Jan. 31
KENYA:
Nakuru cousins to hang for Sh300 robbery with violence
2 cousins who violently robbed an armed police officer of Sh300 will face the
death penalty after the High Court dismissed their appeal.
The Magistrates' Court had sentenced Erick Njure and Patrick Muchoki to hang in
2011 for robbery with violence. They were convicted of robbing Police Constable
Kenneth Malakwen on October 27, 2011.
The court heard that the 2 men, armed with clubs, accosted Mr Malakwen, who was
then attached to Parliament Police Station, on his way back to a hotel in
Nakuru where he was spending the night.
They robbed him of Sh300 and a Ceska pistol that was loaded with 15 bullets.
The 2 were arrested a year later, on July 6, 2012, when they tried to steal
from a shop in Karatina using the same pistol.
When the robbery failed, they hid in a house but were arrested after an
informer tipped the police.
The court heard that the pistol serial number was circulated to police stations
to identify who it had been assigned to.
Mr Njure, according to the testimony given in court, had told police officers
that the firearm belonged to Mr Muchoki who had obtained it from Nakuru.
The 2 denied the charges brought against them.
Njure told the court that on the day of the 2nd robbery, he was working at the
home of one Wangeci and that Muchoki joined him the following morning to help.
The court heard that police officers stormed their house, beat them up and took
them to Karatina Police Station where they were allegedly compelled to sign
some documents.
BEATEN UP
Njure's testimony was that he declined to sign and was driven to somewhere near
a river in Sagana, where he was strangled into submission.
Muchoki said he was also beaten up until he put his signature on the papers
given by the officers.
But Justice Jairus Ngaah found the State had proved its case against the 2 and
that the police officer was robbed violently by the 2.
"In the complainant's case, he was attacked by a group of people who were armed
with crude weapons; it is clear that at least 2 of the 3 strands of this
offence, any of which is sufficient to prove it, were established. Here, I
agree with the learned magistrate that the offence of robbery with violence was
proved to the required standard," the judge ruled.
"Based on this doctrine of recent possession, the appellants were properly
convicted of the offence of robbery with violence," he added.
The judge said although the pistol was recovered 8 months after the robbery,
the 2 were unable to explain how they had acquired it.
"It followed that the burden fell upon the appellants to give a reasonable
explanation as to how they came into possession of the gun, failure to which
the trial court was justified in the ruling," he said.
(source: standardmedia.co.ke)
MYANMAR:
Man is sentenced to death after being caught with 2 bags of weed
A vegetable seller has been sentenced to death in Myanmar for 'trafficking'
cannabis - after being caught with envelopes full of weed.
Nur Alam Mohd Hussain, 29, was caught with 5 pounds of weed - but claims he did
not know what was in the bags, and thought it was stolen car parts.
Myanmar has extremely harsh drug laws - the country is the world's 2nd-largest
producer of opium, after Afghanistan.
Judicial Commissioner Datuk Nordin Hassan said, 'The accused should have been
able to smell the cannabis which was in large quantities. He had knowledge that
the cannabis was for trafficking.'
He said, 'When the police raiding team surrounded him at the petrol station, he
dropped the bag which had contained both the envelopes and ran. The accused
said he ran because he was afraid that he was going to be caught by the police
as the motorcycle he had ridden to the petrol station on was a stolen vehicle.'
The Straits Times reports that he was calm when his death sentence was read
out.
High Times says that no one has been executed for drugs in the country in the
years 2005-15, according to the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty.
(source: metro.co.uk)
JAPAN:
Victims' Families Marginalized Under Japan's Capital Punishment System
Does Japan's criminal justice system give sufficient consideration to the
rights of the families of murder victims? A non-fiction writer who has
interviewed numerous family members of murder victims challenges the case for
abolishing capital punishment.
Questions of Atonement
I first began interviewing the surviving family of murder victims in the late
1990s. Over the decades I have spoken with more than 100 people, and I have to
the best of my ability tried to share their voices with broader society.
