Oct. 29
PAKISTAN:
Death penalty: Taliban fear or EU blackmail?
Nawaz government's continuing moratorium on "death penalty" is getting more and
more confusing. Public and media have still not understood what is happening?
Is it EU's blackmail stitched with its GSP-Plus or is this the fear of Taliban
who have threatened the ruling family? In order to show its determination to
fight the crime, government - only this month - has brought forward 2
ordinances in the space of just 11 days and the Protection of Pakistan
Ordinance 2013 does mention death penalty; but privately government officials
admit that given EU's arm twisting and the power of human right groups funded
by western countries, this continuing moratorium will now never be lifted.
"Death penalty: is a philosophical and moral debate that goes to the heart of a
community and state. By all means Pakistanis should have this debate and should
be able to form a mind. Should criminals be executed? What crimes warrant the
ultimate punishment? Should a state have the power to execute its citizens? Is
death penalty a deterrent? Why death penalty is not a deterrent when arrests,
fines, and other punishments are? What about our whole modern governance system
based on studied methods of incentives, disincentives and rewards? Is there a
credible research that distinguishes the deterrence value of capital punishment
from other punishments? Could that research - counterintuitive on the face of
it - suffer from cultural and other limitations? How do victims get closure?
How do we ensure that loved ones of the victims not take law into their own
hands? Why extra-juridical killings happen? How do we ensure that innocent are
not executed? Who should be pardoned? Should there be a concept of blood money?
Societies have argued, fought and debated these issues for decades if not
centuries and it has also dovetailed with the political, economic and social
conditions of the times, with the kind of challenges a society was facing.
Giving you a snapshot: China for instance saw a brief period of abolition in
8th century, Russian Bolsheviks banned death penalty in 1917; in modern Europe
Netherlands abolished capital punishment in peace times in 1878 but for wartime
in 1983. In UK, a European country of much relevance to Pakistan, Sir Samuel
Romilly had started the process of reduction in death penalty in 1808. But the
Royal Commission on Capital Punishment 1864-66 could not decide to abolish the
death penalty though it did away with public executions. In 1938 a
parliamentary bill was to be debated for an experimental five year suspension
but then the climate and feelings generated by the beginning of Second World
War made it impossible. In 1949, once Nuremburg trials were out of way, another
Royal Commission on Capital Punishment examined the matter but advised against
abolishment. Finally in 1965 a 5 year moratorium was placed on experimental
basis almost 160 years after Romilly had started to reform the punishment. In
almost every European country, abolishment followed a similar intense debate,
reform of the system and adjustment of the defense of life and property through
other parallel enactments.
Pakistanis - children of a lesser God - however, were not trusted with this
debate; they were not allowed to form their own mind. So in 2008, an indirectly
elected President - Asif Zardari - without any input from criminal justice
system, district managers, police officers, prosecutors, prison officials,
senior civil servants and judiciary, and without any debate in parliament,
placed a moratorium on death penalty. Under Article 45 of the constitution of
Pakistan, President had the power to pardon, reprieve, respite, remit, suspend
and commute sentences on case to case basis but could he suspend the whole
system, and a constitutional and religious provision forever? This question
becomes all the more important if we keep in mind that unlike the governors in
the US who are directly elected - with definite campaign commitments -
Pakistani president was an indirectly elected head of the state in a country
and political system that was not debating capital punishment; and someone - as
his critics point out with mixed indignation and relish - who was always
running away from law. It is widely believed that President Zardari took this
unusual decision because he was made to believe that this will help burnish his
moderate and liberal credentials across EU. Ironically, in his limited,
innocent, naive world view - and what may appear as a joke to serious students
of international relations - Pakistani President also saw EU as some sort of
balance and leverage against the US; in May 2012 for instance he collected all
EU Ambassadors - poor souls - in presidency on EU day ostensibly to send a
message to Washington before the Nato summit in Chicago. Americans could have
popped up champagne bottles to celebrate the Pakistani perception of the new
world order.
Nation states have to decide on policy prescriptions keeping in view their
peculiar circumstances and challenges; they have to take into consideration
their history, religion, public opinions and requirements of providing security
to families, businesses and property; Is not this what nations of Europe did
themselves, at every stage in their own history?
