May 21
GAZA:
peedy Trials Achieve Neither Justice Nor Rule of Law
Al-Maydan Military Court in Gaza issued today, 21 May 2017, death sentences
against 3 Palestinians charged with collaboration with foreign entities, murder
and engagement in the murder of Mazen Foqaha', 1 of Hamas leaders. The death
sentences were issued within 1 week after the trial had started, during which 4
sessions only were held, constituting a precedent since Hamas take-over of the
Gaza Strip in 2007. The Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) is concerned
over not granting the accused persons the right to receive a proper defense or
fair trial, and is shocked over the unjustified urgency in issuing the
sentences.
According to information collected by PCHR, "al-Maydan" Military Court in Gaza
sentenced to death by hanging each of A. M. L. (38), from al-Nusairat refugee
camp, and H. M. E. (44), from Gaza City. Moreover, the Court sentenced E. A. N.
(38) to death by firing squad. The three persons were convicted of
collaboration with the Israeli authorities, murder and engagement in murder.
It should be noted the Gaza Strip courts excessively applied death sentences,
as the number of death sentences issued in the Gaza Strip since the beginning
of the year reached 23 sentences, 15 of which are recent and the 8 others were
issued to upheld previous sentences. Thus, the total number of death sentences
issued in the Palestinian Authority (PA) controlled areas has risen to 189
sentences relevant to 189 cases since 1994, 20 of which have been issued in the
West Bank and 169 in the Gaza Strip. Among those issued in the Gaza Strip, 111
sentences have been issued since 2007.
PCHR believes that resorting to "al-Maydan" Military Court is a violation of
the right to a fair trial and the right to litigate before the natural judicial
body. PCHR further stresses that the 1979 Revolutionary Penal Code and its
provisions are not constitutional and violate the PA's obligations at the
international level, and this has always been PCHR's attitude since 1995.
It should be noted that "al-Maydan" Court is one of the judicial mechanisms
stipulated by article 11 of the Revolutionary Procedural Law. It is a court
with absolute powers, issuing non-appealable sentences. This constitutes a
flagrant violation of the Palestinian Basic Law, mainly article 30 of it, and a
clear violation of the PA's obligations under the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), specifically article 14 of it.
Based on PCHR's follow-up of the hearings, PCHR highlights that the accused
persons were not actually granted the right to receive a proper defense, as the
jury claimed that the accused persons refused to be represented by a lawyer,
therefore, the court assigned a lawyer for them working in the military
prosecution. All that lawyer has done was displaying the evidences in one
hearing without requesting a time limit to prepare his defense. This raises
real concerns that the trial was pseudo.
PCHR underscores that a fair trial, especially when issuing death sentences, is
one of the international binding rules, the violation of which is a violation
of the international minimum human rights standards, especially article 6 of
the ICCPR to which Palestine acceded in 2014.
PCHR rejects the insistence on applying death penalty as a deterrent penalty.
Furthermore, PCHR believes that achieving justice is completely different from
revenge and warns against the impact of revenge concept prevailing in the
public opinion over the judiciary.
Since the establishment of the PA, 38 death sentences were applied; 36 of which
were in the Gaza Strip and 2 in the West Bank. Among the sentences applied in
the Gaza Strip, 25 were applied since 2007 without the ratification of the
Palestinian President in violation of the law, and 6 of which were implemented
following the formation of the National Unity Government in June 2014. PCHR
denounced those death sentences without the ratification of the Palestinian
President and highlighted that they constitute a flagrant violation of the
Palestinian Basic Law since they required the ratification of the Palestinian
President for implementation.
PCHR confirms that any death sentence should not be applied without the
Palestinian President's ratification according to article 109 of the 2003
Palestinian Basic Law, otherwise it is considered extra-judicial execution.
PCHR underscores rejection of the speedy trial policy whatever the
justifications and motives were. PCHR also demands the military judiciary to
respect the Basic Law and grant the accused persons the right to receive proper
defense without discrimination and regardless of the nature of the crime.
PCHR calls upon the Attorney General and/or Administrative Committee in the
Gaza Strip to not refer civilians to appear before military courts because it
is a violation of the law and denial of justice.
(source: Palestine News Network)
AUSTRALIA:
AFP helps death penalty nations, while Australia campaigns for end to death
penalty as part of UN bid
Australia continues to assist in international prosecutions where the death
penalty is an option, while underpinning its bid for a seat on the United
Nation's Human Rights Council with a call to abolish capital punishment
worldwide.
Newly released figures, obtained through freedom of information laws, show the
Australian Federal Police have assisted in nearly 130 foreign investigations
involving more than 400 people since 2015, where a successful prosecution could
potentially lead to a death sentence.
Foreign Affairs Minister Julie Bishop lobbied for Australia's election to the
Human Rights Council for the 2018-20 term in New York this week, and has stated
the worldwide abolition of the death penalty is one of Australia's goals.
But the AFP continues to assist foreign investigations where the death penalty
could be handed down, refusing to co-operate in only nine of 129 cases it has
been asked for information.
AFP approval rates for international assistance, mostly involving drug crime,
have been steady since 2010. In 2015, 92 % of requests were, rising to 96 % in
2016. No other information, such as the countries requesting the information,
or the cases involved, was given.
Australia has used its opposition to the death penalty - and a call for a
global abolition of the punitive measure used in nearly 60 countries - as a key
argument for its inclusion on the UN Human Rights Council.
But this year, the government quietly rejected recommendations from a
parliamentary committee which would have banned the AFP from sharing drug crime
information with other countries unless provided with assurances the death
penalty would not be applied, prompting fears of a repeat of the Bali nine
heroin plot which saw Australians Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran executed
after tip-offs to Indonesian authorities.
