Sept. 9
SOUTH AFRICA:
Death penalty no deterrent to crime, says expert
Bringing back the death penalty would be the same as recreating past injustices
and targeting predominantly poor people.
This is according to rape and violence law expert Lisa Vetten, who told the
Pretoria News that reinstating the death penalty would be hard from a legal
point of view due to the fact that it was unconstitutional.
Calls for the death penalty multiplied last week following increased reports of
femicide in the country, with the most recent outcry coming after UCT student
Uyinene Mrwetyana was sexually assaulted and brutally murdered.
“There is no research to substantiate or support the idea that the death
penalty is a deterrent to crime or violence. If we want to do it for vengeful
or retributory reasons we have to really ask ourselves if that kind of stance
isn’t part of the reason why we have a problem of violence and crime in SA
anyway.”
She said using violence to address the scourge of crime in the country was not
the way to go. “We already have a problem of violence in the country, and in
this instance even if it is legally state-sanctioned murder, it is still
violence.
(source: Pretoria News)
**********************
Serjeant at the Bar: Can the death penalty assist in reducing the current
levels of violent crime?
With a generally incompetent police force, and very limited detective and DNA
capacity, the death penalty will do little to protect those who live in this
country, writes Serjeant at the Bar.
It is hardly surprising that calls have been made for the reinstatement of the
death penalty in the wake of the recent horrendous murders of young women.
Indeed, it is understandable that the public is desperate for any possible
solution to the ever-increasing violence, particularly against women and
children. The criminal justice system has failed the country abysmally at the
very time that any scintilla of social cohesion has disappeared.
While no justification for the gross inhumanity perpetrated on a daily basis,
in these latest cases against young women with their lives full of promise cut
short so savagely, we are truly reaping the harvest of more than 300 years of
violence which manifested itself systemically on the basis of race and gender.
Twenty-five years into constitutional democracy, and the violence has only
intensified. It should not be forgotten that unemployment, even on a
conservative estimate is 29%. The geography of our cities have hardly
transformed from their apartheid formats and millions live in the same squalor
and despair as characterised life before 1994. Patriarchy is still dominant and
populist forms of politics seek to divide between us and them – vide the
xenophobia engulfing Johannesburg at present.
The past 10 years have eviscerated the competence of key institutions,
including the National Prosecuting Authority and the police service, which has
never been able to transform itself from its repressive past into the key
guardian of the safety of 58 million people. I mention all of this, albeit
briefly, to focus attention on the key question – can the reinstatement of the
death penalty serve the purpose claimed for it by those who now wish it to
return? In other words, can the death penalty assist in reducing the current
levels of violent crime? Comparative research on this issue is not particularly
helpful.
In 2012, the National Research Council in the USA published a report on the
available research at that time. Of particular relevance was the following
passage: "The relevant question about the deterrent effect of capital
punishment is the differential or marginal deterrent effect of execution over
the deterrent effect of other available or commonly used penalties,
specifically, a lengthy prison sentence or one of life without the possibility
of parole. One major deficiency in all the existing studies is that none
specify the non-capital sanction components of the sanction regime for the
punishment of homicide. Another major deficiency is the use of incomplete or
implausible models of potential murderers' perceptions of and response to the
capital punishment component of a sanction regime. Without this basic
information, it is impossible to draw credible findings about the effect of the
death penalty on homicide."
In 2014, Franklin Zimring - a famous criminologist - took the debate further by
analysing the effect of the death penalty in Singapore and Hong Kong. He and
his co-researchers found that Singapore had an execution rate close to 1 per
million per year until an explosive twentyfold increase in 1994-95 and 96 to a
level that we show was probably the highest in the world.
Then over the next 11 years, Singapore executions dropped by about 95%. Hong
Kong, by contrast, has no executions during the last generation and abolished
capital punishment in 1993. Homicide levels and trends are remarkably similar
in these two cities over the 35 years after 1973, with neither the surge in
Singapore executions nor the more recent steep drop producing any differential
impact.
