May 15
BAHRAIN:
Suspend Death Penalty----Court Upholds Death Sentence for 2 Men
The Bahrain Court of Cassation, the country’s court of last resort, upheld the
death sentence against two men on May 6, 2019, Human Rights Watch said today. A
court convicted the men, Ali al-Arab and Ahmad al-Malali, of terror offenses in
a mass trial on January 31, 2018.
Bahrain ended a de facto 7-year moratorium on the death penalty in January
2017, when it executed three men. Under Bahraini law, after the Court of
Cassation confirms a death sentence, the decision is sent to the King, who has
the power to ratify the sentence, commute it, or grant a pardon. On April 26,
2018, King Hamad commuted the sentences of four men who were sentenced to death
in a military trial in December 2017. According to the Bahrain Institute for
Rights and Democracy, 8 people are currently on death row in Bahrain.
“Despite its rhetoric on reform, Bahrain is moving in the wrong direction by
reinstating the death penalty,” said Lama Fakih, acting Middle East director at
Human Rights Watch. “This irreversible punishment is cruel in all cases, but
all the more so here amid evidence that the accused were tortured and denied
fair trials.”
The 2 men were arrested separately on February 9, 2017 and sentenced with 58
other defendants on January 31, 2018, in a trial marred by allegations of
torture and due process violations. Al-Arab’s family told Human Rights Watch
that interrogators at the Criminal Investigations Directorate beat him
severely, used electric shocks on him, and pulled out his toenails, after which
they forced him to sign a confession while blindfolded.
Al-Arab did not have access to lawyer during his interrogation and saw his
lawyer for the first time during his first court hearing, family members said.
When al-Arab’s family saw him for the first time at the Dry Dock prison, the
25-year-old man was brought out in a wheelchair due, they believed, to beatings
on his legs.
In a letter to the Bahraini government on July 6, 2017, the United Nations
Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and its special rapporteur on torture
expressed “grave concern” about al-Arab’s allegations of torture at the
Criminal Investigations Directorate and the Dry Dock prison. The Bahraini
government responded, claiming that all the allegations were “false,”
contending that al-Arab did not report being tortured during the investigation
and that neither he nor anyone acting on his behalf had complained to the
Interior Ministry’s Ombudsman.
However, al-Arab’s family told Human Rights Watch that they had submitted 2
complaints to the Ombudsman. Further, court records Human Rights Watch reviewed
indicate that al-Arab’s defense stated that his confession was obtained under
torture.
On December 11, 2018, three UN human rights experts sent another letter to the
Bahraini government expressing extreme concern about the imposition of the
death penalty on several defendants, including al-Arab and al-Malali, amid
allegations that their confessions were obtained under torture. The letter said
that al-Malali, 24, was shot during his arrest, but that doctors did not remove
the bullets until 23 days later. The experts also said that al-Malali was
prevented from meeting with a lawyer and allegedly tortured at the Criminal
Investigations Directorate, then forced to sign a confession.
The court documents reviewed state that a forensic examination report found
injuries on al-Malali’s right wrist as a result of being hit by shrapnel during
his arrest.
Human Rights Watch has previously documented torture in the Criminal
Investigations Directorate, including the use of electric shocks, suspension in
painful positions, severe beatings, threats to rape and kill, and sexual abuse.
Many of the detainees interviewed said that interrogators boasted of their
reputation for torturing detainees. Many of those abused at the facility
reported signing forced confessions.
The UN Committee against Torture has raised concerns about Bahrain’s oversight
bodies, including the Ombudsman, and said that these entities were neither
independent nor effective. Since their establishment in 2012, they have
repeatedly failed to investigate credible allegations of prison abuse or to
hold officials who participated in and ordered widespread torture during
interrogations since 2011 accountable.
Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances because of
its inherent cruelty. Bahrain’s use of the death penalty is contrary to
international human rights law, statements of UN human rights experts, and
various UN bodies. Human rights law upholds every human being’s “inherent right
to life” and limits the death penalty to “the most serious crimes,” typically
crimes resulting in death or serious bodily harm.
