March 3
TRINIDAD & TOBAGO:
Ramlogan wants Opposition support for death penalty
Attorney General Anand Ramlogan has called for the resumption of the death
penalty. Speaking to reporters after the launch of the Constitutional Reform at
the University of the West Indies St Augustine campus, Ramlogan said the
Government's efforts are being stymied by the Opposition's refusal to support
this initiative. Ramlogan said the Government was committed to the death
penalty, but needed the necessary support.
Ramlogan said on three occasions the Government had asked the Opposition for
its proposals "on how this can be done" since they were not opposed to the
death penalty. "I did not have the courtesy of a response. But I want to renew
that request to the Leader of the Opposition. The death penalty is one that
remains a sore point for the public."
The AG believes the time has come to pass tough legislation and to consider the
removal of trial by juries. Over the past week, the Government has announced
several crime fighting measures - from the reintroduction of joint army
patrols, the use of army officers to fight crime, and now the abolition of jury
trials for blood crimes.
"We cannot be afraid of change. Trinidadians are very comfortable people and we
don't like to step out of our comfort zone. But right now that zone of comfort
is becoming increasingly smaller as the bandits encroach on the turf that used
to be once occupied by law abiding citizens." The Government, Ramlogan said,
can no longer allow a minority of criminals to hold the country to ransom.
(source: Trinidad Guardian)
INDIA:
Capital Punishment: a Democratic and Humanitarian Viewpoint
Capital punishment has been the subject of vociferous debate in the
international arena for some decades now. Capital punishment has existed in
almost all societies from the very germination of human civilization. With the
application of this retribution sometimes imbalanced against the severity of
the offence, the brutality of the method of execution varied, and the social
status of the guilty played a vital role in the judicial sentencing.
But as democracy evolved in the west, as feudalism began declining in many
cultures, and as the perception of the human rights of the convict gained
consideration, humanitarian views toward the most extreme penalty were
incorporated into the practice of jurisprudence in many societies over time.
Inevitably, crucifixion in ancient Rome dwindled into history, execution as a
tool of the Inquisition in Europe faded into a mere part of ecclesiastical
tyranny, and death by strangulation as practiced in Tang China ceased to exist.
On March 1st, Governor Martin O'Malley's bill to repeal Maryland's death
penalty survived an early test as supporters turned back an amendment that
would have allowed executions to continue in some cases. The Maryland Senate
paused its debate on the bill that would make Maryland the 18th state in the
nation to eliminate the death penalty after advocates of repeal won a key test
vote.
Because the US is a democracy with a federal constitution, capital punishment
laws are controlled by the individual states. But despite being a union of
independent nations, the European Union has abolished the death penalty
everywhere except in Belarus. Even in the case of the US, the statistics of
executions carried out across the states vary, but there has been a strong
postulate from the opponents of this ultimate penalty for a nationwide
moratorium. Islamic countries on the on the other hand, never hesitate to
execute alleged criminals on charges such as apostasy, heresy and blasphemy in
accordance with Sharia'h law, which violates the spirit of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the UN in 1948.
Advertise here nowIn modern times, execution methods differ from country to
country. Electrocution, lethal injection and the gas chamber are widely used in
US, while shooting is employed in China and hanging is preferred by a long list
of countries, including India, Japan and Iraq. Human rights advocates observe
that Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran use the most inhumane,
cruelest and barbaric methods of execution, including beheading and stoning to
death.
Death penalty statistics vary from nation to nation as well, with China leading
the world in executions, Saudi Arabia being the capital of the decapitating
world and with some countries limiting it to heinous crimes and war criminals.
All that said, nobody can expect autocracies and theocracies to alter their
stance on capital punishment, but the law and praxis persisting in two
countries, Japan and India, 2 prominent world democracies, are extremely
disquieting. Japan incarcerates convicts in death row and deprives them of
rights and facilities available to other prisoners. The condemned are informed
of their execution just hours in advance; their identity is not disclosed, and
the sentence is carried out when the Diet is not in session so that any
possibility of debate is avoided.
