Nov. 18
SINGAPORE----executions
Nigerian drug trafficker executed after last-minute appeal rejected
A 38-year-old Nigerian was executed on Friday (Nov 18) at Changi Prison after
his 11th-hour appeal was rejected by the apex court.
Chijioke Stephen Obioha was convicted of trafficking in 2.6kg of cannabis -
more than 5 times the capital limit of 500g - and sentenced to death in 2008.
He appealed against his conviction and sentence, but it was dismissed by the
Court of Appeal in 2010. After death penalty laws were amended in 2013, Obioha
was asked if he wanted to be considered for resentencing but declined, the
Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) said.
But before he was scheduled to hang in May this year, Obioha changed his mind
and decided he wanted to submit new evidence and be considered for
resentencing. The Court of Appeal rejected his request but ordered a stay of
execution to allow him time to file an application for resentencing.
However, Obioha withdrew his resentencing application 3 months later. The court
subsequently lifted the stay of execution.
On Wednesday, 2 days before his execution, Obioha again submitted an appeal for
a stay of execution and to commute his death sentence to life imprisonment. The
appeal was heard and dismissed by the court on Thursday.
CNB said in a news release on Friday that Obioha "had been accorded full due
process under the law". 2 petitions to the President for clemency filed by him
and by the High Commission of Nigeria had also been turned down, CNB said.
Another convicted drug trafficker was also executed on Friday after his
11th-hour appeal was dismissed by the court.
Malaysian Devendran Supramaniam, 31, was convicted of importing 83.36g of
diamorphine into Singapore - more than 5 times the capital limit of 15g - and
sentenced to death in 2014.
(source: channelnewsasia.com)
*****************************
The Noose for Drug Offences: Humanity's Failure
This morning, at 6am, the execution of Chijioke Stephen Obioha took place. I am
not even sure if his family from Nigeria were able to attend. Soon it will be
all forgotten together with Chijioke's name, but for the many of us who fight
and campaign to eradicate this barbaric practice of death by hanging, and for
those of us who challenge the mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking in
Singapore, our work will go on. And it must.
Violations to Humanity
In Singapore, when drug possession and trafficking is presumed, the burden of
proof shifts to the defendant. This is an abhorrent violation of fair trial
rights, specifically the presumption of innocence. International law also
requires that the use of the death penalty be restricted to the "most serious
crimes". The UN Human Rights Committee has on numerous occasions found that
drug-related offences do not meet the criterion of "most serious crimes".
Siding with the Traffickers?
I have written, spoken and fought against the death penalty for drug-related
crimes for several years now. In this time, I have been confronted with several
questions from the other side of the camp.
Some queried my determined obsession to defend these accused persons. "They are
just drug traffickers, scums of the earth who bring vile filth to our country."
"Drug traffickers deserve the noose, not mercy." "They knew the law, they chose
to break it." "Innocent people can be hurt or killed by the drugs." "Do you
have a soft spot for traffickers?" "By siding with the accused, you generate
false hope."
Let me be absolutely clear that I wish all drug traffickers are caught and
brought to justice - drugs should never enter this island I call home. There is
no doubt that all those who are behind the trafficking of drugs should be
caught and brought to justice - not just the mules/couriers, but also the drug
lords.
But justice cannot be gained by the taking away of another person's life. "An
eye for an eye" or "lex talionis" is believed by many to be poetic justice, but
for many like me, it is barbaric, unethical and amoral. Many feel that
retributive justice is the best response to a crime, but to me, the death
penalty attains nothing, deters nothing and solves nothing.
Right to Punish v The Right to Kill
The debate on death penalty is complex because it isn't shaped by just logic
and ideology but is rigged with emotions and personal experience. A provocative
topic, it serves no purpose in a modern society and efforts should be refocused
to address the core issues which result in the crime in the first place. There
is consensus that criminal offending is a symptom of greater societal problems.
Using violence to address these symptoms does not abate the problem - in fact,
the act of execution as a punishment only further endorses the use of violence.
There are several pertinent reasons why I hope the government resists the
temptation to simply look tough on crime by preserving the mandatory death
penalty. Below are some:
An argument that many make in support of death penalty is that it 'acts as
deterrence'. But if we were to believe in the studies carried out by many
organisations including human rights watch groups like Amnesty International,
we can easily conclude that this is untrue. Well-planned crimes like terrorist
activities and pre-meditated murders are carried out with the knowledge of the
consequences because they don't really care about the punishment.
I fail to see how death penalty is a deterrent to the drug lords and underworld
dons when the trafficking is carried out mainly by youths who are incredibly
marginalised, vulnerable to exploitation, manipulation, and coercion. I
remember reading somewhere a description that with death penalty, the "mailman
dies and the drug lord laughs". I doubt the message of deterrence is even
audible to the originators in the crime chain.
