaga as he is
transformed from a carefree culinary art student into one of the nation's most
vilified and hated people whose adult life is lost behind bars.
The documentary presents a compelling case that corrupt authorities framed
Larranaga, then aged 19, and six other young men for the 1997 rape and murder
of the two sisters in the central Philippine city of Cebu.
"This was a systematic failure of the justice system, and of society," the
producer of the film, Marty Syjuco, who is related by marriage to Larranaga,
said following a screening of the movie in the Philippines.
"He didn't stand a chance from day one. There was no presumption of innocence.
From the time he was arrested and paraded for the media he was already judged
guilty by the public."
The killings of Jacqueline and Marijoy Chiong, aged 23 and 21, triggered public
outrage across the Catholic nation.
With enormous political pressure for authorities to quickly resolve the case,
police accused Larranaga, who has dual Filipino and Spanish citizenship, of
being the ring-leader of a gang that abducted, raped and killed the Chiongs.
However, dozens of witnesses said Larranaga was in Manila, the nation's
capital, 550km away, at the time of the abductions and murders. He always
maintained he had never met his co-accused.
The documentary shows how the nation's media accepted the police account as
fact and incited hatred against Larranaga, a member of a rich Filipino-Spanish
family who had earlier been placed on a police watchlist for minor crimes.
After months of emotionally charged hearings that the UN Human Rights
Commission would later describe as an "unfair" trial, the judge presiding over
the case found the 7 guilty.
Larranaga and the others appealed against the conviction. But the country's
highest judicial body, the Supreme Court, instead raised their life sentences
to death by lethal injection.
Throughout the ordeal, Larranaga maintained his innocence, and the documentary
- filmed over 7 years - shows a young man maintaining a sense of dignity while
growing up in some of the nation's most infamous prisons.
The film is named after the phrase Larranaga repeats to himself, "give up
tomorrow", whenever he comes close to despair.
The Larranaga family filed a complaint with the UN Human Rights Commission,
which in 2006 ruled that he had been denied due process and cited multiple
incidents of major flaws in the case against him.
It called for the government to commute his death sentence and grant him early
release on parole. Fair Trials International and the Spanish government also
pressured the Philippine government on behalf of Larranaga.
After 9 years in jail, Larranaga's 1st apparent piece of luck occurred later in
2006 when the Philippines abolished the death penalty.
In 2009, the Philippines approved Larranaga's transfer to a Spanish prison at
Spain's request. But, according to the documentary, authorities there would
only reduce his sentence and release him on parole if he admitted his guilt.
The documentary ends with Larranaga saying he would not admit to something he
had never done, even if it meant he had to spend the rest of his life in jail.
While the documentary does not seek to solve the case of who murdered the
sisters, it shows that when they went missing their father was about to testify
in a case against an alleged drug lord for whom he worked.
The father decided not to testify against the alleged drug lord, who the
documentary showed as having close relationships with local police.
The film has won more than a dozen awards at film festivals around the world,
after debuting at New York's famous Tribeca in 2011.
Hitting Philippines screens last year, it has become a must-see cautionary tale
on the nation's justice system, with more than 100 law schools around the
country having signed up to screen it for their students.
It also inspired the creation in December of the Innocence Project, a network
of law schools and students who offer free legal help to convicts using DNA
technology and investigative work to overturn wrongful convictions.
"The movie highlighted the defects and imperfections of the justice system,"
project spokesman and law professor at the University of the Philippines, Jose
Manguera Jose, told AFP. "There are so many wrongful convictions."
The Philippines justice system has long been regarded as corrupt, with low-paid
judges vulnerable to bribes and intimidation.
The current president, Benigno Aquino, has made fighting corruption in all part
of society the top priority of his 6-year term.
Justice Secretary Leila de Lima was non-committal when asked whether she
thought Larranaga was innocent. "It is difficult to ascertain at this point
whether there was a miscarriage of justice," she said.
National police spokesman Generoso Cerbo declined to comment on the alleged
corruption in the police force that was raised in the documentary.
Larranaga, now aged 35, remains behind bars in Spain.
Syjuco said that Spanish justice authorities, after seeing the film, no longer
require him to admit his guilt in exchange for early release. He has also been
permitted some trips outside of jail for therapy, including one to a film
festival to watch the documentary.
