April 26
UNITED KINGDOM:
A third of Tory MPs want to bring back the death penalty
1/3 of Tory MPs support the reintroduction of capital punishment in the UK,
Yahoo News can reveal.
An exclusive poll of MPs carried out by YouGov found that 18% of Conservative
MPs strongly support bringing back the death penalty and 13% somewhat support
doing so.
The poll has shocked activists, who have condemned MPs for “hankering after the
return of a grotesque and cold-blooded ritual”.
Not a single Labour MP said they support bringing back capital punishment.
In November, Conservative MP John Hayes urged the Government to consider
bringing back hacking for perpetrators of violent crimes in response to the
Westminster Bridge attacked carried out by Khalid Masood.
Mr Hayes said the option “should be available to the courts” in cases such as
Masood’s, and it would have been “appropriate” to hang him if he had survived
the attack.
Amnesty International condemned the MPs who support the reintroduction of the
death penalty.
Commenting on the poll, Kate Allen, Amnesty International UK’s Director, told
Yahoo: “The vast majority of countries in the world have stopped using the
death penalty in recognition of its cruelty and the ever-present danger of
miscarriages of justice.
“We would urge any MP still hankering after a return of the grotesque ritual of
cold-bloodedly condemning people to be hanged to consult our latest global
report on the death penalty.
“It shows in case after case how people around the world are still being
sentenced to death arbitrarily, after unfair trials - sometimes involving false
confessions - and even for political reasons.
“Do we really want the UK to join China, Saudi Arabia and Iran in the dwindling
band of countries that still execute their citizens?
“The death penalty is a cruel relic of the past and there should be no place
for it in the modern world.”
The last execution in the UK took place in 1964 when Gwynne Evans and Peter
Allen were hanged for murder.
The Government’s policy is to oppose the reintroduction of the death penalty.
The most recent official briefing paper, published in 2015, says: “It is the
longstanding policy of the UK to oppose the death penalty in all circumstances
as a matter of principle.
“There is a growing international momentum towards abolition of the death
penalty - in the past two decades we have seen a significant rise in the number
of countries becoming abolitionist, and we are keen to see this trend
continue.”
YouGov’s most recent poll of the public, carried out in 2014, found 45% of
Brits support the reintroduction of the death penalty.
(source: Yahoo News)
INDIA:
HC upholds death sentence for murder of family
The Punjab and Haryana high court has upheld death sentence of Fatehgarh Sahib
resident for killing 4 members of a family, including 2 children, in 2004.
The convict, Khushwinder Singh, had killed Kulwant Singh (40), his wife Harjit
Kaur (38), their daughter Ramandeep Kaur (16) and son Avrinder Singh (14) in
June 2004 by pushing them into the Sirhind canal.
Khushwinder had revealed details of the 2004 murders during interrogation after
his arrest for murders of another 6 people in similar fashion in 2012. He is
already on death row for the 2012 murders.
“The present case falls within the ambit of rarest of rare cases. The appellant
has killed 4 persons, including 2 minor children. Whether the extreme penalty
of death sentence is to be awarded, a balance sheet of aggravating and
mitigating circumstances has to be drawn up,” said the high court division
bench, comprising Justice Rajiv Sharma and Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill, after
dismissing the appeal filed by Khushwinder challenging his death sentence.
The high court said the prosecution has proved its case against the appellant
beyond reasonable doubt and the trial court had correctly appreciated the oral
as well as documentary evidence.
“The case though based on circumstantial evidence, the chain is complete. The
motive attributed to the appellant is that he wanted to grab money of Kulwant
Singh, who had recently sold land. The appellant had taken Kulwant and his
family to Bhakra canal on the pretext of receiving blessings from some “Baba.”
He pushed them into the canal on June 3, 2004 while they were offering prayers.
Bodies of Kulwant and his daughter Ramandeep were recovered. However, the
bodies of his wife and son were never recovered,” the high court observed while
upholding the sentence.
Special CBI court in Mohali had on August 28, 2018 ordered that Khushwinder
should be hanged by the neck till he is dead for the murders and imposed a fine
of Rs 10,000 on him.
(source: The Times of India)
*******************************
HC sends death penalty ruling back to trial court
3 years after a Thane cour awarded death penalty to a man for raping and
murdering a 7-year-old girl, the Bombay High Court Thursday remanded the case
back to it on account of procedural lapses.
