April 1
TANZANIA:
Independent Commission answer to violence against human rights
Human rights activists have warned the government over the alarming increases
of violence against humanity in the country, saying formation of an autonomous
Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance (CHRGG) to tackle the menace is
necessary.
Speaking during human rights stakeholders' conference in Dar es Salaam over the
weekend, activists said the country has recorded a wide range of violence
against humanity but the commission has turned deaf by not taking precise
interventions.
Violence against human rights has escalated far more from the commonly known
gender violence to issue such as mob injustices, people getting victimised,
tortured and mostly killed.
"What does article 14 of our constitution stands for," Geoffrey Chambua, legal
officer at the Tanzania Network for Legal Aid Providers (TANLAP) questioned
while facilitating a session during the conference, referring to the 'right to
life' entitled to human beings as stated in the constitution. The conference
which was organised by TANLAP drew participants from civil societies, high rank
police officers, law reform representatives, senior magistrates and members
from the CHRGG. Among other things, the conference expected to identify key
human rights issue and plan entry points for remedies and draw action points
for intervention.
According to participants, CHRGG is performing below expectations due to
incessant political interferences from the government. They said it is high
time that the government abides with an independent human rights commission
which can address any violence against fundamental rights in the country
without fear or favour.
According to stakeholders, the commission has been taking actions either under
fear or in favour of politicians.
In the conference, it was agreed that, even if a national plan to address human
rights issues will be in place, it will require an independent commission and
political will from the government to ensure political and civil rights, social
and economic rights are promoted and protected at all levels in the country.
Magdalena Danda, CHRGG Human Rights Officer, acknowledging that ignorance and
budget deficit are among the challenges, she said collaboration and networking
between key human rights actors is still needed.
She said while the commission plays its part, policy makers, civil societies,
and law enforcement organs should also play their roles in addressing issues
related to human rights.
Daniel Lema, Legal Aid Secretariat Coordinator, elaborating on the fall of
human rights promotion and protection in the country, he said it all results
from the fact that the government has been implementing its own initiatives and
perspectives while civil societies have been operating under a different
strategy.
He said most key actors are aware of the increase of violence against human
rights and tend to adopt a culture of silence anyway.
"We're trying to see how we can chip-in to identify and come up with a report
on issues of human rights and strategise interventions," he said.
In another development, stakeholder had a back to back discussion of whether
the death penalty should or shouldn't be abolished.
They cited an example of the majority of prisoners on death penalty but have
not had their petitions approved by the President for years, hence ending up
suffering while waiting for their execution which never arrives.
"If it is a death penalty let the wrongdoer be executed on the spot rather than
serving life imprisonment," a participant who requested for anonymity stated.
According to stakeholders, incidents such as the killings of Albinos, unwanted
pregnancies, prostitution and the suppuration of freedom of press remain a big
challenge to the country's human rights protection and promotion.
(source: IPP Media)
INDIA:
'Death penalty is a deterrent punishment, it should be retained'
Shubhangi Khapre: Would you say people generally have more faith in judiciary
than in the political system?
Ujjwal Nikam: People have absolute faith in the judiciary. Of course, there are
certain ifs and buts. The Chief Justice of India has, on several occasions,
said judicial officers should exercise restraint while making statements. In
one case, a Supreme Court judge said in court that a certain person was
'corrupt' and that he should be hanged. Such a statement, made in a lighter
vein, can have a different impression on the common man. Judicial officers
should be cautious about making certain statements.
Sukanya Shantha: In such a scenario, when Justice (Retd) Markandey Katju says
Sanjay Dutt should be pardoned, what would you say?
Justice Katju has the right to form an opinion in his personal capacity.
However, he should have considered that he (Dutt) has been convicted for
unlawfully possessing an AK-56. He acquired it from persons who were closely
involved in the bomb blasts conspiracy. Later, he asked a friend to dispose of
the weapon in a clandestine manner. Had he earlier given the information about
these weapons to the police, perhaps the blasts could have been averted. Being
a public figure, he should have been more careful.
Sagnik Chowdhury: How much of a say does a prosecutor have while the
investigation is going on?
As per Indian law, the public prosecutor is an independent officer. However, in
the US, the prosecutor guides the investigating agency. In India, till the
filing of the chargesheet, police officers make various statements and, at
times, make a mess of things. The reason why a prosecutor should not interfere
in investigations is that a prosecutor should not become a persecutor. If he
finds that a person has not committed an offence, he should say so to the
court.