However, he remains ensnared in legal complexities and his final freedom
remains far from certain.
(source: The News)
INDONESIA:
'Shaken' Sandiford Refusing to See Family After Receiving Death Sentence
A British grandmother recently sentenced to death for smuggling cocaine into
the resort island of Bali is reportedly suffering from depression and has
refused to see members of her family.
Gusti Ngurah Wiratna, the chief warden at Denpasar's Kerobokan Penitentiary,
said that ever since 56-year-old Lindsay Sandiford had been given a death
sentence by the Denpasar District Court on Tuesday, she had been channeling her
anger by being reclusive and getting angry with fellow inmates and prison
guards.
"[Sandiford] is now very sensitive and refusing to meet with anyone," Wiratna
said on Thursday.
He added that she had even refused to see her sister, Hillary Parsons, who went
to Kerobokan to see her on Wednesday.
"We're looking for the right time [to arrange the meeting]. Maybe [today] or
[Saturday] she will feel better," he said.
Sandiford was found guilty of smuggling 4.7 kilograms of cocaine into the
country in May 2012. Her arrest led to the capture of 3 other Britons and an
Indian national on drug charges.
Sandiford's lawyer, Esra Karokaro, said his client was still shocked by the
death penalty, the maximum sentence for drug smuggling under the 2009 Narcotics
Law.
"Psychologically, [Sandiford] was shaken by the sentence," the lawyer said.
Esra added that Parsons was trying to meet her sister to discuss filing an
appeal with the Bali High Court. He said that Parsons had discussed the matter
with him a number of times since Tuesday???s verdict.
Esra said the grounds for an appeal were sound, given that the sentence handed
down was much harsher than the 15-year prison term sought by prosecutors.
In its ruling, the court dismissed the prosecution's argument that Sandiford
deserved leniency because she had confessed to the crime and behaved well in
court.
The panel of judges maintained that there were "no mitigating circumstances" to
allow for leniency in the case.
Bali Governor Made Mangku Pastika, a retired police general, applauded the
court for handing down the death penalty.
"That is the law [in Indonesia]. Anyone who goes to another country must follow
the laws of that country," he said.
Sandiford joins two Australians already facing execution for drug smuggling.
Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan, members of the Bali 9, have appealed to the
president for clemency after being convicted of trying to smuggle in 8.3
kilograms of heroin into Bali in 2005.
Indonesian courts sentenced 113 people to death in 2012, but there have been no
executions since 2008.
(source: Jakarta Globe)
PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY:
9 Islamists Charged with Murdering Inmate at Roumieh
9 Islamists were charged on Friday with the murder of a Palestinian inmate at
Roumieh Prison, reported the National News Agency.
State Commissioner to the Military Court Judge Saqr Saqr charged 8 Islamist
inmates with murder and a 9th Islamist who is not held at the jail.
They may face the death penalty if convicted of the murder of Ghassan
al-Qandaqli.
In addition, Saqr charged 2 soldiers at Roumieh Prison with negligence,
referring them for investigation.
It was initially reported that Qandaqli, first identified as Ghassan Sandaqli
by the media, had committed suicide by hanging in Roumieh's Bloc B.
As Safir newspaper reported on January 22 however that he was actually severely
beaten to death by Fatah al-Islam members.
A meeting was later held on Friday between security officials and Islamist
inmates with an agreement being reached to allow security forces to return to
Bloc B of the jail, reported LBCI television.
The security forces will be allowed to search all areas of the jail and the
inmates will cooperate fully with them.
(source: Naharnet.com)
CHINA:
More signs that Bo Xilai may face the death penalty
Despite early cynical predictions that disgraced politician and potential
murderer Bo Xilai would get off easy thanks to his inestimable guangxi and
familial connections, recent statements by officials seem to indicate that Bo
will get the book thrown at him, with fatal consequences.
The Wall Street Journal reports:
"We have always had severe punishment for corrupt officials," [Li Jingtian,
executive vice president of China's Central Party School] said during the
interview at the World Economic Forum in Davos on Wednesday, in response to a
question about the fate of Mr. Bo. Such interviews are rare for senior party
officials.