A bench of justices B P Dharmadhikari and P D Naik set aside the trial court's
order awarding Atul Rama Lote death penalty Thursday.< P> It remanded the case
back to the trial court, asking it to reconsider the facts and evidence and
decide whether to hold a retrial or proceed anew from the stage of framing of
charges -- when procedural lapses were committed.
On September 28, 2016, the Thane court awarded Lote death sentence. He was
accused of abducting, raping and killing the minor daughter of an acquaintance
in 2014.
When the state government's petition seeking confirmation of death sentence was
taken up by the High Court, Lote's lawyer Yug Chaudhary pointed out certain
lapses.
In February 2014, the police charge sheeted Lote under IPC sections 363
(kidnapping), 366 (A) (kidnapping a minor girl with the intent of forcing her
to have intercourse), 376 (rape) and 302 (murder), Chaudhary said.
Generally, these offences attract life imprisonment or 10 years in jail, and
death is awarded only in the "rarest of rare cases", he argued.
On September 26, 2016, 2 days before the sentence was passed, the prosecution
invoked section 376(2) of the IPC (rape of a victim under 12 years of age) and
provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, making it a
case fit for death penalty, the lawyer pointed out.
The court should not have permitted amendment of charges just 2 days before the
verdict, Chaudhary said.
He also argued that Lote did not get proper legal assistance from his lawyers,
appointed through Legal Aid.
The high court said it could not overlook these procedural lapses and
especially the fact that 2 key charges were pressed only 2 days before the
verdict.
It, however, refused to acquit Lote, and said instead the trial court must
consider Lote as an undertrial and reexamine the proceedings.
(source: business-standard.com)
*********************
1993 Mumbai serial blasts convict dies in Nagpur jail
Abdul Gani Turk (68), convicted in the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts, Thursday died
at Nagpur Central jail where he was lodged after his conviction.
The special Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) court
Judge Pramod Dattatraya Kode awarded him capital punishment after finding him
guilty of planting a bomb at Century Bazaar.
Turk, a former employee of prime absconding accused Tiger Memon, was awarded
capital punishment for parking a jeep filled with RDX at Century Bazaar in
Worli. This blast caused the maximum fatalities – 113 – and injured 227 people.
Later, the Supreme Court commuted Turk’s death penalty to life sentence and
then he was shifted to Nagpur jail in 2012.
According to Nagpur jail superintendent Rani Bhosle, Turk was not keeping well
for some time and was taken to the Government Medical College and Hospital
(GMCH) here on April 22. Later, he was brought back and treated at the prison
hospital. He fell unconscious Thursday morning and was rushed to the GMCH where
he was declared dead around 12.45 pm.
Turk had suffered a paralytic attack last year. The cause of death will be
known after the autopsy report is available, the superintendent added.
Actor Sanjay Dutt was among those convicted in this case though he was
acquitted from the charges of TADA and convicted under the Arms Act. The serial
blasts killed 257 people and injured hundreds more.
The court convicted a total 100 persons in this case, of whom, 3 were sentenced
to death and 14 others to life imprisonment.
Though the apex court commuted the death sentence of other accused, the death
sentence of Yakub Memon, brother of prime accused Tiger Memon, was upheld and
he was executed.
(source: The Asian Age)
************************
In death row----The Death Penalty India Report comes as a rude shock.
Principles of custodial care remain theoretical for the death-row prisoners,
although it is obligatory for the police to take care of their well-being and
health. It is fervently to be hoped that the findings of the report will prompt
the prison administrators and policy makers to sit up and take notice and thus
effect meaningful interventions to ensure the right of the undertrials to have
an effective justice delivery system in the country
Prison administration is integral to our justice delivery system which, many
feel, calls for an urgent review. In India, the system has been unchanged since
its inception though a change in nomenclature has been effected. Our prisons
are no longer called ‘jails’ and have been rechristened as correctional homes
in keeping with the changed ethos. Although the prison infrastructure has
improved drastically over the years, we still have a long way to go as far as
treatment of the inmates is concerned. A recent study titled “The Death Penalty
Research Project” doesn’t inspire optimism. Researchers at Delhi’s National Law
University (NLU) in a comprehensive study of the socio-economic profile of
prisoners on death row, have found that most of them belong to economically
vulnerable sections, backward communities and religious minority groups. Prison
administration contends with fundamental flaws.
