Sept. 21
BANGLADESH:
Hang convicted war criminals by Dec 16 Demands Gonojagoron Mancha
All the convicted war criminals must be executed before the upcoming Victory
Day on December 16, the Gonojagoron Mancha activists demanded yesterday.
The anti-war criminal campaigners also urged the government to ban
Jamaat-e-Islami as a terrorist organisation so that it cannot create anarchy
ahead of the next general election.
Addressing a rally at the capital's Shahbagh, war crimes researcher Shahriar
Kabir said, "Jamaat could be banned for its anti-state activities
administratively under the anti-terrorism act."
Quoting terrorism expert Dr Irfan Al Alawi, he added, "The king of Saudi Arabia
has allocated Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt and Jamaat-e-Islami 50 billion pounds
to strengthen their global network with a focus on South Asia."
Imran H Sarker, convener of Gonojagoron Mancha, which seeks the death penalty
for all war criminals, demanded immediate arrest of those who have attacked
their co-campaigners recently.
Expressing his determination, Bangladesh Chhatra Moitri president Bappaditya
Basu said, "We must not go back home until the war criminals are hanged and
Jamaat is banned."
(source: The Daily Star)
MALAYSIA:
Man charged with murder, attempted murder and drug trafficking in Ipoh
A man was charged with murder, two counts of attempted murder and drug
trafficking at separate courts here today. In a Magistrate Court, Lee Meng
Boon, 35, was charged with the murder of Jasrafveendeerjeet Singh, 25.
He was alleged to have committed the offence in front of Sun Heng restaurant at
No.350, Lebuh 5, in Kg Simee at around 10.15 pm on July 28.
However, no plea was recorded after the charge was read to him before
Magistrate Nur Melati Diana Abdul Wahab.
The offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code carries a mandatory death
sentence, upon conviction.
In a Sessions Court, Lee pleaded not guilty to attempting to murder Sarbjit
Singh, 28, and Kok Loo Kong, 55, also in front of Sun Heng restaurant at
No.350, Lebuh 5, in Kg Simee at around 10.15 pm on July 28.
He was charged under Section 307 of the Penal Code which carries a maximum jail
term of 10 years, and fine, upon conviction.
In another Magistrate Court, Lee was also accused of trafficking 2,973gm of
Eramin Five at No 27, Medan Bercham Selatan 4, Taman Syukor, here at 12.35 am
on Aug 24.
He was charged together with Quek Kar Loong, 34, Aw Chee Seng, 45, and Rusli
Deraman, 52, under Section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, which also
carries the mandatory death penalty upon conviction.
Nov 20 is set for remention of all cases.
(source: mysinchew.com)
GLOBAL:
GLOBAL FAITHS: Muslim law decrees death for conversion
Most non-Muslims are aware of the Muslim law that says a Muslim who converts to
another faith or religion is subject to the death penalty. To most non-Muslims
this sounds like a harsh and unreasonable law. Where in the world did it come
from?
Its roots are in the experience of Muhammad himself in the very origin of
Islam. We may recall that Muhammad grew up and lived in Mecca when he began
receiving revelations and began proclaiming them in Mecca, for which Meccans
began persecuting him. When Muhammad got an invitation to come to Medina and
was welcomed there as a prophet, Meccans felt threatened and attacked Medina. 4
battles ensued between Mecca and Medina, of which Muhammad and Medina won the
decisive 2, and in the end Muhammad rode in triumph into Mecca to do worship at
the Ka'aba and re-consecrate it to the worship of the one true God.
In the seesaw battles between Mecca and Medina some Meccans professed
submission to Islam (Islam means submission) when the victory seemed to be
going Muhammad's way. But they recanted when victory seemed to be going Mecca's
way.
It was about these waffling hypocrites that Muhammad said, "Kill them." And it
was these words directed at hypocrites that Muslim writers of Islam's law codes
used 200 years later to write the law that even someone who ever so sincerely
converts from Islam to another faith is an apostate and should be executed.