He cited the examples of Liu Qingshan and Zhang Zishan, 2 leaders in the
party's early days who were executed in the 1950s following accusations of
embezzlement and other crimes in one of the party's 1st anticorruption
campaigns.
Mr. Bo is currently awaiting trial. He hasn't commented on the accusations
against him in the past and isn't reachable. Harsh punishment would signal a
tough stance against corruption. New leaders installed in November have
publicly worried that graft threatens the party's hold on power. At the same
time, throwing the book at a senior official with a familiar name could leave
the perception that other top leaders are vulnerable. Given the opaque nature
of internal Communist Party politics, Li's comments only indicate one potential
outcome for Bo, but given Xi Jinping's recent frequent pronouncements on the
need to tackle corruption, what better way to demonstrate real commitment to
change than killing off a famously crooked politician*.
*Note: Shanghaiist does not in any way endorse the death penalty, for anyone.
(source: Shanghaiist.com)
SAUDI ARABIA:
Combating Disinformation In the Wake of Rizana Nafeek's Execution
The international condemnation of Rizana Nafeek's unjust execution has not
elicited a positive response from Saudi authorities. There have been no
promises for reform or pledges to reexamine the justice system's flawed
management of migrant workers. Instead, Saudi Arabia has adopted a defensive
approach to combat these "defamatory" and "misleading statements." Officials
denied Nafeek was underage and claimed that she not only had a lawyer, but that
the Sri Lankan embassy was deeply involved in the case. However, Nafeek's
passport was falsified - a fact that was established years ago, and that has
even been confirmed by Saudi authorities in the past. Additionally, officials
distorted the support mechanisms available to Nafeek; she did not have a lawyer
during her initial confession, she was not provided with a translator during
her initial trials, and the embassy did not intervene in her case until she was
sentenced death. Saudi authorities claim Nafeek was awarded "her full legal
rights' - but the absence of sufficient legal rights for domestic workers is
precisely what NGOs have denounced.
Opinion commentators and media figures have also parroted similar distortions
in defense of the legal system's treatment of foreign workers. This article
cross-posted in the Saudi Gazette begins, predictably, by justifying Nafeek's
execution with problematic references to Sharia. Saudi's misappropriation of
the Sharia is a complex discussion that is beyond the scope of this article -
however, it is worth exploring less politically motivated, mainstream
interpretations of the death penalty in Islamic jurisprudence. The following
excerpts are from a translation of a speech by Dr Hamdy Murat, a professor of
Sharia at Al Balqa Applied University in Jordan:
Sharia stresses averting punishments (Hudud) if suspicions arise. Prophet
Mohammed said: "Avert punishments if suspicions arise". Suspicion means that
for any offense that cannot proved 100%, so to speak, punishments should be
averted.
"Suspicion" means the presence of deficiency in absolute certainty. If
suspicion arises, the punishment set for a certain offense must be prevented
and milder penalties should be sought.
Decisive Sharia regulations specify five objectives. After the 1st objective,
which is the preservation of religion, comes the protection of life. Every
attempt should always be made to avert capital punishment.
The answer is that the certainty of the person being a murderer must be 100%;
allow me to use that expression. If the percentage is lower, no matter what the
reason, then suspicion arises in this case.
There was much uncertainty in Nafeek's case. Her account was at odds with the
employer's account, but there was no forensic evidence to indicate that Nafeek
was lying. That there was not 100% certainty is especially evident in the years
her case rebounded between courts.
What is the definition of relatives. According to the judiciary, consanguineous
relatives are the relatives of the murdered, and if one of them opposes the
death penalty imposed on a murderer, the murderer should not be executed.
Media reports indicated the father was willing to grant Nafeek reprieve.
Under Sharia, over the past 15 centuries, the number of cases where the death
penalty was prescribed for committing this crime has not exceeded 10. I am not
talking about the 20th century because it is excluded, nor about the Arab and
Muslim countries these days as they do not apply Sharia at all.
In addition, trials concerning the death penalty are seldom fair, and when
justice becomes rare, the judgment must be immediately suspended to avoid
injustice.
Thus, "divine law" cannot be paraded as justification for Nafeek's execution
for the several reasons listed above. Saudi is renowned, especially amongst its
own citizens, for manipulating Sharia according to national interests. Islamic
scholars do differ on particular interpretations and applications of Sharia.