The death penalty is aimed at systemic marginalization of prisoners from
vulnerable backgrounds. Over half of those who have been sentenced to death had
worked in the unorganised sector as auto-drivers, brick kiln labourers, street
vendors, manual scavengers, domestic and construction workers. About 19 % of
those on death row had only attended primary school. The prisoners were
disadvantaged on 2 counts; 9 out of 10 who had never attended a school were
also economically vulnerable. This is important because a prisoner’s economic
status and level of education directly affects his ability to effectively
participate in the criminal justice system and thus secure a fair trial.
Delineating their socio-economic background, the report noted that more than 80
% of the prisoners facing capital punishment never completed their schooling
and nearly 1/2 of them had started working before they became major. Moreover,
around 25 % of the convicts were juveniles between the ages of 18 and 21 or
above 60 years when the crime was committed. Among those facing death penalty,
Dalits and tribals constituted 24.5 % while over 20 % belonged to religious
minorities.
Indians belonging to the economically backward and vulnerable sections have
found it difficult to bear the burden imposed by our criminal justice system
while handing out death sentences. The penalty can disproportionately affect
those who have the least capabilities to negotiate our criminal justice system.
As regards the right to be present at one’s own trial to defend oneself, only 1
out of the 4 interviewed had attended all the hearings.
Some prisoners would merely be taken to the court premises by the police and
then confined to a lock-up without ever being produced in the courtroom. Out of
189 prisoners, 169 did not have a lawyer.
According to rules, a person who is arrested has to be informed about the
reason for the arrest. However, 136 prisoners said they were taken away to
‘sign papers’ and were never allowed to go home again. Besides, 166 prisoners
were not produced before a Magistrate within 24 hours of the arrest as is
mandatory.
Weeks and months passed before they were presented in court. As often as not,
it was only then that the arrest was recorded. They were often tortured during
the interim period. Out of 92 prisoners who had confessed in police custody, 72
had made statements under torture.
Death-row prisoners were often kept locked while the trial proceeded to ensure
that they would not be in a position to follow the proceedings of the trial.
Even when prisoners were present in court, the report says, “the very
architecture of several trial courts often prevents any real chance of the
accused participating in their own trial.”
The accused were often confined to the rear of the courtroom while proceedings
between the judge and the lawyers took place in the front. A person charged
with a crime has the right to an interpreter and to translated documents if he
or she does not understand the language used in court. But this requirement is
seldom met. Over 1/2 the prisoners interviewed said they did not understand the
proceedings at all either because of the obstructive court architecture or the
language used (often English).
The accused has the right to challenge evidence produced against them. In
India, trial courts can question the accused directly at any stage, and the
Supreme Court has ruled that the accused persons must be questioned separately
about every material circumstance to be used against them, in a form they can
understand.
The study found that these provisions were routinely dishonoured. Over 60 % of
the prisoners interviewed said they were only asked to give yes/no responses
during their trials, with no meaningful opportunity to explain themselves.
Seven out of ten prisoners complained that their lawyers did not discuss case
details with them.
Almost 77 % never met their lawyers outside court, and the interaction inside
the court was perfunctory. Many of the prisoners preferred to engage private
lawyers despite the economic handicap because of the putative incompetence of
the underpaid legal aid lawyers. Higher the courts, lesser the information
prisoners receive about their cases. It is not just the death-row prisoners who
have to contend with such violation of rules. There is still no exhaustive list
of offences punishable by death. 59 sections in 18 central laws, including 12
sections under the Indian Penal Code, including both homicide and non-homicide
offences, carry the death penalty. Provisions under provincial legislation are
separate, and have not yet been put together in a list.
The constitutionality of death sentence was last upheld in May 1980 by the
Supreme Court. However, the apex court ruled that the same should be imposed
only in the ‘rarest of the rare’ cases. Surprisingly, most prisoners sentenced
to death are not eventually executed. Less than 5 % have actually been
executed. In most of the cases, their death sentences were commuted by the
higher courts following appeals. The findings do not suggest that the state
authorities intentionally discriminate against poor or less educated prisoners.
But the report does allege that the system is so loaded that there is a degree
of indirect discrimination at work which worsens the chances of fair trial for
prisoners from disadvantaged backgrounds. Yet issues pertaining to fair trial
and treatment of prisoners on death row by the criminal justice system are
almost never discussed with the required seriousness. Indirect discrimination
happens against such prisoners when a seemingly impartial and innocuous
practice impacts particular groups negatively, even if it is not purposely
directed at the groups. But given the irreversible nature of the death penalty,
it is particularly important that fair trial rights are scrupulously
safeguarded in such cases.