Mayura Janwalkar: You have often said terrorists prepare themselves for court
trials. How do prosecutors prepare for such terrorists?
A prosecutor's role depends on the material collected by the investigating
agency. He has to find out the motive for committing such acts. In cases that
are built on circumstantial evidence, he has to see that the chain of
circumstances is completed. In Ajmal Kasab's case, I was astonished that he
tried to provide an explanation for injuries suffered by him. He also took up
the plea of being a juvenile.
Sagnik Chowdhury: When so much evidence has come out about David Headley, why
have you been reluctant to bring it on record?
Kasab had said he had been shown maps and videos, but that he had no knowledge
about who provided those video tapes. Headley's name was never revealed during
investigations. Later, the case was taken up by the National Investigating
Agency. However, we were ready to implicate Headley.
Sukanya Shantha: Do you believe that the prosecution failed on account of
Faheem Ansari and Sabahuddin Ahmed's acquittal in the 26/11 case?
One has to say that we could not establish our case against them. The trial
court acquitted them on ten grounds. The High Court reversed seven grounds, but
held on the basis of three grounds that the view taken by the trial court was
also possible.
Smita Nair: What are the problems faced by the prosecution in terror cases?
Normally, the main perpetrators remain behind the scenes. They take care not to
appear in CCTV footage. We don't have a law that gives a long rope to
investigators. The media puts pressure on investigating agencies. We should
allow them to do their job.
Sagnik Chowdhury: Do you think that the absence of a witness protection
programme also creates difficulties?
This is a nice-sounding terminology to be used in public meetings and speeches.
But in the Ajmal Kasab case, many people came forward to give evidence. A
witness protection programme is not the only solution. People must realise that
they must support the truth.
Shubhangi Khapre: How do you explain the low conviction rate in Maharashtra?
Often, investigation papers are not up to the mark. Crimes are detected, the
accused are arrested, but when it comes to paperwork, mistakes are committed.
Investigating staff must be properly trained. They must be trained on how to
record witness statements, conduct identification parades and so on.
Sagnik Chowdhury: There is talk of a 2nd judicial commission from Pakistan
coming in connection with the 26/11 case. What was the point of the first
commission coming to India when the 2 countries could not agree on what was to
be done?
It was our mistake. When the `st commission came, we did not allow them to
cross-examine the witnesses. They wanted to use this evidence before the court
in Pakistan trying the perpetrators of 26/11. But the state government may have
thought it inappropriate perhaps because the appeal was pending in Supreme
Court. As a result, the court in Pakistan rejected that evidence. It is then
that they made another move saying that they should be permitted to
cross-examine the witnesses.
Shubhangi Khapre: When we were so confident about our case, what were the
government's apprehensions? Did they think it would delay the case?
The delay could be there. I don't know if the government of Pakistan is really
interested in making progress in this matter. In three-four years, they had
examined only 11 witnesses. Their progress is slow, it is not on day-today
basis and it is strictly on camera.
Sukanya Shantha: In the 1993 blasts after Sanjay Dutt was convicted under the
Arms Act and acquitted under TADA, why was his acquittal not contested?
I was not the prosecutor in the Supreme Court. The investigating agency was the
CBI. They did not seek my advice after the verdict.
Mayura Janwalkar: There are many voices for abolition of the death penalty.
What are your views?
Death penalty is a deterrent punishment. But if it is not executed within a
certain time frame, the purpose is frustrated. Unfortunately, in several cases,
the final confirmation of death sentence comes after ten or twelve years. The
trial court must complete the matter within say six months, the High Court and
Supreme Court should confirm within three months. The death penalty should be
retained.
Neerad Pandharipande: Do you agree that there is ambiguity in what constitutes
rarest of rare offences?
That is true. We don't have any strict formula as such. Every judge defines
rarest of rare according to his notions and discretion.
Sukanya Shantha: How and how much do approvers help the prosecution?
The 1993 bomb blasts was the first case where I had approvers. The selection of
approvers is done by the police officers, I just endorse it. An approver is a
self-confessed traitor. He reveals information about his aides and there are
chances that he may turn hostile. So you are running a risk. But approvers
helped us in unfolding the criminal conspiracy. In the 1993 bomb blasts, the
approvers disclosed minute things about how the conspiracy was hatched in
Dubai, who attended and how they went to Pakistan. That is the reason we could
say how Pakistan had supported the accused. That is the reason that Supreme
Court in its judgment came down heavily on Pakistan.
Smita Nair: When were you informed about Kasab's execution? What happened
behind the scenes?