Look at Pakistan: In the 3 years between 2010-2012, around 41,000 murder FIR's
were registered; in the same time period more than 46,000 attempted murders,
around 60,000 cases of abduction, almost 400,000 crimes against property and
almost 1,000 cases of gang rape were registered. Police officers believe that
due to technical issues of computation, these gruesome figures still does not
include the mass victims of terrorism, and murder in Karachi is underreported.
Pakistan has a homicide rate of 7.6 as compared to 1 for China and Saudi Arabia
and 1.2 for UK. Is this a situation in which Pakistani governments and
bureaucracies can allow themselves to flirt and toddle with untested ideas? And
that too, without the application of their own independent mind? Is this fair?
Most EU diplomats have privately argued that abolishment of death penalty or
continuing moratorium is a not a condition for GSP-plus and they have merely
pointed out that a sudden flurry of executions in Pakistan can create an
unfriendly atmosphere in Brussels and member countries at this stage. But EU
missions need to come out more clearly on the issue. Flexing the muscles of
Pakistani governments, directly or through NGO's sponsored by the several
European government and other western organisations - against the interests and
judgments of Pakistani people defies the very basis of democracy. Pakistanis
need to decide for themselves and this needs a broad based process.
Nawaz government, cabinet ministers and top civil servants have to remember
that the first and the foremost responsibility of state and the elected
governments is to provide better governance, and ultimately all world -
including EU - will measure them on that yardstick. In 1979, the whole western
world - including the peaceniks of Europe - encouraged us to fight soviets in
Afghanistan by selling us false theories of "Next Domino". 40 years later, we
are paying the price and they lecture us to fix our realm. Isn???t this what
President Obama just did to PM Nawaz in Washington?
(source: The Nation)
GLOBAL:
An Eye for an Eye
"2 wrongs don't make a right."
These were the words emphatically asserted by my primary school teacher, after
I had reciprocated the behavior of a fellow classmate by aggressively tossing
the contents of my pencil case at him.
So frequently were those 6 words uttered in my vicinity, that it would hardly
be surprising if they were engrained deep within my brain. It is evident though
that others haven't heeded that same message.
The stationary hurling incident might have been trivial, but the failure to
adopt the '2 wrongs don't make a right' principle can be a matter of life and
death. In parts of the USA, India, China and Indonesia, 4 of the world's most
populous countries, the vile act of murder is punished with...you guessed it -
murder!
Not only does capital punishment disobey the most basic of human principles, it
also denies the most basic of human rights - the right to life. Just as my
school couldn't take away my right to attend on the grounds of my minor
misdemeanour, no state should be able to take away one's right to life on
grounds of murder.
Of course, rights need to occasionally be sacrificed as a means of punishment.
But the right to life should be ever-present, and even if it isn't, who's to
judge when, where, and for what reasons it can be taken away? Imagine the
thought of such a Draconian law existing in the UK - David Cameron and Boris
Johnson deciding who should face the death penalty over a bottle of Pinot Noir
and a Cornish pasty (David's favourite, of course).
I'm sure at Eton - as at my primary school - more often than not the bullies,
in spite of their rugged exterior, were fragile inside. And the same goes for
criminals. Those who choose to commit crimes are the people that need the most
help and support from society. In prison they have the opportunity to redeem
themselves, and learn their lessons. If we actively look to construct and
uphold societies that refuse to give its members a shot at retribution, then
this is a failing of those societies, and humanity as a whole.
On the other side of the coin is the argument that the threat of capital
punishment - just like the threat of the naughty step, of course - serves as a
deterrent to potential criminals. Whilst this might sound well and good, the
reality is in stark contrast. Statistics from the Death Penalty Information
Centre have actually shown that in the USA, murder rates were in fact higher in
those states that use the death penalty.
If we're going to get 'statty' about it, there are a fair few numbers that
would make any sensible man raise an eyebrow. In 2010, 130 Americans were
placed on death row, and released after compelling evidence of their innocence
had been dug up. If so many were wrongly accused, imagine how many innocent men
and women have been - and will be - killed for crimes that they haven't
committed. Enough to raise a 2nd eyebrow, I'd suspect.