International human rights discourse agrees that every death sentence that is
imposed after an unfair trial violates the right to life. The Law Commission of
India, in one of its reports, recommended the abolition of the death penalty in
phases, beginning with ending it for all offences except those related to
terrorism. The Death Penalty India Report comes as a rude shock. Principles of
custodial care remain theoretical for the death row prisoners, although it is
obligatory for the police to take care of their well-being and health. It is
fervently to be hoped that the findings of the report will prompt the prison
administrators and policy makers to sit up and take notice and thus effect
meaningful interventions to ensure the right of the undertrials to have an
effective justice delivery system in the country.
[The writer is an IAS officer, presently posted as the Commissioner of School
Education, West Bengal. The views are personal and don’t reflect those of the
Government]
(source: Opinion; Saumitra Mohan, The Statesman)
GHANA:
African Court dismisses case against Ghana
The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights has dismissed a human rights
appeal brought against the country, by one Dexter Eddie Johnson who was
convicted and sentenced to death for murder and currently on death row awaiting
execution.
The African Court in its ruling on March 28 obtained by the Ghana News Agency
said the Application does not fulfil the admissibility requirement under
Article 56 (7) of the African Charter, which is also reflected in Rule 4O (7)
of the court’s rules.
The African Court recalls that the conditions of admissibility under Article 56
of the Charter are cumulative and as such, when one of them is not met, then
the entire application must fail.
“ln the instant case, since the application does not meet the requirement set
forth in Article 56 (7) of the Charter; the Court dismissed the application as
inadmissible.
The African Court was composed of: Justice Sylvain Ore, President; Justice Ben
Kioko, Vice-President; Justice Rafad Ben Achour; Justice Angelo V. Matusse;
Justice Suzanne Mengue; Justice Tujilane R. Chizumila; Justice Chafika
Bensaoula; Justice Blaise Tchikaya; Justice Stella I. Anukam; and Justice Imani
D. Aboud.
Dexter Eddie Johnson was represented by Saul Lehrfreund, Co-Executive Director,
The Death Penalty Project.
Ghana was represented by Miss Gloria Afua Akuffo, Attorney General and Minister
of Justice; Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, Deputy Attorney General and Deputy Minister
of Justice; Mrs Helen A. A. Ziwu, Solicitor General; and Mrs Yvonne Atakora
Obuobisa, Director of Public Prosecutions.
According to the facts of the case, Johnson holds a dual nationality of Ghana
and Great Britain.
He was convicted and sentenced to death on June 18, 2008 by a Fast Track High
Court in Accra for the murder of an American national on May 27, 2OO4, at a
village near Ningo in the Greater Accra Region of Ghana.
The was brought to trial where he denied the offence but after a full trial, he
was convicted and sentenced accordingly.
The applicant appealed against his conviction and sentence at the Court of
Appeal, arguing that while the death penalty per se is authorised by Article
13(1) of the Constitution of Ghana, the mandatory imposition of the death
sentence, on which the Constitution was silent, was unconstitutional.
He asserts that the mandatory death penalty violates the right not to be
subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, the right not to be
arbitrarily deprived of life and the right to a fair trial, all of which are
protected by the 1992 Constitution.
However on July 16, 2009, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal both on the
conviction and sentence but the applicant further pursued his appeal against at
the Supreme Court and on March 16, 2011 his appeal was, again, dismissed.
Subsequently, in December 2011 and April 2012, respectively, the applicant made
two clemency petitions to the President of Ghana.
Now in July 2012, the applicant filed a communication to the United Nations
Human Rights Committee (HRC) under the First Optional Protocol to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
On March 27, 2014, the HRC found, in its views, that since the only punishment
for murder under Ghanaian law was the death penalty, the courts had no
discretion but to impose the only sentence permitted by law.
(source: Ghana News Agency)
UGANDA:
Museveni Considers Firing Squad As Gen Muntu Launches New Party
Express death is being contemplated as the only possible method to contain the
ruthless murders in Uganda.
President Yoweri Museveni hinted on the possibility of reintroducing death
sentence while at the funeral of Doctor Catherine Agaba who was strangled by a
guard from a private security firm manning her home.
“…A young girl with so much potential to the country, murdered by a criminal
asikari. Such a criminal should not have the luxury of going to prison,”
Museveni threatened.
He said that death sentence was very effective when his rebel group captured
power in 1986.
“We made some alterations to some of the punishment methods in dealing with
Wanainchi. The death penalty was one such alteration. However, over time, it is
clearer that we need to amend the law.”