However, it is widely acknowledged that divine justice cannot be achieved in
this life - and consequently, cannot be used so facilely in defense of any
Saudi policy.
Examining the author's succeeding argument also reveal a number of other
assumptions and distortions:
Our judicial system is looked at as the rule of thugs who take pleasure in
degrading people and shedding their blood.
The international media and human rights organizations attacked us following
the beheading of the Sri Lankan maid who was convicted of killing her
employer's child. Numerous Saudi judicial bodies refuted the claims of the
international media and went on the defensive by trying to convince everyone of
the transparency of our legal system.
In actuality, the judicial system is depicted as deficient and discriminatory
of migrant workers. Many migrant worker executions do not receive the same
intensity of coverage or condemnation. The outcry in Nafeek's case was due
primarily to the unjust circumstances of her trial, rather than to Saudi's
regular use of the death penalty. That is, the judicial system is rightly
criticized when it blatantly fails to uphold justice. But this author fails to
discuss particulars of the trial at all - perhaps because there was so little
transparency, and because the few details that were disclosed stand in
opposition to her argument.
The author attempts to portray coverage of Nafeek's case as unfair, when in
reality such misjudgment regularly befalls migrant workers under Saudi's legal
system. Criticisms erupted because of Saudi's dismal record of migrant abuse,
including the absence of any meaningful protection for domestic workers - not
because of an unfounded prejudice against Saudi Arabia.
Another article cross-posted in the Saudi Gazette similarly espouses this
imagined victimization; one of the article's most egregious arguments includes
that "Rizana was executed in accordance with the Saudi laws that are clear to
all foreigners coming to the Kingdom." Yet the legal system is completely
obscure to migrants who have extremely limited access to translators or to
general legal services. Additionally, the article also falsifies Nafeek's age
controversy and glosses over the absence of forensic absence essential to
proving Nafeek suffocated the child. (Pieces in the Saudi Gazette itself have
consistently maintained that Nafeek was only 17 when the incident took place,
and was consequently under the protection of the Convention of the Rights of
the Child.)
Additionally, the several cases the original author cites in support of her
false sense of victimization are also problematic. The author alleges a Sri
Lankan maid injected herself with over 20 nails to frame her employers. Saudi
authorities claimed that the maid had colluded with labor firms to blackmail
"the Saudi government in order to revoke the new regulations and salary
ceilings applies to foreign workers." This collusion between recruitment
agencies and housemaids is a myth constantly parroted in Gulf media, used to
justify the lack of protective mechanisms for domestic workers. The Sri Lankan
doctors who examined the woman and provided her x-rays gave no indication that
she was capable of inserting the nails - present in her thighs and her head,
among other places - herself. Saudi authorities seem to have determined the
allegations were false without actually examining the maid herself, once again
prioritizing the word of the employer. (Additionally, another Sri Lankan maid
whose employers jammed 7 nails in her body was examined in Saudi. Her case also
proved true.)
The author also alleges that:
Immediately after this incident, 2 Sri Lankan maids, 1 in Kuwait and the other
in Oman, made similar claims of being tortured by nails. Their claims received
virtually no media coverage. So, it seems that any accusation by a foreign
worker associated with our country is true until proven false while the
complaints of workers in other countries have to be checked and verified before
they are published in the media.
However, the Kuwaiti story was mentioned in Time as well as Huffington Post,
which also mentioned a similar case in Jordan. The extent of defamation the
author claims is not only inflated but patently false. Such unfounded
allegations perpetuate the misconception that migrant workers do not need
improved legal protections, and even encourage individuals to ignore abuse by
depicting these cases as either isolated incidents or over-exaggerations.
The author also distort the facts in Ahmed Al-Jizawi's case. The author claims
Egyptians were outraged at his arrest until it became clear he was smuggling
narcotics into the country. In actuality, Egyptian citizens protested because
Al-Jizawi was arrested for "insulting the king" by condemning the detainment of
Egyptian citizens - that is, he was arrested for speaking out against the legal
system's mistreatment of migrant workers. Authorities later claimed the reason
for his arrest was carrying Xanax, the anti-depressants the author seems to
have conflated with dangerous narcotics.