Despite being cosigned to the realms of fiction and the big screen, 'The Life
of David Gale' provides a compelling example of the harm that an unfair
accusation can cause. Gale, who, rather ironically, spent most of life
protesting against capital punishment, was sentenced to death for alleged rape
and murder. By the time evidence of Gale's innocence had been uncovered, it was
too little too late, and an innocent man was dead. Gale's case might have been
fictional, but it would hardly surprise me if the capital punishment system has
taken a large number of innocent lives.
So, what's the point of the death penalty? Needless to say, it gives its
victims no prospect of retributivism, nor does it deter potential criminals any
more than a prison sentence and even where its victims are guilty, takes away
one's right to life. Perhaps those societies that enforce the death penalty
feel that it represents revenge for criminals? But as we know, 2 wrongs don't
make a right.
(source: Henry Clare, Palatinate Online)
HONG KONG:
Drugs worth S$600,000 seized
An international collaboration involving Sabah police and their Hong Kong
counterparts resulted in the arrests of 3 men and a woman and the seizure of
more than 6kg of suspected cocaine with an estimated street value of about
RM1.5mil (S$600,000).
1 of them was detained at the Kota Kinabalu International Airport (KKIA)
Terminal 2 before he boarded a 5.45am flight to Hong Kong on Saturday.
The 2 other men and a female companion were arrested upon their arrival on the
same flight in Hong Kong after police there were alerted by their Malaysian
counterparts.
All 4 were Malaysians and had arrived in Kota Kinabalu from Penang on Oct 25,
said Sabah Police Commissioner Datuk Hamza Taib.
Hamza said police, with the help of Malaysia Airports auxiliary police
personnel detained the 31-year-old man at the Terminal 2 departure hall and
upon checking his body, found 2 packets strapped to each of his thighs.
He said the total weight of the substances recovered from the man was 2.124kg
with a street value of RM500,000.
Also recovered from him was HK$1,000 (S$200) and 200 yuan (S$40).
Upon further investigations, Hamza said police discovered that the man's two
accomplices had checked in earlier for the same flight.
This prompted Sabah police to alert their Bukit Aman counterparts, who in turn
passed the information to the Hong Kong police.
He added that each of the men held in Hong Kong were also had 2 packets of
substances strapped to their legs.
Hamza said the man arrested at airport here had been detained under Section 39B
of the Dangerous Drugs Act which carries the mandatory death penalty upon
conviction.
Police are trying to determine the origin and destination of the drugs.
"We believe Sabah was being used as a transshipment point and those carrying
the drugs were mules," Hamza said.
(source: Asia One News)
BANGLADESH:
No Justice in Mass Trials for Mutineers; Murders and Atrocities Demand Credible
Investigation; Re-trial Needed
The government of Bangladesh should order a re-trial of 847 military personnel
accused of murder, sexual assault, and other atrocities during the 2009
Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) mutiny due to serious violations of fair trial
standards, Human Rights Watch said today. Bangladeshi authorities should
commission a thorough, independent review of both the BDR trials and verdicts,
including the impending October 30 verdict which may see the death penalty
imposed, and then initiate a more credible inquiry and prosecution process.
"Trying hundreds of people en masse in one giant courtroom, where the accused
have little or no access to lawyers is an affront to international legal
standards," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "The
authorities should instead immediately initiate a credible and fair trial to
get justice for the mutiny victims and their families."
The violations of fair trials standards include torture and other abuse while
in custody in order to extract confessions and statements. At least 47 suspects
have died in custody. In addition, BDR suspects have had limited access to
lawyers, and to knowledge of the charges and evidence against them. Human
Rights Watch has documented these abuses in both a 57-page report in July 2012,
as well as in numerous press releases.
On February 25 and 26, 2009, members of the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR), since
renamed the Bangladesh Border Guards, mutinied against their commanding
officers at the central Dhaka headquarters in Pilkhana Barracks. The mutiny,
believed to be triggered by longstanding grievances among the BDR's lower
ranks, led to the killing of 74 people including 57 army officers. A number of
women relatives of the officers suffered sexual assault. While it is crucial
that those responsible for the horrifying violence are brought to justice,
Human Rights Watch found that the trials in military and civilian courts did
not meet international fair trial standards.
