Feb. 20
PAKISTAN:
To The Gallows
Pakistan hanged 324 people last year to rank third worldwide in terms of
executions, but the vast majority of those put to death had no links to
militant groups or attacks according to human rights groups.
The general sentiment is that criminals, dangerous murderers deserve to die. If
they don't, they get to live an easy life in jail, and are a further source of
crime as well as a drain on the state's resources. This is very strong
argument, but the problem is that while we are deterring these "dons" who make
prisons their operative base, we are also sending many a poor man to the
gallows who is often there because of a lack of access to a lawyer, a
confession extracted from torture, and a corrupt legal system. While our legal
system remains ineffective and protective of the criminal (say Mumtaz Qadri and
his like), are we really okay with killing criminals, who might not be
innocent?
Human life on the whole, has such little value in our society, that this is not
even a passing concern. The hordes of people executed, who are not terrorists,
and maybe, just maybe even innocent, are shrugged away as collateral damage -
and often by people who would protest the collateral damage of the US drone
program (while applauding Zarb-e-Azab as unequivocal success - without
collateral damage).
The knot of ethics must be unravelled, and the legal system, the judges, the
lawyers and their penchant for bribes and political decisions must be stemmed.
If we are choosing to kill people, we have to be unequivocally sure that they
are criminals. It is debateable whether threat of the death penalty can deter
extremism. Most of these righteous militants are ready for death as a
consequence of their jihad, will state punishment really deter them? The
military operation was our only bet, and is our only bet, until minds that
support religious extremism can change.
How does the state, and military, ensure that the legal process was unflawed
and the accused had proper legal representation? The concept of human rights
applies to all citizens of Pakistan - it is not suspended when one person is
accused of a crime. The "greater good" argument suggests that we should not
stop hanging 99 criminals to save 1 innocent. Our religion, our constitution
and most standards of ethics would suggest otherwise.
(source: Editorial, The Nation)
IRAN:
The Supreme Court Confirms The Death Sentence Of A Juvenile Offender
The death sentence of Himan Ouraminejad who was charged with murder as a
juvenile, has been confirmed in the Supreme Court and is waiting for the
permission of head of judiciary to be executed.
According to the report of Human Rights Activists News Agency in Iran (HRANA),
Himan Ouraminejad is charged with the murder of another juvenile in a fight in
Sanandaj.
Himan Ouraminejad is born in 1994 and by the time that he committed the crime
in 2010, he was under 18.
According to article 91 of the Islamic Penal Code, when the individual is under
18 or do not understand the nature of the crime, or the growth of their brain
could be questioned, the death retribution will not be applied.
According to an informed source, the forensic has just asked him few questions
and the actual scientific tests were not carried out about Himan Ouraminejad.
The death sentence of this juvenile offenders will be executed after the
permission of the head of judiciary and the refusal of consent by the victim's
family.
Himan Ouraminejad is currently being kept in Sanandaj prison.
**************
2 Death Row Sunni Prisoners' Trial Session Postponed
The trial session of Farzad Shahnazari and Teymour Naderizadeh which was
supposed to be held in the Revolutionary Court on Saturday 13 February was
postponed because of absence of judge Salvati. The 2 Sunni prisoners have
already been sentenced to death by judge Moghiseh but due to abolition of the
sentence by the Supreme Court the case was referred to Branch 15 for retrial.
According to the report of Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), the
Supreme Court cancelled the execution of Farzad Shahnazari and Teymour
Naderizadeh in November 2015 and the case was sent to branch 15 for judicial
proceedings. These 2 were sentenced to execution in 2013 by branch 28 of the
Revolutionary Court presided by judge Moghiseh.
Teymour Naderizadeh and Farzad Shahnazari were detained in June 2010 by the
security forces and were about 20 months in solitary confinement in Sanandaj,
Zanjan and Evin prisons and then were transferred to Rajai Shahr prison in
Karaj.
Teymour Naderizadeh was arrested in Sanandaj and Farzad Shahnazari in the north
of Iran. Both prisoners are kept in hall 10 of ward 4 in Rajai Shahr prison
where mainly the death row Sunni prisoners are being kept.
Erfan Naderizadeh son of Teymour was sentenced on similar charges to 8 years
imprisonment and is currently held in ward 7 of Rajai Shahr prison. Despite
many difficulties and repeated requests, Rajai Shahr prison authorities denied
their transfer request to the same ward.
(source for both: Human Rights Activists News Agency
*********
Commute the Death Sentence of Amanj Veisee
ttp://www.amnestyusa.org/get-involved/take-action-now/iran-commute-the-death-sentence-of-amanj-veisee-ua-3916
(source: Amnesty International)
IRAQ:
Amnesty criticizes Iraq over death sentences
Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] criticized the state of justice
in Iraq on Thursday after a court in that country sentenced 40 men to death.