To kill someone Islam would call an apostate strikes some non-Muslims as
inconsistent with other principles or articles of faith in Islam itself. For
example, a famous and often-quoted verse in the 4th Sura of the Qur'an says,
"There is no compulsion in religion." Is the threat of the sentence of death
not a compulsion? Then too, Muslim apologists argue that Islam is a rational
faith, implying that Muslims hold to their faith because of rational persuasion
rather than because of the fear of death.
Although some people who have converted from Islam to another faith have been
executed, it must be admitted that most of those who do convert to another
faith have not. The reason for this may be that most such conversions take
place in non-Muslim societies in the Western world, where the law protects
freedom of religion. In such societies the situation may in a sense be
reversed. There may be a death penalty for murder of someone who follows
Islamic law in killing another person for what his religion calls apostasy.
But even in predominantly Muslim societies, where not many people might leave
Islam, the death penalty is rarely carried out on those who do, maybe because
Muslims themselves have reservations about it. Most conversions would be to
Christianity, and Christians, after all, are "people of the book," who are
"dhimmis," that is, to be "protected" by Muslims.
For many years Christianity has sent missionaries to predominantly Muslims
countries, and they have always bumped into this obstacle in their work - a law
that threatens death for anyone who converts from Islam to Christianity.
Sometimes converts emigrate. Sometimes they remain secret believers. Sometimes
they develop a hybrid faith that allows them to remain Muslims with a special
devotion to Jesus and a Jesus-inspired reinterpretation of their Muslim faith.
Christianity itself has an Old Testament that contains many gruesome death
penalties, but Christianity recognizes a Jesus whose teaching has brought a new
understanding of God's law that leaves these Old Testament codes behind. Some
people hope that such a "New Testament" era might come to Islam too.
(source: Goshen News)
INDONESIA:
247 Indonesians abroad under threat of death penalty----38 Indonesians facing
death penalty in Saudi Arabia, official
Some 247 Indonesians working abroad have been sentenced to die after being
convicted of crimes they allegedly committed, said Khrisna Jaelani from the
Foreign Affairs Ministry`s Legal Aid and Protection of Indonesians Overseas
Unit.
"Of the total 247 people, 186 workers are facing the death penalty in Malaysia,
36 in Saudi Arabia, 11 in China and 1 in Singapore," he said here on Friday,
adding that Indonesian embassies in these countries are continuously providing
legal aid to its citizens.
Although the highest number of Indonesians facing the death penalty is in
Malaysia, it is Saudi Arabia which hosts the largest number of Indonesian
workers.
According to data from the Foreign Affairs Ministry, there are 4,227,383
Indonesians living abroad, with 2,536,429 employed in the informal sector.
Among the destinations for Indonesian workers are Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, the
Gulf countries, Singapore, Taiwan, and Hong Kong. Saudi Arabia employs the
largest number of Indonesian domestic workers, with 748,727.
Earlier, Anis Hidayah, Executive Director of Migrant Care, called on the
government to lobby Saudi Arabian authorities to prevent more Indonesian
workers from receiving the death penalty.
"A high level of lobbying must be conducted to save those workers from death.
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono must discuss this problem with the Saudi
Arabian king," she said.
Anis added that in protecting Indonesian workers convicted abroad, the
government must also understand what occurred. "Some of the workers have killed
their employers to protect themselves from abusive treatment," she said.
(source: ANTARA News)
IRAN:
Public executions continue in Iran under 'moderate' Rouhani
The wave of public executions is continuing in Iran with at least 32 hangings
in the past 2 weeks under the rule of the regime's new 'moderate' president
Hassan Rouhani.
On September 19, 2 prisoners were hanged, 1 in public and 1 in private, in the
city of Tonekabon. Another named only as Ahmad was hanged the same day in
Qazvin.
5 more, including 2 young men aged 18 and 23, were hanged in public in
Ghaemshahr, Ilam and Dehdasht, and another 5 were hanged in the cities of Karaj
and Qazvin.
Another 4 were hanged on September 18, in Rajai Shahr Prison, Karaj. One of
those was named as Fardin Mohammadi, 24, who was arrested 5 years ago and had
been held in a youth ward.