Even though the number of convicts executed in India is relatively minimal
compared to Japan, the agony and anguish of the Indian convict is no better.
Aside from the legality of the death penalty, execution of a convict in India
is a long, time consuming process. According to the Indian Apex Court ruling of
1983, the death penalty should be imposed only in the "rarest of the rare
cases, but without defining or explaining which cases are "rarest of the rare,"
leaving the decision solely to the discretion of the trial court.
By Indian law, once someone is sentenced to death by the trial court which in
most casesmis a district court, it must be approved by the concerned High
Court. Once approved by the High Court the convict can appeal to the Supreme
Court of India. If the Supreme Court still rules that the convict deserves
death, he or she can submit a clemency petition to the President of India or
the Governor of the concerned state or Union territory, all of whom have the
power to fully or partially grant pardon. The convict still enjoys the
privilege of a judicial review.
The Indian judicial system is infamous for its delay in proceedings. Years will
have elapsed by the time the Apex Court upholds the death sentence. Ever since
the trial court awards the maximum penalty, the convict will have to spend his
life in solitary confinement with no idea of when there will be a final
decision.
Notwithstanding the holdup from the side of the judiciary in upholding the
death penalty, the time that the clemency petition waits for the presidential
decision, whether acceptance or rejection, is a more serious concern, because
there is no time frame for it set by the Indian constitution, and it can be
days, months, years or even decades. Even if the clemency petition filed by the
convict is rejected by the president, it is up to the authorities to decide
when the condemned walks to the gallows, adding further to the distress of the
convict.
In the last 4 months, India executed two people on death row, Ajmal Kasab and
Afzal Guru, the former, the only man captured alive by the Indian security
forces during the Bombay terrorist strikes of 2008 and the latter, a
conspirator of the terror attack on the Indian Parliament in 2001.
The way both were executed is unprecedented; the timing of the execution was
neither properly disclosed to their families, nor were the families granted
time enough to decide on whether to take over the convict's body as mandated by
Indian law. Their bodies were buried in the prison premises.
Many legal experts are of the opinion that both these convicts went trough a
thorough judicial and legal process and that justice was done. But the secrecy
surrounding the executions has raised many eyebrows. In the case of Ajmal
Kasab, it has been pointed out that that he was not granted the right of a
judicial review. The government washed its hands, saying that the maintenance
of secrecy surrounding the executions was for the sake of public safety and for
law and order concerns.
Following these 2 recent executions, the dismal state of the rule of law in
India has been center stage in the public discussion, especially vis-a-vis
capital punishment. How much time will the condemned has to spend in solitary
confinement? It is remarkable that unlike his predecessors, the current
President, Pranab Mukherjee, is not shying away from making decisions on mercy
petitions, causing a New York Times blog to call him India's Mr. Death.
Inmates on death row in India currently include the 3 assassins of the former
prime minister, Rajive Gandhi, and all 3 of them have been in hotbox for the
last 22 years. Even the judge who headed the Supreme Court bench which upheld
their death penalty was of the view that hanging them would be tantamount to
punishing them twice for the same offense. So, regardless of whether or not
India abolishes capital punishment, she has to speed up the judicial and
governmental procedures to wrap up decisions on atrocious crimes.
In conclusion, capital punishment has been opposed mainly on the grounds that
the penalty is irreversible in the case of the conviction of an innocent
defendant, and many countries have abolished capital punishment for that
reason. Religious views on capital punishment are inconsistent and
contradictory and are not worthy of mention here. Heinous crimes such as
genocide, rape and terror may justify this extreme punishment, but the
defendant's human rights have to be kept in mind. But if the world cannot
expect from democracies like Japan and India, forget authoritarian regimes, the
respecting of rights, where is the last resort for the protagonists of human
rights?
(source: blogcritics.org)
**********************************
House of Commons debate on the Death Penalty and Human Rights violations in
India
According to a press release by the organizers of the Kesri Lehar, a petition
asking for the Abolition of the Death Penalty in India was debated in the Main
Chamber of the House of Commons on Thursday, 28th February 2013.