Death penalty therefore fails miserably in reducing crime. There is a risk that
it creates irreversible mistakes for people who are being framed or being
"sacrificed" in the event that the perpetration does not proceed as planned.
Another reason for challenging death penalty is that we can never be sure that
we will never execute the wrong person. Some people fall victims to the death
penalty even when they are innocent because the criminal justice system is
functioned by humans (whether judges, investigating officers or lawyers) who
are fallible.
They can make mistakes or bear discrimination and history is littered with
examples of people on death row who had their innocence proven only at the very
last moment. As a society, we shouldn't wait for a wrongful execution to happen
before we call for its abolition. Miscarriages of justice cannot be remedied
and are irreversible by nature.
Proponents of the death penalty believe that through execution, the perpetrator
never returns back to the society to cause it harm again. Yes, true, but so
does life sentence without the possibility of parole as it exists in Singapore,
and it is done so in a more humane fashion. Anyone who feels that a criminal
would enjoy his stay in jail for the rest of his life and be eternally thankful
is mistaken. Jails are horrific places.
Finally, but not lastly, I strongly believe that there has to be some limit on
punishment - this limit is certainly crossed when we decide to take the life of
a person. Yes, we have the right to punish, but humanity fails in dire
proportions when it starts believing that it also has the right to kill.
Facts from Amnesty International: In July 2014, Singapore carried out its first
2 executions since 2012, when 2 men were hanged after they had been convicted
and mandatorily sentenced to death for drug trafficking. Their executions ended
a moratorium on death penalty established in July 2012 to allow Parliament time
to review the country's laws. Since then, there have been 5 other executions,
including 3 for drug trafficking. At least 5 new mandatory death sentences were
imposed in 2015, 4 for drug trafficking and 1 for murder. At least 23 people
remained on death row at the end of 2015. As of today, 140 countries have
abolished the death penalty in law or practice; in the Asia Pacific region, 19
countries have abolished the death penalty for all crimes and a further 8 are
abolitionist in practice.
"With every cell of my being and with every fiber of my memory I oppose the
death penalty in all form. I do not believe any civilized society should be at
the service of death. I don't think it's human to become an agent of the Angel
of Death." - Holocaust Survivor, Elie Wiesel, 1986 Nobel Peace Prize Winner
(source: M Ravi / Singapore Anti-Death Penalty Campaign; The Independent)
THAILAND:
Death penalty 'too harsh' for political-post buying CDC backs 'extreme' measure
for offenders
A proposal to impose a maximum penalty of death against politicians involved in
selling and buying political positions under the draft organic law on political
parties has been opposed by a National Legislative Assembly (NLA) deputy
chairman.
Peerasak Porjit voiced his disagreement with the Constitution Drafting
Committee's (CDC) proposal, while at the same time some academics threw their
full support behind the proposal, saying the death penalty "will keep corrupt
individuals out of politics".
(source: Bangkok Post)
PHILIPPINES:
House sees bills for death penalty, lower age of criminal responsibility within
the year
The House of Representatives will approve the bill restoring death penalty for
heinous crimes and the bill lowering the age of criminal responsibility within
the year, Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez said Thursday.
Alvarez said President Rodrigo Duterte reiterated his wish to have the measures
in place during their recent meeting in Malacanang.
"As far as we are concerned, at the House of Representatives, our plan is to
pass them before our Christmas break," he said in an interview late Wednesday
in a gathering of PDP-Laban members. Congress will go on Christmas recess
starting December 16 and will return to session on January 15 next year.
It also needs to pass the budget for the President's signing next month.
Both bills to restore death penalty and to lower the age of criminal liability
are in the committee level, and facing tough opposition from several lawmakers
and various groups.
Alvarez is the main author of both measures. House Bill No. 01 seeks death for
the following offenses: human trafficking, illegal recruitment, plunder,
treason, parricide, infanticide, rape, qualified piracy and bribery, kidnapping
and illegal detention, robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons, car theft, destructive arson, terrorism and drug-related cases, among
others.
"There is evidently a need to reinvigorate the war against criminality by
reviving a proven deterrent coupled by its consistent, persistent and
determined implementation, and this need is as compelling and critical as any,"
HB No. 01 said
"The imposition of the death penalty for heinous crimes and the mode of its
implementation, both subjects of repealed laws, are crucial components of an
effective dispensation of both reformative and retributive justice," it added.
House Bill No. 2 sought to revert the minimum age of criminal liability from
the current 15 years old to as young as 9 years old.
The bill, titled "Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility Act," seeks to amend
the "Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006" or Republic Act 9344, which set
the minimum age for criminal liability at 15 years old.
(source: interaksyon.com)
_______________________________________________
A service courtesy of Washburn University School of Law www.washburnlaw.edu
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Unsubscribe: http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/options/deathpenalty