The then-newly elected government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina negotiated a
settlement to end the mutiny. However, after the mutineers surrendered, the
authorities responded with mass arrests of more than 6,000 BDR personnel. BDR
battalion personnel were tried together, often several hundred at a time. Most
of these trials were held under the BDR's own laws, under which the highest
sentence is 7 years' imprisonment. However, the authorities prosecuted an
additional 847 BDR defendants under Bangladesh's criminal laws, which could
result in death sentences for some of the accused.
Family members of detainees and local media raised serious allegations of
torture and custodial deaths. Detainees were subjected to beatings, often on
the soles of their feet or palms of their hands, and to electric shocks. Some
victims described being hung upside down from the ceiling. Many of those who
survived the torture suffered long-term physical ailments, including kidney
failure and partial paralysis. Although prosecuting counsel told Human Rights
Watch that evidence obtained under torture would not be used at trial, defense
counsel said these statements were in fact part of the evidence produced in
court against their clients.
Instead of probing the allegations of serious violations of human rights and
due process, the government has dismissed the concerns. Human Rights Watch
calls on the Bangladeshi authorities to establish an independent task force
with sufficient expertise, authority, and resources to rigorously investigate
and, where appropriate, prosecute all allegations of unlawful deaths, torture,
and mistreatment of suspects in the mutiny.
"Torture is routinely used in Bangladesh, and if the government continues to
ignore credible allegations of torture of BDR mutiny suspects, the culture of
impunity in the country's security forces will simply continue," Adams said.
"The government champions its supposed zero tolerance for torture, but in fact
does nothing to make this talk reality."
Human Rights Watch also calls on the Bangladeshi authorities to undertake a
thorough review of the entire mutiny trials processes, including those which
have already concluded. The possible use of capital punishment in the upcoming
verdict against the 847 accused further heightens existing fair trial concerns,
particularly if torture was used to obtain evidence.
Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all cases as a fundamentally
cruel and irreversible punishment.
(source: Human Rights Watch)
IRAN:
Another prisoner hanged in Khoramabad in 'revenge' to guards killing
The Iranian regime has hanged a prisoner on Sunday following the execution of
16 prisoners on Saturday in Zahedan prison.
The Iranian regime's judiciary did not identify the prisoner but claimed that
he has been associated with political prisoners executed in Zahedan.
A group of 16 political prisoners were collectively hanged in Zahedan prison
Saturday morning, October 24.
Mohammad Marzieh, regime's prosecutor general in Zahedan, said the hanging of
these prisoners who have been in prison for a long time, was in revenge for a
number of revolutionary guards killed in Saravan.
He said, "These people were executed in response to martyrdom of border-gaurds
in Saravan," Tasnim news agency, affiliated with Qods Force reported.
(source: NCR-Iran)
************************
Lives of 2 death row inmates from Kurdish minority at risk amid surge in
executions
2 death row prisoners from Iran's Kurdish minority are at imminent risk of
being executed after the Iranian authorities carried out 20 death sentences
over the weekend, Amnesty International warned today.
"This surge in executions shows that behind words and promises, the Iranian
authorities continue to rely on state-sponsored killing, sparking fears that
Zaniar Moradi and Loghman Moradi, 2 Kurdish minority prisoners on death row,
could be next," said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, Middle East and North Africa Deputy
Director at Amnesty International.
"These and all other executions must be halted immediately. While the Iranian
authorities have a responsibility to bring those suspected of criminal offences
to justice, the death penalty should never be used, as it is the ultimate
cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment."
Iranian prisoners are routinely sentenced to death after unfair trials, and
despite allegations of torture being used to extract "confessions" in pre-trial
detention.
Zaniar Moradi and Loghman Moradi, both death row prisoners from Iran's Kurdish
minority, claim they were tortured into "confessing" to the 2009 murder of the
son of a senior cleric in Marivan, Kurdistan province. They were sentenced to
death in December 2010 after being convicted of "enmity against God"
(moharebeh) and "corruption on earth" for the murder. They were also convicted
of participating in armed activities with Komala, a Kurdish opposition group,
which conducted armed struggle against the Islamic Republic of Iran.