The 2 1/2 hour debate, started with an opening speech by Rt. Hon. John
McDonnell, MP for Hayes and Harlington, who said that the national Kesri Lehar
campaign urged the UK government to press the Indian Government to sign and
ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the UN
Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhumane or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment, which encompasses the death penalty.
Amongst the many issues on Human Right's abuses raised during the debate, 2
prominent cases, currently on death row in India, that of Balwant Singh
Rajoana, and, Professor Davinderpal Singh Bhullar were discussed at length.
Rt. Hon. John McDonnell referring the cases of Balwant Singh Rajowana and Prof
Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar, said, "These 2 cases carry immense significance
around the world, the Rajoana case for its historical context and the Bhullar
case because it is almost now a symbol of the injustice meted out to so many
Sikhs in recent decades."
Parliament was told that, "Balwant Singh was party to killing Beant Singh, the
chief Minister of the Punjab. We now know that Beant Singh personally commanded
the police and security forces in the killing and disappearance of possibly
more than 20,000 Sikhs - men, women and children. Faced with the failure of the
Indian authorities to take action against the former chief Minister for his
crimes against humanity, Balwant Singh and a co-conspirator took the law into
their own hands. Nobody, including Balwant Singh, claims that he is innocent of
the killing, but Sikh organisations, human rights lawyers and human rights
groups are urging the Indian Government to take into account the context of his
actions, the scale of the human suffering that the Sikhs were enduring at the
time, and the anger that young men such as Balwant Singh felt at the failure of
the Indian state to bring to justice the chief Minister responsible for the
atrocities against the Sikhs in the Punjab. On that basis, they plead for
understanding and mercy on Balwant Singh's behalf and that the death penalty is
avoided at all costs."
Free Professor Devender Pal Singh Bhullar
It was also pointed out to Parliament that, the German courts have now ruled
that that deportation of Professor Bhullar was wrong. He has been convicted of
involvement in an attempted political assassination solely on the basis of a
confession, which he retracted, with not one of more than 100 witnesses
identifying him at the scene, and on a split decision of the court judges. In
split decisions in India, the practice of the courts is not to impose a death
penalty, but Professor Bhullar has been sentenced, held in solitary confinement
for eight years and, despite his deteriorating health, his plea for mercy has
been rejected.
Despite a further petition to the Supreme Court, the fear is that the Indian
authorities could move to execute him at any time. This is a shocking
miscarriage of justice waiting to happen unless we can intervene effectively.
There is also concern that India is expanding the scope of the death penalty,
new laws passed in 2011 which provide for the death penalty include for the
making and selling of illicit liquor.
Rt. Hon. Virendra Sharma, MP for Ealing and Southall, stated that, "We must
kill the myth that we are anti-India or that we are interfering in India's
internal affairs. We are taking a matter of principle and fighting for the
rights of the people living in India and abroad." He further stated that, "We
cannot always assume that the judicial system is faultless. Therefore, using
death, an irrevocable act, as a punishment for a crime, puts the system at risk
of punishing the innocent irreversibly.
On talking on the issue of the judiciary in India, Simon Hughes, MP for
Bermondsey and Old Southwark, said that, a Supreme Court bench said that
people's faith in the judiciary was dwindling at an alarming rate, posing a
grave threat to constitutional and democratic governance of the country.
The house noted that "Amnesty International points out that the use of the
death penalty in India is "riddled with systemic flaws".
MP for Slough, Fiona McTaggart expressed her worries that the rights of
religious, ethnic and caste minorities in India are not sufficiently well
protected. It seems to me that we have a responsibility to say to India, "We
expect you, as the largest democracy in the world, to promote the standards of
democracy and human rights that we expect, and to recognise that if the death
penalty is used in this way, there is a risk that you will deepen the divisions
between ethnic and religious communities in country. There is a risk that you
will make your country less safe and less peaceful for all who live in it."