In summary, the available evidence does not suggest that the re–introduction
will serve the claim of a reduction of the brutality that continues to engulf
South Africa. Indeed, our own history of the death penalty, where outside of
China we executed more people per capita than any other country, serves as a
clear warning – rape and homicide never reduced during this period.
For certain poor, mainly black accused felt the brunt of capital punishment and
almost invariably they were represented by the most junior of lawyers. Anyone
interested in this past should read Johnny Steinberg’s recent book One day in
Bethlehem to understand how, within this context, innocent people can be
murdered by the State due to the inadequacy of the criminal justice system.
That this did not happen in the devastating account rendered by Steinberg was
only because, at the time of conviction the death penalty was no longer in
operation. Even if the research and history indicated otherwise, with a
generally incompetent police force, and very limited detective and DNA
capacity, the death penalty will do little to protect those who live in this
country, particularly women and children, from the heart of darkness which is
contemporary South Africa.
In addition, this debate should not be used to divert attention for the core
issues - a competent and accountable police service, a definitive and decisive
set of initiatives to grow the economy and give millions real hope, an end to
residential ghettos inherited from apartheid spatial policy so that residential
areas can provide dignity for all, free from the violence of gangs and
determined policies immediately implemented to expose the horrendous forms of
patriarchy that exist in this land. Any less and we will continue to repeat the
present.
(source: Serjeant at the Bar is a senior legal practitioner with a special
interest in constitutional law----news24.com)
PHILIPPINES:
Shoot them? Hang them? - Filipino heavyweights hanker for death penalty return
If he gets his way, Filipino senator and boxing champion Manny Pacquiao would
have drug criminals executed by firing squad.
That’s getting closer to becoming a reality in the Philippines, where in the
past seven weeks, 21 bills have been filed before the lower house and Senate to
reinstate the death penalty, collectively covering crimes ranging from drug
trafficking and plunder to kidnapping, rape and murder.
It comes at the behest of President Rodrigo Duterte, the popular, self-styled
“punisher”, notorious for his crackdowns on crime, and a war on drugs that has
killed thousands of mostly poor, urban Filipinos.
Pacquiao, a staunch Duterte loyalist and the only boxer to win world titles in
eight divisions, believes executions are the best deterrent for big drug
syndicates.
“We need it. In Asia, we are one of the few countries without a death penalty,
so a lot of drug lords, pushers came in. It is alarming,” said Pacquiao, who
enjoys rock-star appeal among Filipinos, and is being touted as a future
president.
“If you ask me, firing squad,” he told Reuters, when asked how they should be
dealt with. “But it depends on what the people want, as long as death penalty
is imposed.”
But it isn’t clear if Filipinos actually want capital punishment.
Though opinion polls put Duterte’s approval rating consistently above 80%, the
same surveys reflect mixed views on his policies, including a poll 11 months
ago that showed less than a third of Filipinos agreed with reviving the death
penalty.
Human rights groups say reinstating it counters a clear global trend of
moratoria on executions or abolition of capital punishment, and goes against a
United Nations covenant against the death penalty that the Philippines signed.
That matters not to Duterte, who has repeatedly said he favors hanging
criminals, as many as 20 per day.
Most of the 21 bills have not prescribed a method of execution.
From 1950 to when capital punishment was abolished in 1987, the electric chair
was used. The death penalty was restored in 1993, using lethal injections, then
scrapped again in 2006, with 1,230 convicts taken off death row in what Amnesty
International called the biggest commutation of its kind.
BREAKING POINT
If Duterte’s drugs crackdown continues on the same scale and the death penalty
is reinstated covering “heinous crimes” - including piracy, kidnapping, murder,
treason and violent robbery - death row could potentially consist of tens of
thousands of people, going by current numbers.
In the country’s largest prison, 2/3 of the 27,756 population are serving
sentences for heinous crimes, according to the corrections department.
But the biggest problem, activists say, is the strain Duterte’s drugs war is
putting on an overstretched criminal justice system now being pushed to
breaking point.
Under Duterte, police made 193,000 drug-related arrests, but many cases were
thrown out or resulted in acquittals. Less than a third of drug cases in 2016
and 2017 led to successful convictions, according to the National Prosecution
Service.