After the Supreme Court rejected Kasab's appeal and confirmed his death
sentence, the Supreme Court order came to the sessions court in Mumbai.
Immediately, the jail authorities prepared everything, including the warrant. I
knew the President had rejected his mercy petition but did not know the exact
date of his execution. I came to know the same morning, around 6.30 am.
Smita Nair: What was your reaction when you heard that Kasab was going to be
hanged?
I was happy for a simple reason - that the efforts I made had materialised. I
wanted him to be hanged. He killed so many innocent people. Why should I feel
pity? I am not a human rights activist.
Mayura Janwalkar: The 1993 bomb blasts trial took a long time. In 2013, how
prepared are we to carry out trials more expeditiously?
Kasab's trial is an example. We tendered the evidence in the form of affidavit.
For the 1st time, I used the provision under section 296 of the Criminal
Procedure Code and tendered formal evidence in the form of affidavits of 300
witnesses.
Vaidyanathan Iyer: Why do you think the media should exercise restraint? It's
because the media is proactive that there is seriousness.
The media must exercise restraint when the crime is not detected. Otherwise, it
puts pressure on the investigating agency.
Mayura Janwalkar: Did the trial court and then the Supreme Court go soft on
Sanjay Dutt?
I thought Sanjay Dutt should have been convicted under section 5 of TADA. In
fact, I argued like that. But the court felt that his was not a terrorist act,
he had no such intention. The Supreme Court has endorsed it.
Zeeshan Shaikh: Do you think there is a need for laws such as POTA and TADA to
increase the conviction rate in the state?
There is no doubt these laws were useful to the police machinery in tackling
terrorism but sometimes they were misused by the police. But we could have had
checks. The TADA Act was rampantly misused in Mumbai. They had invoked it
against knives and daggers and even against a particular community.
(source: Indian Express)
******************************
No noose will be good news
The death penalty has no place in a civilised state.With the recent stay on the
execution of four of Veerappan's aides who were sentenced to death on the
change of killing 22 people in landmine blasts in Palar, this issue has again
come to the forefront.
They have been languishing in Hindalga Central Jail in Belgaum since 2004, and
suffering anguish while awaiting the sentence.
The execution of Afzal Guru is a travesty of justice in many ways.
First, he was hanged 7 years after the Supreme Court sentenced him to death and
6 years after his mercy petition to the President.
The rejection of his mercy plea was kept from his family to prevent it from
becoming the subject of judicial consideration as has happened in other cases
of inordinate delay in execution.
His family was not informed in advance about his execution and Afzal's body was
buried in secrecy in Tihar jail.
The execution of Ajmal Kasab for involvement in the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks
was also legally flawed.
According to a notification by the Ministry of Home Affairs published the day
Kasab was hanged (November 21, 2012), the President had rejected his mercy
petition on November 5.
Kasab was informed of this on November 12. It is not clear whether he was aware
of the possibility of seeking a judicial review of the President???s decision.
The executions of both Kasab and Afzal were in complete contradiction to the UN
Commission on Human Rights Resolution 2005/59 adopted on April 20, 2005 that
asks states that still have death penalty "to make available to the public
information with regard to the imposition of death penalty and to any scheduled
execution".
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which
India is a state party and which allows the death penalty in certain
situations, clearly states in Article 6.6 that no provision of Article 6 (which
allows the death penalty) should be used "to delay or to prevent the abolition
of capital punishment".
The UNHRC concluded its General Comment No. 6 of April 30, 1982 by stating that
"all measures of abolition (of death penalty) should be considered as progress
in the enjoyment of the right to life".
As a state party to the ICCPR, India is legally obliged to implement the
provisions of the treaty.
The legal flaw of the death penalty came to the forefront when the Supreme
Court explicitly stated in Santosh Kr Bariar v. State of Maharashtra (2009)
that the death sentences pronounced by the apex court between 1996 and 2009
were found to be per incuriam, meaning they were pronounced in ignorance of
law.
(source: Commentary; Soumya Das did her MA in English at Presidency College,
Kolkata, before coming to the Asian College of Journalism, Chennai; The Hindu
Business Line)
*********************************
The new rape bill has strong punishments, yet leaves several crimes out of its
ambit
The Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill is just a signature away from becoming law.
While its passage in the Rajya Sabha was smooth, it had undergone several
changes before the Lok Sabha passed it. There were differences among political
parties on issues ranging from quantum of punishment to the age for consensual
sex. The death penalty, too, was widely debated.