"Even the most basic requirements of Iranian law seem to have been flouted and
it seems that the prisoners and their families were not notified and families
only learned of their executions when they went to visit their loved ones,"
said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui.
Habibollah Golparipour executed
Among those executed over the weekend was Habibollah Golparipour, another
Kurdish minority political prisoner for whom Amnesty International has
campaigned.
On the morning of 25 October, he was transferred from solitary confinement in
Oroumieh Prison, West Azerbaijan Province, north-west of Iran, to an unknown
location and executed the same evening. His family was not notified beforehand
After his execution, the Iranian authorities have reportedly refused to hand
over his body to his family adding to their distress.
Habibollah Golparipour was sentenced to death in a five-minute trial in March
2010. He had been arrested in September of the previous year in north-western
Iran and convicted of "enmity against God" (moharebeh) through his alleged
cooperation with a banned armed group, the 'Party For Free Life of Kurdistan'
(PJAK). According to the court documents, he had denied any armed activity. He
subsequently wrote a letter to Iran's Supreme Leader, alleging he was tortured
during interrogation - but these allegations were never investigated.
'Retaliation' killings
On 26 October, Ebrahim Hamidi, Justice Chief of Iran's Sistan-Baluchestan
province, announced that 16 individuals had been executed that morning in
"retaliation" for a border attack a day earlier. The Sunni armed group,
Jaish-ul-Adl (Army of Justice), had reportedly killed 14 border guards in the
city of Saravan in the same province, near the border with Pakistan.
According to the Public Prosecutor, Mohammad Marzieh, the executed men had been
sentenced to death several years earlier. The provincial Justice Chief said
that 8 of those executed had been convicted of "enmity against God" (moharebeh)
and "corruption on earth" (ifsad fil-arz) for their alleged membership in an
armed militant group in Sistan-Baluchestan Province. The other eight
individuals had been convicted of drugs offences.
"Executing prisoners for an attack they clearly were not involved in and
boasting that it is in 'retaliation' for that attack puts into question the
very principles of criminal law, the foremost of which being that nobody should
be punished for a crime one has not committed," said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui.
A sharp rise in executions
A drop in the number of executions in Iran in 2012, compared to the previous
year, sparked hope that the Iranian authorities were making an effort not to
resort so often to the death penalty. But 2013 has again seen a sharp rise in
the number of executions in Iran.
The Iranian authorities have officially acknowledged 304 executions so far in
2013 but reliable sources have reported at least 234 additional unacknowledged
executions during the year.
"Iran's new government has been cautiously lauded on the world stage for
limited signs of progress, including releasing some prisoners of conscience.
But the renewed dependence on the death penalty gives a startling example of
one area where the Iranian authorities are clearly stubborn," said Hassiba Hadj
Sahraoui.
In his 4 October 2013 report, Ahmed Shaheed, the Special Rapporteur on Iran,
called on the Iranian authorities to declare a moratorium on all executions;
ban public executions, including stoning; and limit capital punishment to
offences considered to be serious crimes under international law. In their
reply to the Special Rapporteur's draft report, the Iranian authorities
defended their execution record by stating that the death penalty is a
recognized punishment in international instruments for the most serious crimes.
Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all circumstances.
(source: Amnesty International)
****************************
Set Immediate Moratorium on Executions; 18 Executed in One Day, 16 of Them 'In
Response' to Border Attack
Iran should issue an immediate moratorium on executions in light of continued
revelations of unlawful or politically motivated executions following flawed
trials.
On October 26, 2013, the government executed 16 people in what the prosecutor
said was "retaliation" for the killings of more than a dozen border guards
along the Iran-Pakistan border. In unrelated incidents, rights activists also
reported that authorities had executed 2 Kurdish prisoners without warning on
the same day.
"What kind of justice system hangs 16 prisoners 'in response' to a recent
killing of security officials, with no indication that they had anything to do
with these crimes," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human
Rights Watch. "The retaliatory execution of 16 men should sound the alarm for
an immediate moratorium on the death penalty in Iran and a massive overhaul of
its flawed judicial system."