Duterte’s opponents say the chance of miscarriages of justice are greater now
than when capital punishment was last used. From 1993 to 2004, 72% of death
penalty verdicts reviewed by the Supreme Court were overturned, sparing 677
people.
Centrist Senator Grace Poe opposes the death penalty and says reforming the
criminal justice system is vital, like addressing manpower shortfalls,
improving investigation standards, preventing graft and giving poor people
better access to legal help.
“Debating on the effectiveness and correctness of re-imposing the death penalty
is not a waste of time. However, we need to give time to our other priorities,”
Poe told Reuters.
For Duterte, executing criminals was his top priority, with a bill put to
Congress on the first day of his presidency. The lower house overwhelmingly
approved it, but it never reached the Senate, where resistance was anticipated,
including from the influential Catholic Church, the country’s dominant faith.
The church vehemently opposes it, citing the Vatican’s decision last year to
formally change its teachings to declare the death penalty inadmissible in all
circumstances.
But politics could prevail, with Duterte’s influence over both houses
strengthened to a super-majority after mid-term elections in May.
Pacquiao, a devout Christian, said he may propose doubling the justice
department’s budget to ensure innocent people aren’t executed.
“If we want good results, we need to help the justice system,” he said. “They
play a big part to eradicate illegal drugs. We can prevent mistakes in court
decisions.”
(source: Reuters)
NEPAL:
Lawmakers demand death penalty for acid attackers, lawyers oppose
Lawmakers condemned acid attack on Muskan Khatun, a schoolgirl from Birgunj,
and demanded death penalty for the perpetrators.
Samajwadi Party Nepal lawmaker Pradip Kumar Yadav, Nepali Congress lawmaker Uma
Regmi and the ruling Nepal Communist Party (NCP) lawmaker Pushpa Kumari Karna
demanded death penalty for those responsible for throwing acid on people.
He said the Parliament should not hesitate to amend the constitution to ensure
death penalty for acid attackers. He said one of the acid attackers was only
17-year-old and might be sent to correction centre if the provisions of the new
penal code were applied, but authorities should ensure that the boy who
committed such a serious crime was sent to jail for years.
Yadav said the Citizenship Act deemed a 16-year-old person an adult, while the
new penal code deemed 17-year-old persons as juvenile.
Acid brings unimaginable physical and mental pain to a victim whose life never
becomes normal and hence perpetrators must be awarded death penalty or they
should be put in jail till death, he added.
NC lawmaker Uma Regmi condemned acid attack on Khatun and said the government
should introduce death penalty in the national legal system to punish those who
committed serious crimes against women and girls. “Even some democracies have
retained the provision of death penalty for such offenders. Why is our
government not bringing new legislation to introduce death penalty in our legal
system?” she wondered.
Lawmaker Karna said laws should be amended to ensure death penalty for acid
attackers.
Almost all the lawmakers who condemned acid attack on Muskan demanded free
treatment for her.
Senior Advocate Satish Krishna Kharel told THT that reintroducing death penalty
would be challenged in the court mainly because Nepal was a party to
international instruments that had abolished death penalty and the country’s
constitution also adhered to those instruments.
Kharel said the constitution had made fundamental features of the constitution
unamendable. He said the Parliament would, however, have to amend other laws
also to increase the penalty for acid attackers. “If the law is changed to
impose 80-year jail sentence on acid attackers, but the provision that imposes
15-year jail term on murderers stays, then that won’t be wise. The House cannot
change one law to increase penalty on acid attackers and leave other criminal
laws as they are,” he said.
He added that the best way to deal with crimes was to address the root cause of
crimes. Kharel said there was not a single country where stricter penalty had
been successful in deterring criminals. He said moral education and
anti-violence education should be given to people from an early age to deal
with crimes.
(source: The Himalayan Times)
IRAQ:
Iraq sentences convicted terrorist to death, another to life in prison
Iraq’s judiciary on Sunday announced that a provincial court sentenced an
individual to death and a second person to life in prison after they were
convicted on terrorism charges.
The Higher Judicial Council said in a statement that “the Diyala Criminal Court
heard the case of a convicted individual who confessed to belonging to an armed
terrorist group and possession of weapons and explosive materials,” adding that
after being convicted, he was “sentenced to death.”