The bill now awaits President's clearance. It addresses, for the 1st time,
several anti-women crimes, from stalking, voyeurism and disrobing to acid
attacks. It, however, does not address the issue of marital rape, though it
lays down a mild punishment for raping a separated wife.
The government had issued an ordinance before the Budget session to deal with
crime against women. It was largely inspired by the recommendations of the
Justice Verma committee, which had been constituted after the brutal gangrape
of a physiotherapy student in Delhi.
Though many believe that the bill is a watered down version of the
recommendations, it lays down provision of death penalty for rapes that lead to
death or permanent vegetative stage of the victim. The report was against death
sentence. Capital punishment was one of the clauses over which there was a wide
divide in Parliament. The UPA and the BJP both felt it was needed, at least in
most extreme cases, but the Left was vehemently against it.
So divided was opinion on certain clauses that at one stage there was concern
that the bill might not pass in this session of Parliament. Its hasty passage
still raises hackles among activists. "What is the need to legislate in a
hurry?" wonders Bharati Ali of Haq, a child rights organisation. "Experience
across the world shows that knee-jerk reactions don't lead to good laws. One
needed to think matters through." Ali adds that the debate was hijacked by the
age of consent. "There isn't enough importance on aspects like investigation
processes and procedures," she says. The age of consent turned out to be a big
headache for the government as it faced opposition from Left parties as well as
women's organisations.
India is a signatory to several conventions on child rights, and the government
is trying to come up with a uniform definition of childhood. The 1st move in
this direction was made last year when the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act of 2012 was passed, defining the age of consent as 18. Though this
move was assailed, back then, too, a uniformity in law did not give much scope
for introducing the more nuanced approach to consent that the left parties and
activists were demanding.
"Incidentally, the age of consent till 2012 was 16 and no one seemed to have
bothered much about how it was kept 2 years below the age of marriage," notes
Harish Sadani of Men Against Violence and Abuse. At one point, the bill was
redrafted and age of consent was put at 16; in the final debate, it was brought
back to 18.
However, there still remains a grey area on the aspect of age. The Prohibition
of Child Marriage Act of 2006 says child marriage (above the age of 15) is
'voidable' if either party files a plea for annulment. "Which means it
recognises the validity of underage marriages," says Ali.
The rule was made keeping in mind traditional social realities. Girls,
especially in villages, are not likely to find another match if they have been
married once. "International law requires no exemptions be made for
perpetrators of sexual violence because of their marital status. The exemption
that allows for rape of married girls between 15 and 18 years by their husbands
also violates India's international legal obligations to protect children from
abuse," says G. Ananthapadmanabhan, chief executive, Amnesty International,
India. The issue of non-inclusion of marital rape, incidentally, barely raised
a dissent.
Should rape be gender neutral or not, was another area of dissent. The Verma
committee had, for the 1st time, taken into account sexual assaults against
men, too. The ordinance, too, took a gender neutral stand, replacing the term
rape with sexual assault. The same was the approach of the parliamentary
standing committee on the bill. However, the clamour for "gender just, not
gender neutral" from women's groups made the legislators do a rethink, and the
word 'rape' was reinserted. However, several human rights activists still feel
there should have been a provision for sexual assault against males, too.
The Verma committee report took note of some crimes against women that were not
considered serious enough, but which emboldened perpetrators to get more
violent. Based on this observation, the ordinance took note of crimes like
stalking, voyeurism and disrobing. For deterrence, it proposed stringent
punishment even against first-time perpetrators, making the offence
non-bailable. However, parties like the Janata Dal (United) felt this was a bit
harsh and might get love-lorn romeos behind bars for wooing their lady loves.
Noting the formula for wooing in India, JD (U) leader Sharad Yadav said women
do not talk first, men are meant to chase them, and get them to talk.
Ultimately, both stalking and voyeurism were made bailable for 1st offence.
In its final form, the bill is a mixed bag. Women's organisations believe that
a good opportunity to have women-friendly laws was lost in the male-dominated
setup. "While it is a move in the right direction, the language is still
archaic, dwelling upon terms like 'outraging the modesty of a woman'.
Ultimately, the tone is still how a woman should behave," says Sonya Gill,
Maharashtra president of the All India Democratic Women's Association. They had
also campaigned for treating rape of a low caste woman by a higher caste man as
aggravated assault and wanted "aggravated assault" to include people in social,
economic and political dominance.
Youth organisations feel that not recognising the reality that teens indulge in
non-marital sex does not wish it away. "Laws should punish the crime, not
create a moral framework for people," says Sadani.