In fear of the rising protests and its definite overthrow, the befalling
clerical regime of Iran is resorting to various means of suppression inside
Iran including waves of mass executions in the streets of various cities across
the country. The regime also has in its agenda the massacre of the members of
the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK) in Camp Ashraf who
inspire the Iranian people and youth who are at their wits' end with this
regime. No doubt, this will only intensify the Iranian people's abhorrence
towards the broken regime of Khamenei.
(source: NCR-Iran)
INDIA:
The rapists' lawyer who shot his mouth off
Moments after a court in Delhi awarded the death penalty to the 4 men convicted
of the rape and murder of a 23-year-old paramedic student, a man emerged from
the court and in one statement to the media, managed to deflect attention from
the case that has shaken the nation, and from the issue of woman's safety, to
himself. Ajay Prakash Singh, the 41-year-old defence lawyer of 2 of the
rapists, Akshay Thakur and Vinay Sharma, has since gone on to become the symbol
of everything women in India are struggling against.
After the sentencing, in response to a question from the media, Singh declared:
"...if my daughter was having premarital sex and moving around at night with
her boyfriend, I would have burnt her alive. I would not have let this
situation happen. All parents should adopt such an attitude." As the television
cameras kept returning to him, the moral policeman in him kept getting bolder
and bolder. A few days later, he repeated the warning, "...If my daughter or my
sister (incidentally, he has both) spoils her character, I will definitely take
her to my farmhouse and in front of my entire family, pour petrol on her and
burn her. Main yeh himmat aur jazba rakhta hoon (I have the courage and the
conviction to do this)." In another interview, he advised women: "Wear decent
clothes. Treat your body as a treasure. The way you keep your treasure safe in
your purse, in a box, in an iron safe, in a locker, the same way protect your
body."
This must have been music to the ears of the country's self-appointed moral
police. Only this week, a young man was beheaded in a village in Rohtak by the
family of the woman he was in a relationship with. The woman too was lynched by
her family. Now, if such people land in trouble they know who to turn to for
legal advice. Here's a defence lawyer who on national television not just said
that the onus of a woman's security lies solely on her and her parents, he has
also gone to the extent of making his client's battle his own, and in the
process taken on even the judge. What more can an accused ask for in his
lawyer? And what better publicity can Singh hope for?
Singh, who holds a bachelor's degree from Meerut University and did law from
Shia College in Lucknow, has called the death penalty for the rapists a
"political judgement" - a statement for which he could invite a contempt
notice, says Surya Prakash Khatri, chairman of the Bar Council of Delhi which
has taken suo motu action against Singh for his "professional misconduct" and
"misogynistic statement", and issued a show-cause notice asking him to reply by
October 11.
Ask Singh about his statement and he says, coming across as mellower than he
does when the cameras are on: "It was in response to a disgusting and very
personal question." And what was that question? "Meri behen (my sister) I
cannot even repeat it," he replies. "You know how the electronic media is. They
used only part of what I said without giving the context it was said in." Even
so, how does he justify threatening, on television, his sister and his daughter
with appalling consequences if they did not lead an 'honourable" life? "This is
my mother's version. These are her notions of keeping the household
disciplined," he says. His decision to defend the rapists, too, he says was
made on his mother's aadesh (order) which he says he always follows.
Now, with the Delhi Bar Council unanimously deciding to issue a notice against
him, he says: "The bar council is my mother. I am its agyakari (obedient) son.
I will present all facts before it and honour its orders." Under the Advocate
Act, the maximum penalty is that a lawyer's licence to practise at the Bar can
be revoked, says Murari Tiwari, secretary, Bar Council of Delhi. Else, he can
be suspended for a particular period. "The statements Singh made defame the
legal profession," says Tiwari.
(source: Business Standard)
**************************************
Punjab and Haryana high court upholds death penalty for man who pushed his 6
relatives into Bhakra canal
Punjab and Haryana high court on Friday upheld the death sentence of a man who
had killed his 6 relatives by pushing them into Bhakra Canal.
The accused Khuswinder Singh had killed his 6 relatives by pushing them into
Bhakra canal in June 2012 for money, which the deceased family had obtained
from sale of their property.