However, one troubling question that has arisen in each interview is the issue
of redemption.
It is difficult to say whether a person convicted of murder is capable of
making amends for their crime. Even suggesting that murderers should atone for
their sins not with their lives, but through the act of repentance and carrying
the weight of their actions for the rest of their days poses a direct challenge
to the core arguments against capital punishment. During interview, people
invariably would ask in frustration what this concept of atonement even means.
While the question concerned the broader death penalty debate, there is no
denying they also wished to know which side of the argument I fell on. Unable
to provide an answer, I often simply fell silent. I have no doubt that my
conversations with surviving family members were vital in shaping both my
thoughts and doubts about Japan's system of capital punishment.
I remember speaking with the family of an elementary school girl who had been
abducted and murdered. A man pretending to ask for directions had snatched the
young girl off the street, then abused and brutally killed her before dumping
her body. I vividly remember her mother and father, both of them younger than I
was at the time, telling me in voices trembling with rage how ludicrous it was
to think that a killer could atone for their crime in their lifetime. It was
impossible, they argued, without experiencing such a devastating loss to even
comprehend how preposterous a supposition this was. In their view, most people
are unable to understand that the first step along the path to redemption
begins with the family of the victim.
During my years of reporting on the case I saw the couple direct their fury not
only at the perpetrator, but also at the lawyers and anyone else trying to
prevent the death sentence from being handed down. This included people calling
for the end of capital punishment and society as a whole. Japanese
overwhelmingly support capital punishment, but I suspect that many family
members of murder victims are skeptical of this support, feeling it is not
grounded in any serious consideration of their plight.
Few Executions Carried Out
We tend to loosely and carelessly bandy about the idea of redemption. Somehow
we have come to believe that criminals will naturally come to regret their
crimes. Maybe this is because we hold in the back of our minds a picture of an
inmate writing and sending and endless stream of letters of apology, repeatedly
copying out Buddhist sutras, or living out their days as a model prisoner.
However, none of these images are correct. Redemption for murder is an academic
fantasy, not something that exists in the real world. I believe it is a myth
cooked up by those of us lucky enough not to have had our lives transformed by
a brutal homicide. The more family members of murder victims I meet, the more
certain of this I become.
First off, the majority of family members have no interest in redemption for
the perpetrator. They do not want apologies, which sound to them as false
regrets. What they want is for the killer to be dead. This feeling,
particularly in the most heinous cases, never diminishes, even if the murderer
serves their sentence, turns over a new leaf, and becomes a saint. A victim's
family does not merely want the perpetrator to pay with their life, but longs
for them to be wiped from the face of the earth. In this sense, capital
punishment allows them to achieve at least a modicum of closure.
I recognize that there is no way to bring an end to the mental and emotional
duress of family members. However, only in knowing that the murderer no longer
haunts the world can they finally direct all their attention at remembering
their lost loved one. In reality, though, such longing for vengeance is rarely
appeased as death sentences are handed down in only a handful of murder cases.
Lessons From the Hikari Murders
In April 1999 an 18-year-old man committed the shocking murder of a young
mother and her 11-month old child in Hikari, Yamaguchi Prefecture. The youth
broke into the woman's home, raped and killed her, and then strangled her baby
daughter. The assailant was initially sentenced to life imprisonment, but in a
2008 retrial the Hiroshima High Court condemned him to death. After several
appeal attempts, the Supreme Court eventually upheld the sentence in February
2012.
I interviewed Motomura Hiroshi, the husband and father of the victims, soon
after the incident, and have written several books about the case. Motomura,
who has gone on to become one of Japan's leading proponents of capital
punishment, boldly declared during the trial that if the murderer was not to be
sentenced to death then he wanted him set free so he could do the deed himself.