A please-all law is never a possibility. Yet, notwithstanding the dilutions and
omissions, there is unanimity that the bill is a move in the positive
direction. Rape leading to death or permanent vegetative state of the victim
comes with a death penalty now. Repeat offences are non-bailable, and the
minimum punishment for gangrape is 20 years in jail. In cases where sexual
intercourse by offender has been proved, if the woman says it was without
consent, the court shall presume there was no consent. Acid attacks are
recognised as a sexual crime, as is even the intent to disrobe. Repeated cases
of stalking and voyeurism will attract a jail term for up to 7 years. A
day-to-day trial is mandatory, unless the court specifies the need for
adjournment. And for all those who blame women for inviting trouble, the law
now makes clear what the Supreme Court had emphasised through several
judgments: that a woman's past sexual history cannot be brought up against her
in the trial.
Ultimately, a law is only as potent as its enforcers are. "Legislation is
anyway the cheaper and easier way out. It does not necessarily ensure safety
for women. Only a safer infrastructure in the public domain, like good public
transport, better policing and proper lighting, which encourage women to go
out, will ensure safety. That, however, costs money," says Praveena Kodoth,
associate professor at Thiruvananthapuram's Centre for Development Studies.
The age of consent for sex till 2012 was 16 and no one seemed to have bothered
much about how it was kept 2 years below the age of marriage.
(source: Harish Sadani, Men Against Violence and Abuse----Manaramaonline)
SINGAPORE:
Teenager had drugs worth over S$87,000
A Malaysian teenager was caught on Saturday for allegedly trying to smuggle
more than 1kg of drugs, including heroin, into Singapore.
If convicted, the unnamed 19-year-old could face the death penalty.
In a statement, the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) said the Malaysian was
arrested after 3 bundles of drugs worth over S$87,000 were seized from his
Malaysia-registered motorcycle during a routine check at the Woodlands
Checkpoint at about 5.25am that day.
CNB officers noticed that the fuel tank of the teenager's motorcycle was
missing a screw and, after checks, found 3 bundles hidden under the fuel tank
compartment.
2 of the bundles contained about 745g of heroin - almost 50 times over the
mandatory death penalty threshold of 15g - while the other had 279g of
cannabis.
The teenager was arrested and is currently under investigation.
(source: Today ONline)
PHILIPPINES/MALAYSIA:
DFA awaits Malaysian report on Filipinos facing terrorist raps
The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) is now awaiting the full report from
the Philippine Embassy in Kuala Lumpur regarding the status of the eight
Filipinos detained in Sabah who have been charged with terrorism-related
offenses for their participation in the standoff between Malaysian forces and
the followers of the Sultanate of Sulu.
According to DFA Spokesperson Raul Hernandez, the report, which will be
submitted 1st to the office of President Benigno Aquino III, will come
following the recent visit of a consular team from the Philippine Embassy to
the eight Filipinos who are under the custody of Malaysian authorities.
Based on a report last week by Philippine Ambassador to Malaysia J. Eduardo
Malaya, the Embassy team, led by First Secretary and Consul Antonina
Mendoza-Oblena and Director Renato Villa, talked to the 8 individuals at the
prison facility in Tawau and inquired about their conditions.
They also asked about the places of origin and respective families of the
accused, some of whom face charges that could carry the death penalty.
The 8 men facing criminal charges were identified as Atik Hussin Bin Abu Bakar,
Basad H. Manuel, Habil Bin Suhaili, Holland Bin Kalbi, Thimhar Hadil Suhaili,
Lin Bin Mad Salleh, Kadir Bin Uyung and Lating Bin Tiong.
The consular jail visit was conducted after arrangements were made with the
Malaysian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Attorney General's Chambers and
Tawau prison officials.
No other details were made available due to the sensitivity of the cases.
Nevertheless, Hernandez said they are currently looking for legal
representation to help the Filipinos in their defense since the next hearing
has been scheduled on April 12.
The 8 Filipinos were charged last month before a Magistrate's Court in Sabah
for violating 2 articles in Malaysia's Penal Code: Section 122 (waging war
against the King); and Section 130 KA (terrorism).
While Section 130 KA (terrorism) calls for a jail term of up to 30 years,
Section 121 (waging war against the King) can fetch the death penalty.
(source: Manila Bulletin)
EGYPT:
3 faces of Egypt
Gone are the days when Egypt was a state of the law. Law is the sanctuary that
cannot be divided. Nevertheless, Egypt has lately turned to wear 3 conflicting
faces, notes Mohammed Aly Ibrahim.