Concluding the debate, Labour MP John McDonnell said, "To add weight to the
British Government's representations, I urge them to raise the issue again with
our European partners and to seek a joint representation from Europe on the
subject. I urge the British Government, working with other Governments, to
raise this call within the United Nations. With the UN Commission on Human
Rights meeting imminently, this is an ideal time to put this back on the UN
agenda."
It seems to me that we have a responsibility to say to India, "We expect you,
as the largest democracy in the world, to promote the standards of democracy
and human rights that we expect, and to recognise that if the death penalty is
used in this way, there is a risk that you will deepen the divisions between
ethnic and religious communities in country. There is a risk that you will make
your country less safe and less peaceful for all who live in it."
Richard Fuller, MP for Bedford, added that, there will be consequences for our
relationships with India unless the Indian Parliament looks at this issue very
seriously again and makes the changes that Members are asking it to do.
Rt. Hon. David Ward, MP for Bradford East, stated that, "I believe that it is
our intrinsic right and, more importantly, our fundamental duty to speak up for
all people, and especially for minorities who do not have suitable champions
for their cause and who face persecution, wherever in the world that might
occur and no matter what entrenched views or self-interest they might be
battling against. The oppressors often have powerful weapons at their disposal
to stifle debate...I have touched on the necessity for India to uphold the
basic human rights that are espoused in the United Nations convention against
torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. This is
an important issue for my constituents, especially those in the Sikh community,
who have long borne the brunt of judicial and societal discrimination in parts
of India."
David Ward, went on to state that, "Over the past few years, I have been
approached by a number of constituents about the cases involving Balwant Singh
Rajoana and Professor Bhullar. I know those cases well, and I am sad that those
people are still on death row. I must be honest and tell the House, however,
that on researching this issue more thoroughly, I was deeply shocked to
discover the sheer scale of the human rights abuses that the Indian Government
have not acted against, over many years. I am a member of Amnesty
International, and I regularly receive the evidence that it produces. It is
shocking to learn of the extensive use of forced evictions, the excessive use
of force, arbitrary arrest and detention, and the fundamental lack of due
process that are still prevalent in India. Amnesty states: "Impunity for abuses
and violations remained pervasive." The continuing existence of India's
controversial Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act gives the Indian army arbitrary
powers and near-immunity from prosecution."
Seema Malhotra, MP for Feltham and Heston, said. "We participate in many
debates in this House, but this one is literally about life and death. I have
had a long-standing personal opposition to the death penalty in all
circumstances and I am proud to live in a country where it has been abolished.
This is a matter of humanity and, as someone once said, it is not for the state
to kill people who kill people to show that killing is wrong."
The execution of Balwant Singh and others would not end terrorism or causes of
concern, and would damage the image of India
Another great concern is the fact that in the world's greatest democracy we
have recently seen innocent people suffering and being killed in the crossfire
when peacefully protesting for improved human rights. Last year, a horrific
case that touched us all deeply was the death of Jaspal Singh. Jaspal was an
18-year-old Sikh college student peacefully protesting against capital
punishment last March who was killed when police opened fire on a crowd of just
a few hundred to make them disperse.
India is a nation with more than 1,500 languages and dialects and is a showcase
to the world in business, culture, arts and crafts. The Sikh community in India
and around the world leads in business and agriculture, where it blazes a
trail. The work of the Pingalwara charity in the Punjab shows the deepest
compassion for those in the community with the least and those with the
greatest disabilities. It is also leading the thinking about how to deal with
environmental issues so that we can have a clean environment and tackle the
vital questions of quality of life and the supply of water and good food for so
many. The Sikh religion has at its heart the principles and values of equality
that many of us hold so dear.
(source: sikhsiyasat.net)
CHINA:
In China, death row entertainment is nothing new
A fierce debate is raging in China over a state-run channel's decision to air
the last hours of four foreign drug smugglers before their executions for
killing 13 Chinese fishermen. But the outrage belies a simple reality in China:
Executions here are frequent - and TV stations have treated them as
entertainment before.