As the appeal process drug on, Motomura came to believe that the facing
execution is only way a criminal can be truly repentant. He spoke to me about
his grim resolution to bear the responsibility for the loss of his wife and
daughter, and in seeking the death penalty, the life of the 18-year-old who had
killed them. In reaching this conclusion, he had repeatedly questioned whether
he, as someone who knew the pain of having his own family murdered, could
justly seek the death of another human being.
I believe what Motomura really sought was a seat at the table in deciding the
ultimate fate of the young murderer. He wanted to have a say that was equal to
that afforded the state and the defendant. I also feel that he harbors hope of
a crime-free society someday where there is no longer any need for capital
punishment.
An Issue of Justice
It is instinctive human reaction to seek retribution when a loved one is
murdered and experts intensely debate whether reprisal should be considered a
natural right of victims and their families. If surviving family member's hopes
for enacting retribution on a murderer are restricted by the state to the death
penalty, then we should be careful not to dismiss it as cruel, inhumane, or
violating of human rights.
Capital punishment, as critics point out, is in essence state-condoned murder.
However, it is predicated on a fundamental asymmetrical relationship between
victim and killer. Can we easily dismiss executing a person guilty of homicide
as a one-sided act by the state? It is natural that families of victims should
long for retribution and look to the state to carry this out. Can we simply
dismiss such a system as barbaric and misguided? I have misgivings about
justice being served if capital punishment was abolished as there would no
longer be a legal way to pay heed to the feelings and thoughts to victims of
violent crime, including surviving relatives.
I feel the strong support for the death penalty among family members of murder
victims in Japan stems not only from the harrowing experience of losing a loved
one but also a profound dissatisfaction and distrust of the criminal justice
system.
In the end, all forms of punishment are merely ways for the state to make
criminals pay for their unlawful deeds. In reality, the state can carry out
punishment without the defendant uttering a single word of apology. Victims and
their families, of course, will do their utmost to ensure that the state levies
the harshest punishment possible on their behalf. They cannot, however, settle
the score with the perpetrator on their own. Even though they suffered at the
hands of the offender, there is no legal way for them to join in determining
and meting out punishment. Survivors harbor distrust and suspicion about the
criminal justice system because it does not allow them to participate.
The State Versus the Victims
Japan for years has viewed the victims of crimes as little more than a piece of
evidence in criminal trials. It has only been the last 10 years that the
framework for victim participation in the legal process has been expanded,
leading to stronger sentencing. However, even with new conventions in place,
the legal system does not adequately reconcile survivors' desire for
retribution. Overall, the systems and laws in place favor the rights of
offenders and little has changed from the days when the involvement of victims
and surviving family members in legal proceedings was tightly restricted, and
even viewed with hostility.
The recent introduction of the lay judge system may have introduced greater
public sentiment into Japan's legal system. However, it has conversely worked
to reduce the ability of family members of murder victims to push for stronger
sentences. This is because defending and prosecuting attorneys and the court
decide on evidence and a trial scenario during pretrial proceedings, summarily
playing these out in the courtroom. Sentencing is primarily determined by the
bench rather than lay judges, and while the initial punishment is in principle
expected to hold up against appeals, this has often proven to not be the case.
Most critically, Japanese defense attorneys still cannot break away from the
traditional state-versus-the-defendant model. Under this mindset, lawyers see
elevating the rights of victims as undermining a defendant's right to a fair
trial.
This state of affairs further fans the fury of family members. The Japan
Federation of Bar Associations has even created a manual advising lawyers in
capital cases to do everything possible to keep the relatives of victims from
speaking up in court, prevent their participation in cases, and block them from
voicing opinions so as to protect the rights of defendants. To be fair, the
JFBA's campaign against capital punishment does not reflect the thoughts of
every lawyer in Japan, but the assertions about justice by defense lawyers who
avidly adhere to these guidelines enrage crime victims and family members.
The arguments for avoiding the death penalty at all cost or for abolishing it
outright may reflect humanistic sympathy for the life of the perpetrator.
Contrarily, sympathy among proponent of the death penalty for the lives of
victims is either cursory or lacking altogether.