Gone are the days when Egypt was a state of the law. Law is the sanctuary that
cannot be divided. Nevertheless, Egypt has lately turned to wear three
conflicting faces. The first is that of the lynch law known here as the
"haraba" or the Islamic law which helps to deter theft and murder. According to
such law, execution in public will be the penalty for murder. As for thieves,
the punishment will be cutting off one arm and one leg from the opposite side
of the criminal body if the thug proves guilty of robbery. But if the robbery
is mixed with murder, the thief will receive death penalty.
People should know that Islam does not allow individuals to carry out the
haraba as it is restricted only to the ruler. Islam also necessitates that
haraba should not be applied unless social welfare, justice and good income are
available to everyone. 2 thieves abducted a 5 year old girl from her small
village near Tanta, seeking ransom from her wealthy parents. To their bad luck
they were caught by the villagers who hanged them upside down and flogged both
severely. Almost a thousand of angry peasants conducted the punishment
cheerfully. They chanted and cheered during the haraba procedures, banning
ambulance cars to rescue the 2 kidnappers. Naturally, the 2 criminals died of
torture and thirst. Astonishingly, the security chief of Tanta could not take
any actions against the executioners as the whole village took part in the
penalty as he claimed.
True the conduct of kidnapping a child is disgusting but the punishment should
be left to judicial authorities and police.
The 2nd face of Egypt appeared in the Cairo district of Shobra, where a brutal
battle took place between 2 families .The bloody clashes resulted in burning 70
cars, destroying 100 shops, looting 6 houses and killing and wounding 94
people.
The barbarian confrontation took place when a son of a Salafi leader shot dead
another young man after a dispute in a street soccer match. The lynch law
showed its ugly face again when the Salafi father refused to hand over his
criminal boy to police to stand trial. He thought that his belonging to Islamic
forces immune him from justice. The Salafi family exchanged fire with police
forces who were forced to storm into the house and arrest father and son.
Instantly, the Islamic media and papers criticized the arrest as inhuman .
The Islamic forces forgot all their past history of brutality against their
opponents when they beat, kidnapped and tortured them in many an occasion.
The third face is that of police who were impotent to take actions in haraba
execution in Tanta, violence around the presidential palace ,Tahrir square ,
near 5 stars hotels in Nile Corniche and finally at Almoqatem headquarter of
Muslim Brotherhood. The police who absented themselves in previous incidents
were astonishingly present to arrest Ahmed Qaddaf Al Dam, the Libyan politician
who also enjoys an Egyptian nationality. Egypt's law bans to hand over any of
its citizen to another country as long as he can stand trial here. Libyan
sources disclosed that the speedy arrest of the Libyan politician and his
handover to Tripoli was part of a deal with Egypt for not expelling 3million
Egyptian workers from Libya. Also they promised to pour Libyan investments in
Egypt. Accordingly, our police move and refrain upon orders, not relying on law
and discipline.
Actually this is not the Egypt where I lived in for 60 years. The lynch law is
giving the state institutions and laws a long vacation.
(source: Middle East Online; Mohammed Aly Ibrahim is the former editor of both
Al Goumhoria and The Egyptian Gazette newspapers)
UNITED ARAB ENMIRATES:
'Djinn' possessed Wadeema, says father; Criticises 'unjust proceedings' of his
case
The father, who was awarded a death penalty for causing the death of his
daughter Wadeema and torturing the other daughter and causing her 10 %
permanent disability, claimed before the Court of Appeal that his daughter was
possessed by a 'djin'.
He also claimed that statements had been ignored by the Prosecution and the
lower Court.
The Dubai Criminal Court of First Instance awarded HSJ, 29, security
supervisor, death penalty for confining and causing the death of his 8-year old
daughter and torturing his other 7-year old daughter Mira, with the help of his
mistress AMA, 27. She was awarded life in jail by the same Court in February.
The 2 convicts pleaded not guilty before the Appeal Court and denied the
accusation of ill-treating the 2 sisters, torturing them, and confining them in
the washroom without food, and keeping them locked in the flat for 6 months.
The father asked the presiding judge Mahmoud Fahmi Sultan for permission to
address the Court. The judge permitted him and he went on talking in a tense
way blaming the lower court and the prosecution for ignoring statements and
testimonies and exaggerating what had happened describing the alignment sheet
and the Court's hearings as a scene fit to be a movie.
"Wadeema was possessed by Jinni...her younger sister realised that she had a
man's voice when she talked...I told that to the Prosecutors but they made fun
of me," the father told the Court.