At one point, the author laments the absence of a legal mechanism to redress
the defamation of the nation, and that justice is consequently deficient. Yet,
the far more serious legal obstructions that migrant workers face is not cause
for any concern.
These unfounded arguments are a conspicuous form of propaganda intended to
squash any censure of the regime's policies, regardless of their legitimacy.
Such vociferous opposition to public denunciations of abuse perpetuates the
invisibility of domestic workers in the both social and legal spheres.
However, 1 Saudi Gazette article did provide a slightly more nuanced view of
Nafeek's case, recognizing that employers are responsible for giving domestic
workers a reasonable amount of work and for ensuring childcare-givers are
experienced. The article notes that employers' conflation of housemaids with
nannies severely over-burdens workers and can lead to incidents similar to
Nafeek's. These opinion pieces that acknowledge employers' accountability are
critical in challenging official and societal conceptions of migrant worker
rights.
(source: Migrant-rights.org)
INDIA:
Smriti Irani endorses death penalty for rape
TV actor and BJP MP Smriti Irani today said she favoured death penalty for rape
convicts.
"I am in favour of capital punishment for rapists," she said on the sidelines
of a seminar on women empowerment at M S University here.
Reacting to Justice Verma panel report, which has rejected the demand of
capital punishment for rape, Irani said, "The report is not the end of the
road.
(source: PTI News)
*********************
All those involved in Mumbai terror attacks should get death penalty: India
In the 1st formal reaction to the American-Pakistani terrorist David Coleman
Headley's sentencing, home secretary R K Singh on Friday said, "Our view is
that all those involved in 26/11 case should receive death penalty. That has
been our consistent stand".
Though Singh said India still wanted Headley to get death sentence, he did not
explain how it was still possible since a US court had already awarded him jail
term of 35 years -- wit the judge explaining that the death penalty was not
possible under his plea bargaining clauses and the leniency shown by the
American prosecutors.
On possibility of Headley's extradition, Singh said, "The Indian request for
his extradition remains (intact) and New Delhi will press for it".
Other officials, however, said that Headley's extradition was impossible under
his plea bargaining clauses.
"The American terrorist can be extradited only if he violates the provisions of
the plea bargaining - which he certainly won't. He will continue to cooperate
with the US agency to avoid his extradition to either India or any other
country", said an official.
Though officials in Indian agencies are disappointed at leniency shown by US
prosecutors to Headley which spared him from the death penalty, they are not
surprised with the 35 years jail term for him by the American court. The 26/11
convict had ensured he would escape capital punishment long ago when he had
entered into plea bargaining with the FBI in 2010.
Headley had, in fact, pleaded guilty on all 12 counts including his role in
Mumbai terror attack only after getting such assurance during plea bargaining.
He, in lieu of this concession, had promised cooperation with the US agency in
all possible manners -- be it providing information or deposing through
video-conferencing for any future case in any other country.
Officials here said that it was quite clear then that Headley would not be
handed death sentence nor would he be extradited to India as he had got this
specific assurance in lieu of his cooperation immediately after his indictment
by the FBI.
Considering this, the officials said, the 35 year jail term followed by
supervised release for life seemed sufficient, though life term would have been
better. This is what they had expected from the US court, taking in view the
Headley's plea bargaining deal, they added.
Meanwhile external affairs minister Salman Khurshid said the government was
"slightly disappointed" over the quantum of sentence, saying the 52-year-old
convict should have got the "severest sentence", PTI reported.
Asserting that India's demand was Headley should be tried in India, Khurshid
said he would have possibly got a "serious and severe" sentence in this
country. Khurshid, however, said the sentence handed over to Headley was a
"beginning".
"The 35 year sentencing and what the judge said is a beginning. We understand
there are legal procedures in the US but nevertheless the position we have, the
request(extradition) that we have made remains intact," Khurshid told
reporters.
Congress spokesman Rashid Alvi expressed disappointment at the verdict and
demanded that he should be tried in India. BJP spokesperson Rajiv Pratap Rudy
demanded that Headley should be extradited to India and be tried under Indian
laws and given capital punishment.
"I think going by what the judge has said this should go "I think going by what
the judge has said this should go a long way in hopefully conveying a very
clear message that the kind of things that have been going on in the past will
not be tolerated," Khurshid said. US District Judge Harry Leinenweber said
yesterday, "The sentence I impose, I'm hopeful it will keep Mr Headley under
lock and key for the rest of his natural life."