Bahrain should join the many countries already committed to the UN General
Assembly’s December 18, 2007 resolution calling for a moratorium on executions,
a move by UN member countries toward abolition of the death penalty. King Hamad
should exercise his authority in this case to halt the executions and move to
abolish capital punishment outright.
Bahrain’s European allies should use their leverage to press Bahrain to abolish
the death penalty, or at the very least, to reinstate the moratorium on
executions.
“The death sentence is irreversible, and any doubt that is cast on the fairness
of the trial should be grounds to commute the sentence,” Fakih said. “The death
penalty is an archaic punishment that should be halted immediately.”
(source: Human Rights Watch)
IRAN----executions
6 Men Executed for Drug Offences in Iran, Despite Legal Reform
At least 6 men have been hanged for drug offences in Iran since late April,
raising concerns about a “new wave of drug-related executions” in a country
that recently legislated to reduce the punishment.
On April 27, Kamal Shahbakhs was hanged at Kerman Central Prison for drug
offences after having spent six years in prison. The next day, 24-year-old
Mohammad Bameri was executed at the same prison. A local activist described
Bameria as "a poor student who had [sold drugs] to earn some money for his
college expenses. His execution made his family’s condition even worse.”
Then, on May 9, 4 men were hanged at Arak Central prison for drug offences:
Hamidreza Hosseinkhani, Majid Kazemi, Mohammad Hemmati, and Mohammad
Davoudabadi.
Between 2008 and 2018, Iran executed at least 3,975 people for drug offences -
according to a report by Harm Reduction International. However, the number of
executions for drug offences dropped by 90 % between 2017 and 2018, following
an amendment to the country’s drug legislation.
As TalkingDrugs has previously reported, the 2017 amendment raised the
threshold quantity of drugs needed for a person to be eligible for capital
punishment. For heroin and cocaine, the quantity needed to be possessed to
allow the death penalty rose from 30 grams to two kilograms. For cannabis, the
quantity rose from 5 kilograms to 50 kilograms.
The amendment was retroactive, so thousands of prisoners on death row are
likely to be spared following a review of their case.
Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, spokesperson for the Iran Human Rights (IHR)
non-profit, praised the amendment: “This is probably the most significant step
towards limitation in the use of the death penalty in the history of the
Islamic Republic and probably 2018’s most significant change in death penalty
trends worldwide. We hope it is the 1st step of many that the Iranian
authorities must take in order to improve their dark human rights record”.
While authorities have not confirmed any of the deceased’s specific offences,
there are several drug-related activities that retain the death penalty as
punishment, regardless of the quantities involved. These include possessing or
using a gun while drug trafficking, and encouraging children to participate in
trafficking. Additionally, anyone who has previously been sentenced to death or
over 15 years in prison for drug offences is eligible for execution if
convicted for any subsequent drug offence.
IHR have expressed dismay at the recent executions, stating that they “raise
concerns about a new wave of drug-related executions in Iran”.
(source: talkingdrugs.org)
BELARUS:
Belarusian Supreme Court Upholds Death Sentence In Double-Murder Case
The Belarusian Supreme Court has upheld a death sentence for a man convicted of
murdering 2 women, despite calls from the European Union for Minsk bring an end
to capital punishment.
The court pronounced its decision in the case against Alyaksandr Asipovich on
May 14.
Human rights activist Andrey Paluda, who coordinates the Rights Defenders
against Capital Punishment campaign, told RFE/RL that Asipovich had a right to
appeal the court's decision at the United Nations' Human Rights Committee.
Paluda maintains that Asipovich's right to a fair trial was violated.
Under Belarusian law, Asipovich has 10 days to file a request for clemency from
President Alyaksandr Lukashenka.
Asipovich's mother told RFE/RL that her son planned to request clemency.