Strengthening Victims' Rights
The decisiveness of the death penalty places the onus on the state to ensure
that those prisoners it executes are guilty beyond a shadow of doubt. While
concern of wrongful conviction voiced by death penalty opponents is valid, such
arguments are also true of other types of crime. Family members of murder
victims certainly find the prospect of a killer going cheerfully about their
lives while an innocent person was punished unbearable, and as much as anyone
they want to see an end to wrongful convictions.
I also recognize that certain conceptual arguments for abolishing the death
penalty - arguments driven solely by legalistic logic - are more persuasive
than those for keeping the system of capital punishment in place. The risk of
false convictions and the question of whether the death penalty acts as a
deterrent against violent crime are issues that defy simple answers. Likewise,
there is a lack of transparency in the way the current system is implemented.
In fact, it has only been a few years since the media was finally allowed to
document the interior of an execution chamber. There is still no press coverage
of executions, however, and the lives of death row inmates and their final
moments remain shrouded in an impenetrable veil. From the outside, there is no
way to ascertain what is actually taking place inside the system.
Japan is in the minority of countries left in the world today that retain
capital punishment. European and other nations have taken the lead in
abolishing the death penalty and providing for the rights of both victims and
criminals. These countries have a history of guaranteeing public trust in the
criminal justice system by making the victims of crime participants in criminal
procedures. Japan took its 1st steps in this direction in 2004 with the
enactment of legislation that promotes comprehensive and systematic measures to
support the rights of crime victims. Before Japanese debate whether to keep the
death penalty, though, it is more important that we clearly establish the
rights of victims and their families to participate in the criminal justice
system.
(source: Fujii Seiji, nippon.com)
CAMEROON:
Journalist Ahmed Abba could face death penalty in Cameroon
The case of Ahmed Abba, a Hausa-language correspondent with Radio France
Internationale in the country's Far North region, typifies a failure that the
Cameroonian government needs to get right if it hopes to win the trust and full
support of its citizens and the international community in its fight against
Boko Haram. Abba could face the death penalty if convicted under Cameroon's
controversial 2014 anti-terror law.
Cameroon has remained in a protracted battle with the Boko Haram Islamist
militant sect since 2014 when the group began attacking the government. The
International Crisis Group reports that there have been no fewer than 460
attacks and scores of suicide bombings leading to at least 15,000 deaths and
hundreds of thousands of refugees and internally displaced persons.
The Cameroonian government, in its attempt to confront Boko Haram, has resorted
to deploying repressive measures that violate the rights of its citizens, whom
it is supposed to be protecting. Authorities are desperately trying to censor
the public's right to information by targeting journalists reporting on the
security situation in the country.
The case of Ahmed Abba, a Hausa-language correspondent with Radio France
Internationale in the country's Far North region, typifies a failure that the
Cameroonian government needs to get right if it hopes to win the trust and full
support of its citizens and the international community in its fight against
Boko Haram.
For 18 months, Abba has been in prison awaiting a verdict in his military
trial. The government of President Paul Biya, an autocratic leader in power for
34 years, is persecuting Abba in reprisal for his reporting on the plight of
people living in the Far North, the poorest of Cameroon's 10 regions, having
the lowest school enrolment rate, and the worst affected by activities of both
Boko Haram and security forces.
Abba was arrested on July 30, 2015 as he left a security press briefing, and
held incommunicado until October 19, 2015. Officials did not take a statement
from Abba until November 13, 2015. Abba was later charged with "complicity"
with and "non-denunciation of acts of terrorism". His trial only began in
February 2016; but his case has been postponed 11 times due to a military
tribunal that continues to grant extended time to prosecutors who have failed
to provide any evidence incriminating Abba.
"We are defending this journalist who was doing his job and is detained in
conditions that we cannot accept," said Jean-Marc Ayrault, French Foreign
Affairs minister, in December 2016 while calling for his release.