Meanwhile, the threats to return the death sentence come at a time opposition
politicians are repeatedly engaged in running battles with the police amidst
growing insecurity in the east African country.
Major General Mugisha Muntu one of first Army commanders to serve under
Museveni’s government has finally registered a political party – the Alliance
For National Transformation Party and says he is determined to dislodge his
former boss from Uganda’s biggest job.
“We have often been asked what we were doing: tasked to show publicly, our
actions for change. But progress isn’t always measured by the amount of
coverage it receives but by the hard work put in, often in private. Today we
received our certificate of registration as a party.”
(source: taarifa.rw)
SOUTH AFRICA:
It's clear: South Africans want capital punishment - ATM President
Fledgling political party the African Transformation Movement (ATM) has
promised to reintroduce capital punishment should it be elected into power
after South Africans go to the polls on May 8.
Its president, Vuyolwethu Zungula, speaking to News24 during an interview, said
that South Africans had marched, held summits and numerous meetings regarding
escalating levels of violence in the country, but only strong legislation would
be able to curb acts of violence.
Zungula said only "justice-based" capital punishment would solve South Africa's
challenge with violence, especially against those who perpetuate it against
women and children.
"All serial murderers and serial rapists will get to pay for what they are
doing - with their lives. We can't have South Africans living in fear," he
said.
Zungula was quick to add that his party would not impose the death penalty if
it wins a majority in next month's polls but would seek to give South Africans
the opportunity to change legislation if this was what they wanted.
He also insisted that based on incidents of mob justice in the country, it was
clear to him that South Africans were agitating for the return of capital
punishment.
"Look at the increase of mob justice. That's people saying part of the
punishment that must be given to criminals is that they must pay with their
lives."
Zungula claimed that close to 500 people died in the past year.
He cited social media comments on some of the high-profile killings that have
caught the country's attention, including the February murder of Thoriso
Themane in Limpopo, as signs that people are in favour of the death penalty.
"When people communicate with government, sometimes they write petitions, they
will go on TV. At times people speak with action, when they are violent in
dealing with crime, it's another expression of what they think needs to be
done," explained Zungula.
(source: news24.com)
NIGERIA:
Amnesty Begs Akeredolu Not To Endorse Execution Of Death-Row Inmates in Ondo
“Amnesty International is extremely concerned that executions may resume in
Nigeria. On 27 March 2019, the press reported that the Ondo State Attorney
General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr Adekola Olawoye, stated that the Ondo
State Governor will commence the signing of execution warrants. Since the
declaration was made Amnesty International has received a report that the Ondo
State Governor may have signed executions warrant."
Human rights organisation Amnesty International has warned Rotimi Akeredolu,
Governor of Ondo State, not to authorize the execution of any death-row
prisoner.
Amnesty made the call in in a statement signed by its country Director, Osai
Ojigho.
The statement reads: “The Governor of Ondo State, Rotimi Akeredolu, must not
authorize the execution of any death-row prisoner and if he has already
authorised executions must immediately revoke it.
“Amnesty International is extremely concerned that executions may resume in
Nigeria. On 27 March 2019, the press reported that the Ondo State Attorney
General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr Adekola Olawoye, stated that the Ondo
State Governor will commence the signing of execution warrants. Since the
declaration was made Amnesty International has received a report that the Ondo
State Governor may have signed executions warrant.
“Governor Rotimi Akeredolu must recognize that the death penalty is a cruel
punishment that has no place in the 21st century and we ask him to respect the
right to life.
“No matter what the crime is, who the prisoner is, or the method of execution
used, nothing can justify the deliberate taking of human life by the
government. There is no convincing evidence that the death penalty deters crime
better than imprisonment, therefore the death penalty is an ineffective
punishment. The possible resumption of execution in Nigeria will constitute a
setback for the country and it should be avoided, particularly as the world is
moving away from the use of the death penalty.
“The last time Nigeria carried out an execution was in December 2016 when 3 men
were executed in Benin city prison. Of the over 2,000 people on death row in
Nigerian prisons, those who have exhausted their right of appeal are at risk of
execution and could be executed as soon as a state governor authorises their
death warrants. Since Nigeria returned to civilian rule in 1999, most state
governors have not signed execution warrants.
“Amnesty International is calling on Governor Rotimi Akeredolu to commute all
death sentences issued in Ondo State to prison terms; make a public commitment
that he would not authorize the execution of any prisoner; and take immediate
steps to abolish the death penalty for all crimes in Ondo State."
(source: Sahara Reporters)
_______________________________________________
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