The 36-year-old Asipovich has previous convictions for theft, robbery,
hooliganism, and inflicting bodily harm.
He was convicted and sentenced to death on January 9 for the murders in 2018 of
2 women in the eastern city of Babruysk.
Belarus has drawn criticism from rights activists and EU states as the only
European country that carries out the death penalty.
For years, the EU has urged Belarus to join other countries in declaring a
moratorium on capital punishment.
According to rights organizations, more than 400 people have been sentenced to
death in Belarus since it gained independence following the collapse of the
Soviet Union in 1991.
Human rights groups say Belarus carried out 1 execution in January, 1 in
November, and 2 executions in May 2018.
(source: Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty)
TAIWAN:
EU calls on Taiwan to stop use of death penalty
The European Union (EU) has called on Taiwan to introduce a temporary
moratorium on the death penalty after a bilateral meeting on human rights in
Brussels on Tuesday.
The European External Action Service (EEAS), the EU's diplomatic service, said
in a statement after the second annual EU-Taiwan Human Rights Consultations
that the EU and Taiwan share democratic values and a respect for human rights
and the rule of law but the death penalty remains problematic.
"The EU commended Taiwan for recent developments on human rights. The EU called
upon the Taiwanese authorities to apply and maintain a de facto moratorium in
relation to the death penalty in Taiwan," the statement said.
"The EU regretted the resumption of executions in Taiwan in 2018 and reiterated
its long-standing position that the death penalty has no deterrent effect and
is an inhumane form of punishment that cannot be reversed."
The EU added that Taiwan stated its position on the death penalty issue,
without divulging what that was.
The death penalty remains legal in Taiwan and is supported by the vast majority
of the population, up to 80 % according to some polls, but outside human rights
groups have continued to urge Taiwan to ban the practice.
Taiwan most recently executed a death-row inmate on Aug. 31, 2018, the 1st
execution carried out under President Tsai Ing-wen's government, which took
office in May 2016.
During the meeting, Taiwan and the EU also discussed the situation of Lee
Ming-che, a Taiwanese activist who is serving a jail term in China for
"subverting state power" after promoting democracy in group messaging chats.
The EU, meanwhile, also highlighted Taiwan's achievements in incorporating the
provisions of United Nations human rights conventions but called on Taiwan to
better incorporate those provisions in its legal system and establish a human
rights action plan.
Migrant workers' rights, especially in the fishing industry, were discussed as
well, with the EU underlining the need to effectively ensure that migrant
workers are fully protected against discrimination, abuse or exploitation, the
statement said.
During the discussions, the EU and Taiwan updated each other on respective
policies on LGBT and gender equality, and brought up for the first time
indigenous people's rights.
Taiwan and the EU agreed to hold the annual consultations in Taipei next year
and maintain close cooperation on the topics raised this year, the statement
said.
(source: focustaiwan.tw)
ZIMBABWE:
Is Zim ready to abolish death penalty?
May 2019 marks the anniversary of the publication of 12 Years Without an
Execution: Is Zimbabwe Ready for Abolition?, an independent survey of public
attitudes towards capital punishment commissioned and published by the Death
Penalty Project in association with Veritas. Since the release of the report,
there appears to have been further progress towards the abolition of the death
penalty in Zimbabwe.
The President, Emmerson Mnangagwa, himself has made his support for abolition
very clear. In January 2019, we also understand that the Justice, Legal and
Parliamentary Affairs ministry made recommendations to Cabinet to abolish the
death penalty — with Justice minister Ziyambi Ziyambi citing evidence of both
the lack of increased deterrence, and the inevitability of error, to support
these proposals. Encouragingly, this important step was taken despite the
disappointing decision made by the government to vote against the United
Nations (UN) resolution on a worldwide moratorium on the death penalty only a
month prior, in December 2018.