The judge said it would have been much easier to impose the death penalty.
"That's what you deserve".
"Mr. Headley is a terrorist," the judge said while imposing the sentence on 12
counts in a packed court. Leinenweber also said, "He commits crime, cooperates
and then gets rewarded for the cooperation.
"No matter what I do, it is not going to deter terrorists. Unfortunately,
terrorists do not care for it. I do not have any faith in Mr Headley when he
says that he is a changed person now.
"I do believe that it is my duty to protect the public from Mr Headley and
ensure that he does not get into any further terrorist activities. Recommending
35 years is not a right sentence".
(source: The Times of India)
*************************
Dalai Lama Says Delhi Gang Rapists Should Not Be Executed, Death Penalty Not
The Answer
One of the world's most respected spiritual leaders has asked that mercy be
shown in the case of the men accused of last month's brutal gang rape and
murder of a woman on a bus in New Delhi.
During a panel discussion this week at the DSC Jaipur Literature Festival in
Jaipur, India, His Holiness the Dalai Lama touched on the controversial trial
that began Thursday in the bustling Indian city.
The 5 men on trial could be hanged if they are convicted, according to the
Associated Press. The family of the 23-year-old victim, who succumbed to her
injuries 2 weeks after the attack, have called for the execution of all the
accused. But the Dalai Lama, during his appearance at the Jaipur festival,
demurred.
"I do not like the death sentence," he said, adding that there are other ways
to deal with the alleged perpetrators, according to English-language Indian
news outlet the Hindu.
The Hindu went on to write that "the Dalai Lama said the 21 century belonged to
dialogue and not to confrontation or violence."
The Tibetan leader has been a steadfast opponent of the death penalty, which
contradicts the Buddhist philosophy of nonviolence. In July 2011, the Dalai
Lama, then 76 years old, traveled to Chicago, where he praised Illinois Gov.
Pat Quinn for abolishing the death penalty in his state.
The Delhi rape case has sparked debate over the Indian legal system, and public
anger has been directed at officials in a city informally christened India's
"rape capital," according to Reuters.
A Indian government panel this week dismissed calls to allow the death penalty
to be considered in cases of sexual assault, Reuters reported on Wednesday. The
panel's decision does not have bearing on the Delhi case, as the suspects are
also accused of murder, a charge that can carry the death penalty.
(source: Huffington Post)
******************************
UN Rights Chief Backs Indian Report Eschewing Death Penalty For Rape, Murder
The U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay has welcomed the report
of the Verma Commission as a ground-breaking basis for action on violence
against women in India, and urged the government to follow through on its
vision and recommendations.
Pillay said she "strongly supports the fact that the report eschews the death
penalty and any lowering of the age of juvenile perpetrators," which comes
contrary to widespread demand by a large section of the Indian society to
introduce capital punishment to those found guilty of murdering women after
rape.
The U.N. rights chief termed the Commission's recommendation for prolonged
prison sentences ranging from seven years to life as "suitable."
In a statement on Friday, Pillay commended the former Chief Justice of India
J.S. Verma and the 3-member Commission he heads "on producing such a thorough
report so quickly, and for involving women's groups and civil society so fully
in the process."
"This report and its far-reaching recommendations are not only a tribute to the
brave young woman who was raped and murdered five weeks ago, but to all victims
of sexual violence and assault in India," the High Commissioner said. "It is
also a testament to the power of the young women and men of India, and the
broader civil society, who have joined hands across the nation to say 'Enough
is Enough'," she added.
The Verma panel was constituted following national outrage over the gang rape
of a 23-year-old paramedic in national capital New Delhi. The girl and her
boyfriend were attacked after boarding a bus on the night of December 16. The
rape victim, who had suffered from multi-organ failure following serious
injuries to her body and brain, died in a Singapore hospital on December 29
after undergoing multiple surgeries.
6 men were arrested and 2 police officers suspended over the gang-rape, while
the Indian government ordered a special inquiry by a retired judge into the
incident.