Abba could face the death penalty if convicted under Cameroon's controversial
2014 anti-terror law. The international community needs to intensify its
engagement with Cameroon as Abba appears in court for the 12th time on February
2, 2017. He told the Committee to Protect Journalists, through a proxy, that he
has no confidence in a trial set up by the same military persecuting him.
"This is an unfair trial. I have never been told who I know that I did not
denounce, or who are my accomplices," Abba said. "I could get justice in a
civil court, maybe, but not in a military court. Right now I don't know my
fate."
Abba is one of many journalists paying the price for reporting on conflict and
security in Cameroon. 3 other journalists - Baba Wame, Rodrigue Tongue, and
Felix Cyriaque Ebole Bola - arrested in 2014 are also been prosecuted in a
military tribunal for failing to disclose information and sources to the
government. The trio were investigating allegations of complicity of security
forces with an armed group from Central African Republic destabilising
Cameroon's East region.
In August 2015, Simon Ateba, a freelance Nigerian-based Cameroonian journalist,
was arrested and detained 4 days on accusations of espionage for his
investigations into abysmal conditions of refugees in the Far North region. In
April 2014, Denis Nkwebo, the president of Cameroon's press union, had his car
bombed. Nkwebo has received repeated threats for his reporting on Cameroon's
security forces.
One unreported face to Abba's persecution is the tragedy his family is living.
Rakiatu, Abba's wife, lives in Maroua, the Far North regional capital, which is
over 1,100 kilometres driving distance from Yaounde, Cameroon's political
capital, where Abba is imprisoned. She has not seen her husband since December
2015. In great penury, she said she is barely surviving. With sobs over the
phone, Rakiatu called for her husband's release.
"If anyone cares, please help me, help my husband. He is innocent. I know one
day we all will die. But don't let my husband die in prison," Rakiatu said in
an interview with the Committee to Protect Journalists.
Abba lost his father months into his birth, and from early youth had been the
breadwinner of his family. His mother recently died from grief, his sister
Yagana, who lives in the Nigerian northern city of Maiduguri, told the
Committee to Protect Journalists.
"Our mother died from pain because of Ahmed in prison. She cried every day. I
cry every day because I am afraid. I don't know what will happen to Ahmed.
Please help him. Please help save my brother," Yagana said.
Journalists and human rights activists from around the world are unanimous in
calling on Cameroon authorities to release Abba unconditionally. Journalists
should not be forced to disclose information they uncover in their work or act
as government informers. A journalist's responsibility is to hold the
government accountable to the people. Journalists should never be persecuted in
reprisal for their journalism.
The Cameroonian government is presently in a state of another conflict that is
threatening the stability and unity of the entire country. In Anglophone
regions of Cameroon, the government is contending with escalating civil
disobedience from English-speaking Cameroonians in the North West and South
West regions who say the Francophone central government has marginalised them.
In another wrong response, authorities and security forces have again gone the
route of attacking its citizens and using repressive force to address labour
strikes, protests, and sit-ins. The government has arrested journalists
covering protests, suspended dozens of newspapers' and broadcasters' permission
to operate, permanently banned newspapers from publishing and their publishers
from practicing journalism, and sanctioned dozens more journalists. The speaker
of the National Assembly in November 2016 called the use of social media "a new
form of terrorism". The government shut down the internet in the Anglophone
regions on January 17, 2017 after outlawing 2 prominent Anglophone groups.
It is pertinent for Cameroon authorities to realise that an attack on a
journalist for doing his work is an attack on the society's right to be
informed on issues of public interest affecting their common wealth.
It is not too late for Cameroonian authorities to do what is right by first
acquitting and discharging Ahmed Abba of any wrongdoing, and desisting from
further acts fostering a crisis of press freedom and fundamental rights abuses
that threatens to engulf the Republic of Cameroon.
(source: Op-Ed; Peter Nkanga from the COMMITTEE TO PROTECT JOURNALISTS
(CPJ)----dailymaverick.co.za)
_______________________________________________
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