Division bench comprising Justice S S Saron and Justice S P Banger of the HC
has passed these orders while deciding on the murder reference sent by district
and sessions judge Fatehagarh Sahib.
In March this year, the district and sessions judge Fatehagarh Sahib had
awarded death sentence to Khuswinder Singh holding him guilty of pushing 2
children among 6 members of a family, into Bhakra Canal.
40 years old accused Khuswinder Singh, a native of Suhavi village of district
Fatehagarh Sahib was a typist outside a local court and had planned to
eliminate the family of his relatives for Rs 37 lakh, which they had got on
sale of their property. He had taken the victim family to the Bhakra Canal near
village Mukandpur in pretext of performing a religious ceremony.
The victims included 70 years old Gurmail Singh (a retired Punjab police
constable), his wife Paramjit Kaur (60), their son Gurinder Singh (35), their
son-in-law Rupinder Singh (34) and Rupinder Singh's son Jaskirat (7) and
daughter Prabhsimran (6).Gurmail's son Gurinder Singh was an alcoholic and the
accused Khuswinder Singh had taken Gurmail and his family to canal on the
pretext that he knew a Godman who can cure their son by some prayers. Accused's
wife was niece of the deceased Gurmail Singh.
The matter came to the knowledge of the police only when deceased Gurmail's
daughter Jasmine (33) managed to survive and informed the police about the
incident.
(source: The Times of India)
********************
Don't Cheer Death Penalty, Vote for Change
Just over a week ago, cheers of triumph rang out at a Delhi courthouse where a
special fast-track court handed the death sentence to 4 men who on Dec. 16
gang-raped and murdered a 23-year-old student, who came to be known in India as
Nirbhaya, "fearless one."
It is, in my opinion, a just and appropriate sentence: one that sends a strong
message to would-be perpetrators of such horrific sex crimes against women in
India. But triumph?
We would do well to temper our response to the sentence as we consider the
context of this so-called legal success.
Let's not forget that the Nirbhaya tragedy was just the first of a string of
barbaric rapes in India that made global headlines this year. On Mar. 15, a
Swiss tourist was gang-raped while camping with her husband in Madhya Pradesh,
central India, the men responsible were given life sentences. On June 4, in
Himachal Pradesh, northern India, 3 Nepali men raped an American tourist. The
trial in the case is in its final stages. On Aug. 22, a young Indian
photojournalist was gang-raped in the presence of her male colleague, while on
assignment in Mumbai. Police have arrested 4 men and a juvenile in connection
with the case. And just over 2 weeks ago, also in Mumbai, a 4-year-old girl was
kidnapped from a playground, raped and left on the streets. A man has been
arrested in connection with the attack.
Tragically, the cases that make the news are only the tip of the iceberg. In
June, the Indian National Crimes and Records Bureau released their 2012 report,
which says that there were 24,923 cases of rape registered in the past year.
It is known that, while the reporting of rape cases has increased, the numbers
remain vastly understated for reasons ranging from victim intimidation to
inconsistencies in how crimes are categorized. A rape and murder for example,
such as the December case, would not show up in these rape statistics, as it
was recorded only as a murder, because that is categorized as a more serious
crime than rape.
Furthermore, there has been little progress in the number of criminal
convictions achieved. In 2012, more than 133,000 rape cases were pending in the
Indian criminal justice system. Of these cases, only 20,660 trials (or 15%)
were completed and just 6,031 convictions were achieved. The number of reported
rapes in India in the last decade has certainly increased, but the conviction
rate has flat-lined.
For the overwhelming majority of cases, there is no international press, no
fast track court, no justice.
The story gets worse. There's another kind of rape that we would rather not
talk about. Rape for money. Not to be confused with prostitution, we are
talking about children who are sold and held captive as sex slaves. In 2009,
police estimated that there were more than 1 million of them in India,
according to a CNN report.
Through my work with EmancipAction, an international NGO working in India to
fight child sex trafficking, we have learned that these children are raped up
to 20 times a day by adults who pay money to their criminal captors for the
pleasure. Our research indicates that their average age at the time of sale is
13.
Anyone still feel like cheering?