Rights groups have documented more than 400 executions in Iran so far in 2013,
with at least 125 of those carried out since the election of President Hassan
Rouhani on June 14 in a judicial system that is rife with due process failures.
On October 26, Mohammad Marzieh, the public prosecutor of the southeastern city
of Zahedan, announced that authorities had "executed 16 bandits linked to
anti-government groups in response to the martyrdom of the border guards." The
semi-official Fars News Agency reported that armed groups near the border town
of Saravan in Sistan-Baluchistan province killed at least 14 members of Iran's
security forces on October 25.
In his statement to the Fars News Agency, Marzieh, Zahedan's public prosecutor,
said that the execution of the 16 men followed "previous warnings --- that any
action that resulted in injuries to innocent people or police and security
forces would be responded to in kind." He warned that Iran's "judiciary would
not, under any circumstances, look the other way in response to these
[terrorist] actions." Marzieh is an employee of Iran's judiciary, which is
headed by Ayatollah Sadegh Larijani. Under Iran's constitution the head of the
judiciary, who is appointed by the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has
the power to pardon or prevent the execution of prisoners sentenced to death.
On October 27, Ebrahim Hamidi, the head of Sistan-Baluchistan's judiciary,
revealed the names of the 16 people executed. He said that all had previously
been tried, convicted, and sentenced to death. He said 8 were members of the
terrorist group Jundullah, while the other 8 had been sentenced to death for
drug trafficking.
Hamidi said in his statement that the Jundullah members had not been executed
earlier in the hope that they would show remorse for their actions, but that
the recent border attack "proved" that they continue their belief in an
oppressive cause and the use of violence. He implied that the attackers were
formed from remnants of Jundullah, which the government claims it defeated
after authorities captured and executed its leader, Abdolmalek Rigi, in 2010.
The "judiciary issues no ruling or decision based on emotions or a desire to
take revenge," he said, but provided no explanation as to how any of those
executed were, either directly or indirectly, involved in the recent border
attack.
Initial reports indicate that the attackers fled across the border into
Pakistan and were members of a Sunni extremist group called Jaish al-Adl (Army
of Justice). On October 27, the group claimed responsibility for the attack on
their website, saying that Iran's involvement in Syria and its oppression of
its Sunni minority justified the attack. Little is known about Jaish al-Adl, or
its relationship, if any, to Jundullah.
Sistan-Baluchistan province and especially the border areas between Iran,
Pakistan and Afghanistan are plagued with insecurity and violence caused by a
combination of drug trafficking and attacks by armed insurgent groups. The
Iranian government claims that more than 3,500 members of its security forces
have been killed in clashes with armed traffickers and insurgent groups linked
to extremist Sunni factions.
On the same day as Marzieh's announcement, Human Rights Watch learned of the
execution of the 2 Kurdish prisoners sentenced to death for their alleged links
to the armed Party for Free Life of Kurdistan, or PJAK. PJAK is identified as a
terrorist group by the Iranian government and several other countries.
Authorities executed a prominent Kurdish political prisoner, Habibollah
Golparipour, in the northwest town of Orumiyeh without notification, his lawyer
told Human Rights Watch. Ehsan Mojtavi, the lawyer, told Human Rights Watch
that on the morning of October 26, authorities informed Golparipour's family
that they had hanged him in Orumiyeh prison. Mojtavi said authorities had not
given any notice of the execution to him or the family.
Mojtavi said the family learned that authorities had transferred Golparipour to
a solitary cell on October 25, so they traveled from Sanandaj, where they live,
to Orumiyeh to seek information about Golparipour's condition and whereabouts.
But in the morning of October 26, authorities informed them that they had
executed Golparipour the night before and refused to hand over his body.
Mojtavi said a court convicted his client in 2007 based on books and writings
taken from him during his arrest and witnesses who allegedly testified about
his client's involvement with PJAK, but whom Golparipour never had a chance to
challenge in court or during trial.