From 2006 to 2012, China's Henan Province aired a hugely popular TV show called
"Interviews Before Execution," in which death row inmates discussed their
crimes and regrets with in-your-face host Ding Yu. The show drew 40 million
nightly viewers during its run - almost 1/2 the population of Henan Province,
or 1.25 times the number of Americans that watched the Olympic closing
ceremonies.
"Interviews Before Execution" favored controversial inmates, like a gay man who
murdered his mother and a young couple who killed the boyfriend's grandmother.
The interviews could be provocative as well.
"I went to see your brother and sisters. They all know that you are leaving
this world. But, sorry, they didn???t want to see you," Ding Yu told one man,
according to NBC.
"You're dangerous to society. You're s---," she reportedly said in another
episode.
Something of that provocative tone echoed in Friday's controversial broadcast.
That program included interviews with police officers, a graphic that read
"Kill the Kingpin," and instant analysis from a host of pundits - what the
Post's William Wan called "all the staples of modern current events coverage."
"Some viewers may consider it cruel to ask a criminal to do an interview when
they are about to be executed," Ding Yu told the BBC. "On the contrary, they
want to be heard."
Amnesty International believes China executes "thousands" of people each year -
the most in the world. The organization stopped publishing estimates out of
fear they "grossly underestimate the true number" of executions each year.
(source: Washington Post)
BANGLADESH:
Riots to Protest Death Sentence Enter 3rd Day in Bangladesh
Demonstrators protesting the death penalty given to an Islamic political party
leader clashed with Bangladeshi security forces for a 3rd straight day on
Saturday, killing 2 people and injuring about a dozen, the police said.
Delawar Hossain Sayedee, one of the top leaders of Jamaat-e-Islami, the
country's largest Islamic party, was sentenced to death on Thursday by a war
crimes tribunal for atrocities committed during Bangladesh's 1971 war of
separation from Pakistan. The sentence set off rioting across the country,
killing at least 46 people, including the 2 in the latest fighting, the
authorities said.
Mr. Sayedee, 73, is the 3rd defendant to be convicted by the tribunal, which
was set up in 2010 by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's government. He was accused
of involvement in looting and burning villages, raping women and forcing people
to convert to Islam.
An additional 7 top leaders of Jamaat, including its chief, Matiur Rahman
Nizami, are on trial facing war crimes charges.
Jamaat campaigned against Bangladesh's 9-month war of independence and formed
some auxiliary forces to help the Pakistani troops, but it has denied
committing atrocities.
Bangladesh says that during the war, 3 million people were killed, 200,000
women were raped and millions of others were forced to flee the country.
On Saturday, security forces used tear gas to stop Jamaat supporters from
smashing vehicles and blocking roads in Chittagong district, the police said.
The area is 135 miles southeast of Dhaka, the capital.
Two men were killed and about a dozen were injured in the fighting, a local
police official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was not
authorized to speak to the news media.
Dhaka's private television stations, Ekattor TV and Somoy TV, reported that
Jamaat supporters had erected roadblocks and attacked the homes of government
supporters in some areas.
Jamaat is an ally of Bangladesh's main opposition party, the Bangladesh
Nationalist Party, which is led by former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, and was a
partner in Ms. Zia's government from 2001 to 2006.
Ms. Zia says the war crimes trials are politically motivated to prosecute the
opposition, an allegation the government rejects.
Jamaat and Ms. Zia's party have called for a 3-day nationwide general strike
starting on Sunday.
(source: New York Times)
ANTIGUA:
Death Penalty Hard to Implement says ex-AG
A former attorney general has said the authorities will have a hard time giving
effect to implementation of the death penalty.
Sir Clare Roberts, a former president of the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights, was commenting on the government's stated intention to see that capital
punishment becomes a priority.
That position was put forward on the heels of the slaying on Tuesday of Susan
Powell, a mother of 5, while at work at a store in the Heritage Quay tourism
area.
Sir Clare said it is wrong to think of the death penalty as a deterrent.
(source: Antigua Observer)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