The truth is, it is going to take a lot more than one big announcement or death
sentence to keep India's women and children safe. The Indian government and
judiciary are in fact, quite good at announcements - it's implementation that
can be a problem.
We have heard much this week about the fact that, while some 477 criminals sit
on India's death row, only 3 have been executed in the last 18 years. In all
probability, the 4 convicted rapists will survive for years to come. The
proclamation of the death sentence will likely remain just that - a
proclamation.
There was an encouraging announcement made in the aftermath of the Dec. 16
attack. Finance Minister P. Chidambaram announced a 10 billion rupee (US $160
million) "Nirbhaya fund", designed to increase women's safety throughout India.
Nearly 7 months after the announcement, arguments continue over which ministry
should control the funds, and there remains a lack of clarity on how and when
the funds will be released. Until this month, according to local media reports,
not a rupee had been invested.
There have been a number of proposals announced: from a public transport GPS
system to a new women's bank. There has been no discussion about how these
proposals will be evaluated against the goal of increasing security for women,
or how the impact of the investments will be measured.
If India is to become a place of greater security and justice for women, it is
going to need to get serious about implementing and evaluating the good
decisions it manages to make. A case in point: Police reform. The national
discussion on police reform arguably began back in November 1977 when the
National Police Commission was formed to examine the role and performance of
the Indian force. More than 35 years later, after countless reports,
commissions and even Supreme Court rulings, it is clear that effective reform
has not taken place and the force continues to be riddled with problems. There
is room for much debate on the specifics of what reforms are needed, but some
basics are indisputable. For example, we simply need more officers. According
to the latest figures available, the ratio of police personnel in India is 130
for every 100,000 people - compared to the international norm of 270 per
100,000. In order to protect the population properly, we need to start by
almost doubling the size of the police force.
India is, similarly, far behind international norms on its judge to citizen
ratio, with just 15% the global average. In 2002, the Supreme Court made a wise
decision and ruled to move the judge to citizen ratio from 10.5 to 1 million
people to 50 for every 1 million people. Implementation eludes: According to a
report in The Times of India, the ratio has moved just 4 points in 10 years.
To its credit, the government promised in May to double the number of judges in
lower courts, where much of the backlog in cases resides, in the next 5 years.
It did not say what the current ratio is, nor did it provide details on its
strategy for growing the numbers.
Ultimately, to secure safety and justice for women, India needs more women at
the table of government, making the bold decisions and detailed, nuanced plans
that will ultimately change the culture of - and acceptable behavior in - this
male dominated country. Women are still massively under-represented in
Parliament with only 91 (11%) of nearly 800 seats in both houses. Changing this
will take the implementation of another good decision: The Women's
Representation bill - which would reserve 33% of all seats in India's national
Parliament, and all state assemblies for women. That bill, pending for some 17
years, was passed by the upper house in March 2010, and more than 3 years
later, still awaits confirmation by the lower house.
It is wonderful - and essential - that the discussion has begun about the
inexcusable sexual violence against women in India. But this spark, ignited by
our collective rage at the atrocities we are now discussing needs to fan into a
call for action. Implementation. Transparency. Accountability.
By May, the people of India will have vote in the 16th General Election of the
Lok Sabha. And for the 1st time in the history of free India, if the electorate
demands it, the issues of justice and the empowerment of women in India can be
a serious election topic. The people of India must demand that this country's
next leaders present clear, actionable plans to transform India from the worst
place to be a woman among G20 nations into a safer, more just and better home
for all.
There are some encouraging signs. In January, the ruling-Congress party adopted
a new slogan which translates to "First respect women, then build the nation."
This is a noble start. The party's president, Sonia Gandhi has expressed her
concerns about the issue publicly, saying that "discrimination against the girl
child and atrocities against women are a blot on our collective conscience."
She is right. But words are not enough. We need to know how each of the parties
intends to transform India into a nation where women are respected and
protected. We need plans. We need specific targets. We need data.
Voters should ask themselves, 'Which candidate has a plan for implementing
police reform? Who has a credible approach to grow the number of judges in our
courts in a sustainable manner? Which candidate will increase transparency and
let us watch where the money is spent and how the work is done? Who will
implement creative measures to attack corruption in the manner that Brazil has,
by making increasingly detailed government spending data instantly available to
all on its "Transparency Portal." Who among those wanting my vote will commit
to measuring and demonstrating change instead of just announcing it?'