No executions have taken place in Zimbabwe since July 2005, almost 14 years
ago. However, Amnesty International reports that at least five people were
sentenced to death in 2018, with 81 people under sentence of death at the
beginning of this year. The on-going use of the death penalty remains an issue
in Zimbabwe, with public opinion commonly cited as a key barrier to abolition.
The findings of the “12 Years” report challenge this perspective.
Until this research was undertaken, no examination of public attitudes towards
the death penalty had been carried out in Zimbabwe since the
constitution-making process in 1999. At this time, the public were only asked
one binary question – whether or not they supported or opposed capital
punishment. We know from previous research that such binary questions fail to
uncover important nuances or gauge the extent of public attitudes. As such,
there was a clear need for further investigation of public attitudes towards
the death penalty. As expected, the in-depth research uncovered important
findings that are essential to any discussion on the future of the death
penalty in Zimbabwe.
While a small majority of Zimbabweans do support retention of the death
penalty, this support was not particularly strong. Only 41% thought that
Zimbabwe should “definitely” retain the death penalty, with 20% feeling it
should “probably” be kept – a combined total of only 61% (compared with 33% in
favour of abolition). In addition, the report also identified that public
opinion, whether for or against abolition, was generally not based on deep
knowledge of the subject matter. Of those surveyed, 83% were unaware that
Zimbabwe had not conducted an execution for over a decade. Moreover, when
presented with a range of typical case scenarios, 5 out of 6 respondents
rejected its use. This demonstrates that support for capital punishment, in
practice, is far lower than it first appears in the abstract.
When exploring the reasons for the support of the death penalty, it was
striking that the “eye for an eye” argument did not weigh heavily with the
Zimbabwean public. Only 14% of retentionists supported the death penalty for
retributive reasons, standing in stark comparison to similar studies conducted
in Trinidad, Ghana, and other countries, where this tended to be one of the
most popular arguments in favour of the death penalty. Further questioning
found that public opinion was not deeply entrenched, with 92% of respondents
considering that policies other than “more executions”— such as “better moral
education” or “reducing poverty” — would be more effective in reducing violent
crime. Thus, while on the surface, public support for capital punishment might
appear strong, the survey clearly shows that this is not the whole picture.
Attitudes towards the death penalty are highly qualified and vary according to
different assumptions, information and situations.
Perhaps, the most significant finding of the study was that 80% of the
respondents, who were in favour of retention, would accept abolition, if it
were to become government policy. This means that people look to the government
to take the lead on the issue.
While public opinion is a factor that should be considered in the debate, it is
ultimately the responsibility of the country’s political leadership to educate
and lead the national discussion. This finding demonstrates that principled
leadership by Members of Parliament and other leaders would be welcomed by the
Zimbabwean public.
Until formal steps are taken by policymakers to abolish capital punishment in
law, people will continue to be sentenced to death, and the risk of future
executions being carried out in Zimbabwe will inevitably persist.
It is, therefore, imperative that abolition of the death penalty is championed
by political leaders and is based on a rational and informed appreciation of
the facts.
Many countries that are now the most ardent supporters of abolition worldwide
abolished the death penalty in the face of significant public opposition. We
know from these examples that public attitudes evolve, and where political
leadership is exercised to abolish the death penalty, the public does — in time
— come to support the abolitionist position.
Support for the death penalty is reducing worldwide, with over two-thirds of
countries having now abolished capital punishment in law or in practice.
Sub-Saharan Africa has particularly seen positive trends in recent years — with
Burkina Faso, Guinea and Benin all having abolished the death penalty since
2016.
Over the past year, Zimbabwean policymakers have indicated their readiness to
take significant steps in the same direction.
We would encourage Zimbabwe to join the majority of the world’s nations in
removing execution as punishment from its laws. 12 Years Without an Execution
demonstrates that the public will accept and embrace its leaders taking this
important step.
(source: Guest Column: Parvais Jabbar & Val Ingham-Thorpe; newsday.co.zw)
_______________________________________________
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