The Commission submitted its 630-page report to the government on Wednesday,
recommending a number of far-reaching changes in its statutes. They include
punishment for marital rape, domestic rape and rape in same-sex relationships;
requiring police officers to register every case of reported rape and ensuring
those who fail to do so face serious repercussions; ensuring accountability of
police or armed forces personnel for sexual violence.
Punishing offenses such as stalking and voyeurism with prison terms; changing
the humiliating protocol for medical examinations experienced by rape victims;
cracking down on extra-legal village councils, known as khap panchayats, which
often issue edicts against women; comprehensive measures to improve sexual
education in schools and the community; and making new legal requirements and
electoral reforms to ensure that people charged with criminal offenses may not
hold political office.
"The report should serve as a beacon for many other countries struggling to
respect the rights of women more comprehensively by addressing sexual violence
through legislation, policies and programs," according to Pillay.
The High Commissioner acknowledged some of the urgent steps already taken by
the government, including the establishment of fast-track courts, and urged
India's political leaders to rally around the Verma report and make
implementation of its recommendations an unequivocal national priority.
At the invitation of the Verma Commission, the Office of the High Commissioner
made a submission and stands ready to assist in any aspect of the report's
implementation, the statement says.
(source: RTT News)
IRAN----execution
1 prisoner hanged in western Iran
1 prisoner was hanged in Ilam Prison yesterday morning, reported Fars, a
state-run Iranian news agency.
The prisoner, who was not identified by name, was convicted of murder and
sentenced to Qesas (retribution).
According to official Iranian sources, at least 17 people have been executed in
different Iranian cities in the last 9 days.
(source: Iran Human Rights)
*********************
Rights groups speak out for condemned Iranian-Arabs
The groups Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International called on the Iranian
judiciary on Thursday January 24 to quash the death sentence against 5
Iranian-Arab activists, whom the rights groups claim were tortured and denied a
fair trial.
In their joint statement, HRW and Amnesty International say that Jaber
Alboshokeh, Mokhtar Alboshokeh, Hadi Rashed, Hashem Shaabaninejad, and
MohammadAli Amourinejad were charged and sentenced for terrorism because they
all belong to a banned cultural group named Alhavar.
The five prisoners were transferred last week from Karoon Prison to an unknown
location, which is feared to be a preliminary step in their execution, Ann
Harrison of Amnesty International reports.
Families of the five men claim their kin were severely tortured in order to
acquiesce to false confessions.
Iranian Nobel Peace laureate Shirin Ebadi and Iranian human rights groups have
also spoken out against the imminent execution threat, urging Iran to halt the
death sentences.
(source: Radio Zamaneh)
*******************
Hundreds gathered outside Sanandaj prison to protest execution
Hundreds of residents of western city of Sanandaj in Iran gathered outside the
city's main prison on Wednesday to protest a decision by the regime's judiciary
to execute a prisoner. The Iranian regime had planned to execute Omar Shahbazi
who had been condemned to death for an alleged murder.
A crowed of over 400 people gathered in early hours of Wednesday outside the
prison. Around 7:30 am local time the regime's State Security Forces and
anti-riot forces attacked the protesters to disperse the crowd. As a result a
number of woman protesters were wounded but the protest continued.
Once again at around 9:00 am local time attacked the gathering but again they
did not succeed to disperse the crowd. Finally the mullahs were forced to
postpone the execution for the time being in order to prevent the spread of
protest to other parts of the city and other towns.
(source: National Council of Resistance of Iran - Foreign Affairs Committee)
VIETNAM:
Vietnam To Produce Own Lethal Injection
Vietnam will produce its own chemicals to carry out the death penalty by lethal
injection after failing to get shipments from the European Union (EU), news
reports said Thursday.
The country would start producing the poison for 5 prisons under a pilot
program from next year, the Tuoi Tre newspaper quoted Public Security Minister
Tran Dai Quang as telling the National Assembly on Wednesday.
The country has not been able to execute any convict since switching from
firing squad to lethal injection in July, 2011.
The EU imposed a ban on European companies selling the necessary chemicals to
Vietnam as part of an effort to pressure the country into abolishing capital
punishment.
More than 500 people are on death row in Vietnam, the Tuoi Tre newspaper said,
quoting Quang. Capital crimes include murder, child rape, and drug trafficking.
(source: Manila Bulletin)
_______________________________________________
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