If we are to begin to see real change for Indian women, the answers to these
questions need to be top of mind as voters make their decisions this spring. Of
course, if I were an Indian citizen with an average annual income of around
$1500. I might also be tempted to sell my vote for a rice cooker - or one of
the many other "incentives" that are offered by political parties in exchange
for support at the polls.
But I hope not. I hope I'd remember Nirbhaya - and the many others.
India, let's ensure that our collective rage at these horrors does not subside
- but instead, gets channeled into a country-wide call for action this election
season. Demand action, transparency and measurement. Then show up at the polls
- and vote like your life depends on it.
(source: Laura Entwistle is founder and chief executive of EmancipAction, a
non-profit, focused on ending the commercial sexual exploitation of children;
Wall Street Journal)
PHILIPPINES/SAUDI ARABIA:
Respect the Kingdom's laws, former death row prisoner tells Filipinos
An overseas Filipino worker (OFW) who was released from prison after 13 years
for killing a Saudi has advised his Filipino expatriates to always respect the
rules of their host countries.
Rodelio Celestino "Dondon" Lanuza, speaking to Saudi Gazette hours before
departing for the Philippines after he was released on Wednesday night, said he
killed his victim in self-defense.
The 38-year-old said the first 2 years in prison were among the most difficult
times of his life.
He said he still could not believe that he would spend his life in prison
because of an incident he never thought could happen.
Lanuza said he almost committed suicide when he stopped eating for a week.
"I almost lost hope, especially when the family of the person I killed refused
to forgive me and insisted on my death penalty," said Lanuza.
Eventually, the family forgave him, but Lanuza said he regretted the incident
that almost ruined his life and hoped it was not too late for him to start his
life again.
Lanuza said he would use his experience to encourage fellow OFWs to respect the
Kingdom's laws, tradition and culture and not to engage in any illegal
activity.
Lanuza also expressed gratitude to those who he said supported him throughout
his 13 years in prison.
He said: "I am very grateful to Allah that He made me the person that He wants
me to be, for giving me a new lease of life, for sending me all the people I
need to support me.
"I'm very grateful to the benevolent Saudi King (Custodian of the Two Holy
Mosques King Abdullah) for answering our plea, to the Saudi Reconciliation
Committee (SRC) for their hard work and dedication in saving me from execution
and securing my release.
"I thank the jail management who treated me fairly and to the family of the
person I accidentally killed, may Allah bless your family for your forgiveness.
"I know my words will never be enough to express how grateful I am. I will
forever be indebted to all of you."
Lanuza also thanked community groups Migrante and Tau Gamma Phi, former
Filipino ambassador Antonio Villamor, US-based Filipino business leader Loida
Nicolas-Lewis, other Filipino philanthropists and non-government organizations,
his case officer Jerome Friaz from the Philippine Embassy in Riyadh and current
Ambassador Ezzedin Tago for their help in securing his release.
Lanuza left the Kingdom on Wednesday night on an Etihad Airways flight.
(source: Saudi Gazette)
PAKISTAN:
Pakistani Clerics Reportedly Reverse Course On DNA Evidence In Rape Cases
Rape cases are notoriously hard to prosecute in Pakistan. Under current law,
victims must produce 4 witnesses -- all male, adult, and pious -- to bring rape
allegations to trial. Forensic evidence, such as DNA samples, is considered
only circumstantial.
But that could all change soon if, as expected, a powerful Islamic body in
Pakistan agrees to allow DNA to be introduced as primary evidence in rape
trials. The Council of Islamic Ideology, the country's top Islamic guidance
body, on September 20 issued a press release saying it has made its decision
and will publicly announce the change on September 23. The influential
council's recommendation will be forwarded to the government, which would then
decide whether to implement it.
The decision would mark a significant shift. In May, the council ruled that the
current legislation -- inspired by Shari'a law -- could not be altered because
it had its origins in Islam's holy book, the Koran.