However, the convict admitted that his mistress burnt the younger girl but
insisted that it was only once. He cast the accusation of burning the 2 girls
on his ex-wife, the mother of the 2 girls, when they were in her custody.
He told the jury that he loved his daughters and presented the court with their
pictures when he took them to hotels and public places as proof that he took
good care of them.
"Mira told my brother that I loved them and treated them well and did not hurt
them at all and my brother admitted that in his testimony. I wonder why the
court did not take his statement into consideration and why Mira's love
statement turned later into hatred as she expressed in a YouTube asking for a
just punishment. There is no child on the Earth of her age who knows what just
punishment means," he said implying to someone influenced the little girl and
changed her love into hatred.
The convict accused investigators of lying under oath before the lower Court.
He told the Appeal Court that investigators claimed the house was not valid for
human living and that the 2 girls were not provided with care. "How come they
did not mention the good food...the nuts...the cake and the sweets? Not
everything was rotten as they said.
"He also denied the accusation that he caused permanent disability to Mira
saying that when she got injured, he rushed her to the hospital. He blamed the
doctors for failing to fix the cast properly to her arm.
He also claimed that the forensic examiner's statement was full of
contradictions.
Defending his mistress, who had admitted to the accusations before the lower
Court, HJS said that her confession was due to the impact of pregnancy on her
emotions.
"Consult any doctor who would confirm that pregnancy affects a pregnant woman's
emotional state...she was suffering when she made confession before
investigators and the lower court," he said.
In his opinion, the affirmative witnesses made inconsistent testimonies before
the lower Court.
The Court adjourned the case until April 14 for lawyers to submit their
defence.
(source: emirates 247)
BRUNEI:
Death For Debasing Islam
Death penalty will be imposed on those who commit 'Irtidad' or 'Riddah' crimes.
'Irtidad' or 'Riddah' crime is an act committed or word uttered, in any way or
any means, by a Muslim who is Mukallaf, where the act or word in accordance
with the Syariah Law violates or contradicts the Islamic faith, provided that
the act is done or spoken with an intention, and freely without any coercion by
anyone or by circumstances.
The State Mufti, Pehin Datu Seri Maharaja Dato Paduka Seri Setia (Dr) Ustaz
Haji Awang Abdul Aziz bin Juned, in a dawn lecture yesterday, held at Kampong
Lambak Mosque in Jalan Pasir Berakas, stressed this.
The State Mufti explained that illegal acts or words contrary to the Islamic
faith are many, but generally it is anything that relates to rejecting the
basic knowledge that must be known and embraced by every Muslim, such as the
Islamic Pillars, Pillars of Faith, and so on.
Relating to the abovementioned act, the State Mufti said, "We have to be
careful in what we do or say."
The State Mufti gave an example of a Muslim, who rejects the Pillars of Islam,
declares himself as a God or prophet (proven by himself declaring by oath), or
declaring others as God or prophet (proven by reciting Syahadah witnessed by at
least 2 persons), and when the court is satisfied with regard to the
requirements of Tazkiahasy-Syuhud, the person is considered to have committed
an 'Irtidad' offence and upon conviction is punishable by death.
Such matters, the State Mufti said, have happened in the past and the present
and it is mentioned by people as deviant teachings. Anything that is said by
such people means apostasy (Murtad) in Islam.
The State Mufti continued by giving other examples such as denying verses in
the Quran or the hadith, or matters required with ijma', and explained that
when a Muslim insults any of the verses of the Quran or hadith, or deny the
hadith as a source or authority (hujjiah) in the Muslim faith, or deny
obligatory matters in accordance to ijma', and if it is proved by an oath
recited by the person, or proven by reciting Syahadah witnessed by at least two
persons, and if the court is satisfied with regard to the requirements of
Tazkiahasy-Syuhud, that person is considered to have committed an 'Irtidad'
offence and upon conviction is also punishable by death.
"Sometimes people do 'Irtidad' without an intention due to them being
uninformed or ignorant, and thus turn down or reject hadith as law," the State
Mufti explained.
For example, a person has said that in the Quran, there is no mention of
stoning for those who commit adultery, and questions why there is an act for
this law? Based on logic, this may appear as correct, but logic itself is not
enough, as we need to have knowledge.
"If proper knowledge is acquired, the formulation of an act of stoning
adulterers will be accepted as the Prophet had mentioned and implemented this,"
asserted the State Mufti.