The committee recommended ministerial approval be required for "high-risk"
cases and the AFP refuse co-operation on drug trafficking cases unless
assurances that the death penalty would not be sought, both of which were
rejected by the government.
A spokeswoman for the Attorney-General's department said the government "has
and will continue to seek suitable assurances in appropriate cases where it is
clear that the death penalty is likely to be imposed".
But Emily Howie of the Human Rights Law Centre said Australia was sending mixed
messages.
"Global abolition of the death penalty is meant to be a core objective of
Australia's Human Rights Council bid," she said.
"But whilst the Foreign Minister spouts the right language to delegates in New
York, the reality is that every week the AFP continues to share information
that puts peoples' lives at risk. If Australia really opposes the death
penalty, it must do so not just through the speeches of our ministers but
through the actions of all Australian departments and agencies.
"The fact remains that if the Bali nine case were to happen again tomorrow,
there is nothing to stop the AFP from doing exactly the same thing.
"Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran learned from their mistakes, we owe it to
them to learn from ours."
Researcher Sarah Gill, who has studied Australia's response to the death
penalty, said neither legislation, or the guidelines the AFP follow when asked
for co-operation "present much of an obstacle to information sharing".
"The question we need to ask is: are we serious about human rights or aren't
we? Capital punishment is a core human rights issue, and we ought to have a
consistent approach, including in relation to law enforcement co-operation, if
we think this really matters," she said.
Under the guidelines, a senior AFP official can sign off on requests from
overseas before detention, arrest, charge or conviction. After an individual
has been arrested, detained, charged or convicted, requests for information
must have ministerial approval.
Police-to-police assistance can include everything from providing personal
information like dates or birth or criminal records to wider co-operation in
investigations. Some of the data includes foreign citizens.
Philip Ruddock, who served as attorney-general in the Howard government and is
now Australia's special human rights envoy, led calls for a ban on sharing
information in prosecutions where the death penalty could be handed down as a
sentence following the executions of Chan and Sukumaran in 2015.
The Coalition said those recommendations were impractical because foreign law
enforcement partners could not provide such assurances and it would be
"inappropriate" to undertakings from prosecutors.
It is believed there are 12 Australians sitting on death rows across the world,
mostly for drug crimes.
(source: transcontinental.com.au)
SINGAPORE:
His father was hanged, now he tells what happened to his family after that
We are often told that the death penalty is a "deterrent" and therefore it is a
necessary punishment for those who traffic drugs.
While it is true that drugs destroys not only the addict but also the families
of the addict, it is also true that the death sentence similarly can destroy
the family of the trafficker.
Vick Martin says his father was hanged for trafficking in drugs, and it
destroyed his mother.
Martin was only 14 then.
Now 32-years old, Martin relates the aftermath of his father's death, carried
out by the state.
Here is Martin's Facebook post, without edits.
Abolish the Death Penalty....
My very own experience ... 16 july 1999.. My father was Hang to Death by the
government of Singapore for trafficking drugs. I was a 14year old boy who have
2 older brothers and 1 younger bro. It changed the lives of my family and
myself.
My mother started to drink to drown her sorrows that there is nothing she could
do to save her husband. She eventually started to be an alcoholic and could not
look after us. She became very depressed and lost focus in her life.
My brothers and i started to go wayward as there was no one to look after us.
We started to mix with the "wrong" company and got ourselves into loads of
trouble with the Law. I have be incarcerated a couple of times myself. We
dropped out of school. Joined gangs. And practically lost the sense of living a
proper live. We did whatever we took was right and started to rebel against all
forms of authority. Now i am 32yrs old. After 18yrs of "trial and error" i have
so far been out of prison for the past 4 years. I have learnt my lessons but
what i experienced and when through shaped me as a different individual. The
sad thing is, i am not even sure if i am a proper person or not as i dont have
my parents guidance from a very young age.
My Question to the Goverment,
How is it fair for my family and i to be destroyed based on my father's action?
What did we do to suffer this? My father sold drugs to people who were already
drug addicts and knew what they were getting themselves in to. Those guys are
guilty people and not innocence citizen. My family and i are innocence citizens
when the government decided to Execute my father. How is that fair? What did we
do to deserve this?? By taking his live, 5 other people (my family) had to
share his consequences. Do u think thats Justice?
This is only my story. I m sure there are many many more familes have been
destroyed because of the Death Penalty. So many other innocent people have had
to suffer because of the Government's desicion to "Murder" People. How or what
are you going to tell all these innocent people that has been affected by your
decision??
I personally feel that there is not enough support and education given to
prevent drug addicts to change their life or new addicts from starting the
habit. The Goverment is not doing enough to help these addicts to change their
lives. By incarcerating there for years and years is not going to break that
habit. Its a psychological problem. We should not run away from our problems
but to face it. By throwing them into prison is like running away from the
problems. We have to find a solution to stop them from going back to their old
ways. Give them more support when they are released from prison. Give them
better paying jobs so they can start their lives properly. Most of these people
are from the lower rungs of our society. They need the support and help from
the Goverment. If the government dont help their own people, than who will help
them?? We are humans. We all commit mistakes and we all deserve multiple
chances to change our lives. I hope and pray the The Government will do more to
help and educate the people and abolish the Death Penalty. Killing a live will
not stop the crime. STOP CRIMES NOT LIVES Just my 2 cents worth.
My deepest condolences to Ridzuan's Family and to all those that have gone thru
the same fate as him. God bless
(source: theindependent.sg)
_______________________________________________
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