Allama Tahir Mehmood Ashrafi, who sits on the 20-member council, confirmed that
the body has reversed its decision, and prefers to leave it to the courts to
decide whether DNA can be used as primary evidence in a rape trial.
"DNA is not un-Islamic or against Shari'a law," Ashrafi told RFE/RL. "We are
saying that if a judge thinks DNA is necessary as evidence in a certain rape
case, then then it's up to the judge to accept it as admissible evidence or
not."
'Scientific Basis'
Pakistan's "Express Tribune" on September 20 quotes an unidentified member of
the Islamic council as saying that "the discussion on DNA testing was
successful and we were unanimous on the issue that DNA tests can be presented
as evidence in rape cases coupled with other circumstances of the crime."
Ali Dayan Hasan, the Pakistan director at Human Rights Watch, has welcomed what
he says is a long-overdue decision.
"It's a positive development, because it's a move forward by the council," says
Hasan. "It will certainly help in providing a scientific basis for rape
convictions. The government is now expected to legislate in light of the
council's recommendation."
The council's May 2013 decision to uphold the current Shari'a-inspired law --
enacted in 1979 by then-military ruler Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq -- prompted fierce
criticism from human rights groups.
Rights groups have said the current law is one of the main reasons for the low
rate of rape convictions in Pakistan. Hasan says only around 4 % of rape cases
taken to court result in a conviction.
But he says the council has been under mounting pressure to change course amid
public outrage over a number of high-profile rape incidents involving minors,
including that of a 5-year-old girl in the city of Lahore earlier this month.
"These [cases] have created a lot of shock within society," he says. "The
debate concerning poor conviction rates and the social revulsion over [the lack
of action] has, I think, contributed to the council looking at ways in which
rape convictions can be made more sound."
Backpedaling?
But even as Pakistan appeared to take a step forward on the prosecution of rape
cases, it also took a half-step back, advising the government to reexamine a
key piece of legislation, the 2006 Protection of Women Act.
That legislation was meant to amend the heavily criticized Hudood Ordinance
laws, which dictated the punishment meted out for rape and adultery. The
ordinance laws, passed in 1979, led to the imprisonment of thousands of rape
victims who were unable to prove they had been assaulted.
The council now says certain clauses of the Protection of Women Act undermine
Islamic values. Activists fear that if the government opts to throw out the
legislation, rape victims may once again find themselves in a situation where
seeking justice for a crime may end with them, and not the perpetrators, behind
bars.
Looking at the apparent contradictions in the council's dual recommendations,
Zohra Yusuf, who chairs the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, says
successive governments have repeatedly failed to take on the challenge of
changing laws regarding the prosecution of rape. The fear of provoking a
backlash within a deeply conservative Islamic society, she says, was simply too
great.
"Unfortunately, governments have found it expedient to make alliances with
religious parties because they are afraid of their street power," she says.
"There really haven't been any meaningful changes."
The council this week also discussed amendments to the Pakistan's controversial
blasphemy laws. Among the proposals was one to introduce the death penalty for
people convicted of making false accusations.
Currently, Pakistanis convicted of blasphemy -- in most cases on the basis of
flimsy evidence -- are subject to a death sentence. Critics of the laws say the
accusations are often used to settle personal vendettas.
Council member Ashrafi admits that people have abused blasphemy laws, but said
the council is not recommending changes to those laws.
(source: Radio Free Europe//Radio Liberty)
***************************
VIEW : To kill or not to kill - Syed Mansoor Hussain; In a country like
Pakistan, an all out fight against a homegrown enemy could easily upend the
nascent democratic system
As an old-fashioned 'make love not war' type liberal, I am opposed to all forms
of violence. I am also instinctively opposed to the death penalty. Being
against the death penalty is an easy point of view to maintain since lifetime
incarceration and solitary confinement are quite horrific as far as punishments
are concerned. I am not alone in this belief since most western countries have
outlawed the death penalty, the major notable exception of course being the US.
However, in many states even in the US, there exists a moratorium on actual
execution of criminals. Interestingly, in Pakistan, even though the death
penalty is legal, there have been no executions recently, a policy that the new
government has decided to continue. The reason for that though might not be
quite the same as in the past.