In another case, the same court “sentenced to life in prison another convicted
person for the crime of placing an adhesive explosive device on a civilian
car.” The statement explained that the bomb had not been detonated.
Since 2017, the Iraqi judiciary had issued death sentences and life
imprisonment to hundreds of alleged Islamic State members—among them, foreign
nationals.
The country has been highly criticized for its implementation of capital
punishment in recent years. The death penalty in Iraq was suspended on June 10,
2003, but reinstated the following year.
International groups and human rights organizations, including the United
Nations and Human Rights Watch, say efforts by Iraqi authorities to accelerate
the implementation of death sentences could lead to the execution of innocent
people, pointing to major flaws endemic to the nation’s deficient criminal
justice system.
In late August, the Babil Criminal Court announced it had sentenced 11 members
of the Islamic State to death for their involvement in exploding a strategic
bridge in the Iraqi province. All of them had confessed their membership to the
terrorist organization, the court said.
(source: kurdistan24.net)
SAUDI ARABIA:
Saudi operatives reveal gruesome details of Khashoggi murder
Gruesome details about the case of the murdered Saudi journalist Jamal
Khashoggi have surfaced once again through confessions at the trial of Saudi
suspects who were members of the state's security apparatus. Maher Abdulaziz
Mutreb, who was supposed to be the leader of the 15-man Saudi hit squad that
killed Khashoggi, was in fact not number 1 but number 2 and the head of the
negotiation group, according to reports.
The number one was Gen. Mansour Abu Hussein, who came to Istanbul with the
Saudi team. Hussein, on the order of the former deputy head of the Saudi
intelligence services, Ahmet al-Asiri, ordered the formation of three different
groups for the assassination – intelligence, negotiation and logistics. Hussein
headed all 3 groups, one report said.
"When Jamal Khashoggi saw a towel, a needle and drugs on the table, he asked
'What will you do with these? Will you numb me? I replied to him, 'Yes, we will
numb you.'"
"After Jamal died, I thought of burying his body in the garden of the [Saudi
Consulate] first. But then I ordered the team to dismember his body, worrying
that it would come out," Saudi intelligence officer and former diplomat Mutreb,
who played a pivotal role in the assassination of Khashoggi, said.
According to Mutreb's statement, the Saudi hit squad asked the Saudi consul
general in Istanbul to allocate a place for the meeting with Khashoggi.
During the meeting, Khashoggi was asked to return to Saudi Arabia and talk with
his son Salah to tell him that he would be in Saudi Arabia soon. However, he
refused.
Mutreb claimed that Khashoggi had been killed with a drug.
"If Jamal refuses to come to Riyadh voluntarily, I find it difficult to take
him out by force. So I decided to kill him," he added. "I wore his clothes to
make Jamal look like he came out of the consulate, I put on his glasses. I went
to Sultanahmet Square and wore my own clothes in a mosque's toilet. I threw
Jamal's clothes and glasses in the trash."
Khashoggi was killed and dismembered by a group of Saudi operatives in the
country's consulate in Istanbul on Oct. 2, 2018. Initially denying and later
downplaying the incident as an accidental killing in a fistfight, almost three
weeks after the disappearance, Riyadh finally admitted that Khashoggi was
murdered in a premeditated fashion but denied any involvement of the royal
family.
The incident was blamed on lower-level officials, including 5 that are now
facing the death penalty over their involvement. A Saudi public prosecutor said
in late March that they would seek the death penalty for 5 suspects among the
21 involved in the case. Ankara has said the statement is not satisfactory and
demanded genuine cooperation from Riyadh.
Khashoggi's body has not been recovered and the kingdom has remained silent on
its whereabouts. The U.N. human rights expert who conducted an independent
probe into the murder of Khashoggi, Agnes Callamard, said in a report last
month that the state of Saudi Arabia was responsible for the murder. The report
also found "credible evidence" that linked Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin
Salman to the killing of Khashoggi. The rapporteur noted she had received no
cooperation from Riyadh and minimal help from the U.S.
(source: daiysabah.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