A letter allegedly written by Golparipour in March 2012 said that his
interrogators in the Intelligence Ministry had subjected him to severe
psychological and physical torture during his initial detention in Orumiyeh and
Mahabad. He wrote that a court sentenced him to death after a trial that lasted
no more than a few minutes. In his letter, Golparipour steadfastly denied
carrying arms or otherwise supporting or calling for the use of violence. He
said he had filed a complaint but that the authorities did not investigate his
torture allegations. A trusted source also provided Human Rights Watch with two
audio recordings said to be the voice of Golparipour, in which he vividly
describes his torture at the hands of Intelligence Ministry officials, recounts
various due process violations during his interrogation and trial, and notes
the "injustice" of being sentenced to death "merely for distributing and
publishing books."
A copy of Golparipour's conviction by Branch One of the Mahabad Revolutionary
Court on March 15, 2010, which Human Rights Watch reviewed, indicates that the
court sentenced him to death based on articles 186 and 190 of Iran's old penal
code for "corruption on earth" and "enmity against God." The ruling states that
Golparipour confessed to being a member of PJAK and "cooperating with and
actively engaging on the terrorist group's behalf." Under those articles,
anyone found guilty of taking up arms against the state, or belonging to an
organization taking up arms against the government, also may be sentenced to
death for "enmity against God" regardless of whether they used weapons or
resorted to violence.
Iran's new penal code, which went into effect in 2013, retains the death
penalty for terrorism-related charges. In cases in which an alleged member of
an armed or terrorist group is not found to have used weapons or resorted to
violence, however, it calls for sentences not exceeding 15 years.
Mojtavi, the lawyer, confirmed to Human Rights Watch that Iran's criminal law
allows those convicted under the old penal code to request a review of their
sentence if the new code imposes a lighter punishment. He said that about 15 to
20 days ago Golparipour's family requested a review of his case in light of the
amendments to the new penal code, hoping that the death sentence would be
reduced. But the sentence was carried out before the Supreme Court could rule
on the request.
Human Rights Watch has criticized both the old and new penal code's definitions
of terrorism-related crimes for being overly broad or vaguely worded.
Kurdish activists operating outside Iran informed Human Rights Watch that on
October 26 authorities also executed Reza Esmaili on charges of membership in
PJAK. Human Rights Watch has not been able to confirm information regarding
Esmaili's case and execution.
On October 10, Iran's Revolutionary Guards announced that its forces had
clashed with armed insurgents near the Kurdish town of Baneh, along the
Iran-Iraq border, which led to the deaths of 5 of its members. Kurdish rights
activists have told Human Rights Watch that at least 40 members of Iran's
Kurdish minority are on death row, convicted on political charges, crimes not
considered "most serious" under international law, or sentenced after flawed
trials. They include Zaniar and Loghman Moradi, who are at imminent risk of
execution.
Article 38 of the Iranian Constitution prohibits all forms of torture "for the
purpose of obtaining confessions." The Penal Code also provides for the
punishment of officials who torture citizens to obtain confessions. Despite
these legal and constitutional guarantees regarding confessions under duress,
the government sometimes broadcasts "confessions" on television even before a
trial has concluded and generally accepts them as evidence in court. Such
broadcasts violate Iran's fair trial obligations under article 14 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which it is a state
party.
In 2012 Iran remained one of the world's foremost executioners, with more than
500 prisoners hanged either in prisons or in public. The Iranian government has
announced at least 260 executions in 2013, with rights groups alleging or
documenting an additional 160 or so unannounced executions. At least 15 of
these executions have been carried out in connection with terrorism-related
charges such as moharebeh. The vast majority of executions carried out in Iran
during the past few years are for alleged drug-related offenses including
trafficking, which are crimes not considered "most serious "under international
law.
On August 1, Human Rights Watch wrote a letter in which it called on Rouhani,
then the president-elect, to push for a moratorium on the death penalty. Human
Rights Watch opposes capital punishment in all circumstances because of its
irreversible, cruel, and inhumane nature.<
"Iran]s judiciary should take seriously any admission or suggestion by its
employees that executions are being carried out based on arbitrary and unlawful
considerations such as responding to the killing of security forces," Whitson
said. "President Rouhani's administration can play an important role by calling
for a moratorium on all executions and a thorough review of the way Iran
investigates, tries, and sentences suspects."
(source: Human Rights Watch)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/deathpenalty@lists.washlaw.edu/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