He also stressed on the hadiths brought by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who is
incomparable to human beings. "The words from the Prophet have revelation
status and we need to know some of the many things that are not mentioned in
the Quran but detailed by hadith, which became law and worshipped."
The State Mufti added more examples by stating that the Quran only mentions
"perform prayers", but the guidance on how to perform the 5 times daily prayers
are not mentioned. This is where the Prophet taught and demonstrated how to
perform prayers from his sabda, "Sembahyanglah Kamu sebagaimana kamu melihat
aku sembahyang" (Follow my way of performing the prayer). This is the role of
hadith.
Ijma' has stated death penalty for the offence of 'Irtidad' and 'Riddah' based
on hadith. The State Mufti pointed out the process of execution will run as
follows: while the offender has been convicted and sentenced and before the
sentence is carried out, the court shall order the offender detained for a
certain period to be exposed to religion in education and told to repent.
If the offender repents, the court after affirming his/her repentance, will
release the offender; but if the offender does not wish to repent and still
chooses 'Irtidad' or 'Riddah', and the court is satisfied that the offender
will not repent, then the death penalty will be imposed. The court will issue
an order for the offender's wealth, received after making an offence, to be
confiscated and held by Baitulmal, but if the offender chooses to repent,
before or after being charged, the charges will be struck out and the wealth
returned. Any offender who is married and found guilty, the court will
'memfasakhkan' (declare an end) the marriage according to Syariah Law.
(source: Brudirect.com)
KUWAIT----executions
Kuwait: 1st executions in 5 years; Saudi, Pakistani and bidoon in 1st
executions since May 2007
Kuwaiti authorities on Monday morning executed 3 men sentenced to death in
separate murder cases.
The Pakistani, Saudi and Bidoon (stateless resident) were executed in the
Central Prison at 8am in the presence of the public prosecutor and delegates
from the justice and interior ministries, Al Watan site reported.
Each of the 3 men was allowed a final visit by their families before they were
kept separately in different rooms prior to the execution, it said.
The Saudi, identified by local daily Al Rai as Faisal Al Utaibi, was sentenced
to die after he was found guilty of deliberately killing his friend while the
Pakistani, Pervez Ghulam, was executed for strangling a couple to death.
The stateless resident, Dhaher Al Utaibi, was sentenced to death for killing
his wife, son and daughter and attempting to kill another daughter. He
reportedly claimed he was the Awaited Mahdi, the 12th Imam in Shiite belief,
expected to emerge from hiding and appear at the world's end to establish a
reign of peace and righteousness.
News about the executions on Sunday triggered a wave of comments on the
internet, mostly supporting the death penalty.
However, allegations that the executions would be carried out live on Kuwait
Television were strongly denied by the information ministry.
Mohammad Al Duaij, the head of the executive prosecution, said that the
executions were endorsed by the Emir last week after the court of cassation
upheld the death sentence against each of the murderers.
"The April 1 date was selected by the public prosecutor," he said, according to
Al Rai.
He attributed the presence of journalists at the hanging to help deter the
occurrence of crimes.
"There are around 48 people sentenced to the death penalty in Kuwait who have
used up all their recourses. They are now on death row, but we are waiting for
the endorsement of the Emir," he said.
The last execution in Kuwait was carried out in May 2007.
(source: Gulf News)
*********************
Kuwait hangs 3, including Pakistani, in 1st executions since 2007
Authorities in Kuwait on Monday hanged 3 convicted murderers in the 1st
executions in the Gulf state since May 2007, the ministry of justice said.
The men, a Pakistani, a Saudi and a stateless Arab, were hanged at the central
jail, west of the capital Kuwait City, in front of judicial and security
officials, the ministry said.
The Pakistani was convicted of killing a Kuwaiti couple and the Saudi of
murdering a compatriot.
The stateless Arab was hanged for killing his wife and 5 children after
claiming he was a long-awaited imam.
Shia Muslims rever Islam's 12th imam, Mohammad Al-Mahdi, who disappeared from
the earth in the 10th century and is said to be due to return to save mankind.
Kuwait had 6 years ago stopped executing convicts sentenced to death without
providing an explanation.
The local Al-Sabas daily reported Monday that at least another 44 people are on
death row.
They include 2 members of the Al-Sabah ruling family convicted over drugs
trafficking and murder, and a woman who set a wedding tent ablaze in 2009
killing 57 people.
Kuwait has executed a total of 69 men and 3 foreign women since it introduced
the death penalty in mid-1960. Most of those condemned have been convicted
murderers or drug traffickers.
(source: Agence France-Presse)
_______________________________________________
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