However, violence exists and as such it is necessary to deal with it. The
reasons why I wish to ruminate on this are twofold. First is the recent
decision made by the All Parties Conference (APC) to 'negotiate' with the
terrorists that for years have indiscriminately killed thousands of civilians
and security personnel in ruthless attacks. Second, of course, is the recent
spate of sexual assaults on small children. Here not in jest but overwhelmed by
a sense of sadness, I could suggest to our 'leaders' that they should perhaps
also try and negotiate with the vicious, violent and sadistic sexual criminals.
After all, our newly elected 'political leaders' keep insisting that the
terrorist are from us and of us, but then perhaps they should also be reminded
that so are the sexual predators.
Frankly, it is easier for me to feel some responsibility for the sexual
predators. Here again, my liberal attitudes are to blame. I believe that
nurture is more important than nature when it comes to how we behave as
individuals; it is, therefore, possible for me to accept that environmental
factors lead people to certain types of behaviour, however heinous these might
be. No, this does not mean that we as a society should condone such behaviour
but rather that we should go through some introspection on why such things
happen. There will always be individuals with serious psychological problems
who commit aberrant acts that just cannot be understood or even rationalised by
normal people. But even so, when we punish such people for the crimes they
commit, we must also accept that they are either just 'sick' or else driven to
their reprehensible actions, in some way, by the society they live in.
At this point, some of my readers might wish to ask me the question that have
we not also driven the terrorists to what they have become? Here, what we
liberals are often accused of, called 'moral relativism', sort of comes to my
rescue. Some crimes are indeed worse than others. Killing a multitude in my
opinion is worse than killing an individual. A crime borne of enmity, passion
or lust that is directed against an individual is despicable but it is much
worse when violence is directed towards persons that are not known and when
their death, dismemberment and disfigurement are done on orders from 'above'
for a political purpose and as part of an 'organised' campaign. That is called
war.
And that is the question we as Pakistanis must confront. Are the terrorists at
war with Pakistan? The corollary being, are we then at war with the terrorists?
War leads to only 3 outcomes: victory, defeat, or an 'armistice', which leaves
the status quo intact. If the confrontation between the Pakistani state and the
terrorists is indeed a war, then which of the alternatives I presented above is
acceptable?
The 'enemy', and I hope that most Pakistanis will consider the terrorist
entities the enemy, want something. It is obvious that they want to replace the
existing political structure with a different political structure based on
their idiosyncratic religious ideas about government and society. And I also
presume that most Pakistanis don't want that. Therefore, we have a war between
2 'irreconcilable' points of view, and at the end, as I said above, either 1 of
these 2 points of view must prevail or else we will have to accept the present
situation. But then most Pakistanis will also accept that the present situation
is not acceptable. So then it is either victory or defeat.
And that brings me to the ultimate pacifist conundrum. Is any war justifiable?
Most ethicists and almost all major religions justify a 'defensive' war. But
'asymmetric' conflicts pose unique problems. The enemy is ill defined and is
often difficult to differentiate from the ordinary population. So, taking the
fight to the enemy poses the risk of exposing innocent civilians to violence
and making the insurgents more popular in their home bases. Worse, such
internal conflicts often produce a state of national paranoia where almost
anybody seems like an enemy since anybody could actually be the enemy. And this
state of national paranoia is often the precursor to the creation of a 'police
state'. Within mature democracies, a situation like this is unlikely since
built in constitutional guarantees eventually prevail. But in a country like
Pakistan, an all out fight against a homegrown enemy could easily upend the
nascent democratic system.
Personally, I am extremely pessimistic about the APC recommendation for
negotiations with the terrorists. This is for 2 major reasons. First, the
'enemy' is not a monolithic entity with an identifiable leadership that can be
directly engaged. Second, the fight is not about a particular political demand
that is amenable to a negotiated settlement. The way things stand, it seems
that eventually there will have to be an all out attempt to neutralise the
terrorists. And, from my perspective, such a conflict will inevitably lead to
the end of democracy in Pakistan and a return to a government run by the
security establishment.
(source: The Daily Times)
_______________________________________________
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