The Baghdad court found the men guilty of being Sunni jihadists and allied
militants that carried out a massacre of 1,700 military cadets from the
Speicher Military camp by the Islamic State in June 2014. The men are sentenced
to death by hanging under Iraq's anti-terrorism law that states that anyone who
"perpetrates, incites, plans, finances or assists acts of terrorism will be
sentenced to death". The 40 death sentences brings the total sentenced to death
in 2016 to 92 death sentences in 6 weeks. The advocacy organization called on
Iraqi authorities to halt the ratification of death sentences and to establish
a moratorium on executions. AI's Middle East and North Africa Deputy Director
said that, "[t]he vast majority of the trials have been grossly unfair, with
many of the defendants claiming to have been tortured into 'confessing' the
crimes. These allegations must be urgently investigated and a re-trial that
meets international fair trial standard should be ordered."
The use of the death penalty remains controversial worldwide. In 2014 UN
officials called on the government of Iraq to impose a moratorium on the death
penalty in response to a significant rise in executions since the country
restored capital punishment in 2005. Last month AI reported on the many
juvenile offenders on death row in Iran. The report stated that 73 executions
of juvenile offenders took place between 2005 and 2015 and that 160 juvenile
offenders are currently on death row. Last year AI said that use of the death
penalty in Pakistan was undergoing a "disturbing and dangerous" escalation
after the execution of 2 men convicted of non-terrorism offenses.
(source: jurist.org)
INDONESIA:
The Bali 9 And The Capital Punishment In Indonesia
Is the death penalty fair? Is it humane? Does it deter crime? The answers to
these questions vary depending on who answers them. Those who are against the
death penalty usually argue that such punishment fails to rehabilitate and
discourage crime. They also believe that prison keeps dangerous criminals away
from society just as well as having them executed. On the other hand, those who
support the death penalty believe that it is the ultimate weapon against
increasing crime rates, since it is human nature to fear of death.
It has been reported that there are around 100 convicts currently on death row
in Indonesia. At least 60 of them were sentenced for drug offenses, which at
the moment is dominated by foreigners. Recently, the processes related to the
execution of two (2) Australians, Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, who were
both sentenced to death by firing squad for drug trafficking, have raised
protests from people and the government of Australia. Domestically, many
Indonesians have different opinions on whether or not the government should
continue to implement the death penalty. It seems that the controversial
stories of the death penalty always attract the public's attention.
INDONESIAN LAW ON DEATH PENALTY
In Indonesia, the death penalty can be applied to various criminal offenses.
There are fourteen (14) different laws with the death penalty as a
discretionary punishment. Such major offenses include: (i) production, transit,
import and possession of drugs (Law No. 35 of 2009 on Narcotics); (ii)
premeditated murder (Art. 340 of Penal Code of Indonesia); (iii) corruption
under 'certain circumstances' (Law No. 31 of 1999 on Corruption); (iv) acts of
terrorism (Law No. 15 of 2003 on Combating Criminal Acts of Terrorism); and (v)
gross violations of human rights, including genocide and crimes against
humanity (Law No. 26 of 2000 on Human Rights Courts). The reports indicate that
in practice the death penalty is mainly imposed on the commission of drug
trafficking, murder and terrorist acts. Drugs offenses have accounted for most
death sentences since 1998.
The Constitution of Indonesia ("Constitution") provides that every person has
the right to live and to defend his/her life and existence; however the right
to live and other human rights granted under the Constitution are not absolute.
Article 28 (J) of the Constitution stipulates that every person has the duty to
respect the human rights of others in the orderly life of the community, nation
and state. As the consequence, for the sole purposes of guaranteeing the
recognition and respect of the rights and freedom of others, the law may
restrict the individual human rights. The law can set aside such rights if the
interest to be protected is particularly important or serious.
In light of the above, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia,
in its Decision No. 2-3/PUU-V/2007 on Judicial Review of Law No. 22 of 1997 on
Narcotics dated 23 October 2007 ("Decision No. 2-3/2007") and Decision No.
15/PUU-X/2012 on Judicial Review of Indonesian Penal Code dated 10 July 2012,
interpreted that the inherent right to life is not absolute. Therefore,
according to the Constitutional Court, the state is entitled to restrict the
right to life in order to protect the rights and freedoms of others, including
through the application of the death penalty. Also, the Constitutional Court
based its ruling on Article 6 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights of 1976 ("ICCPR"), and the United Nations Convention against
Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988
("Convention 1988") which has been ratified by Law No. 7 of 1997. The
Constitutional Court argued that the death penalty may still be imposed for the
most serious crimes.
FUTURE TREND
The phrase 'the most serious crimes' as stated in Article 6 (2) of ICCPR is
open to interpretation. In 2006, the United Nations ("UN") rapporteur on
extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions further narrowed the
interpretation of the 'most serious crimes' by defining them as 'cases where it
can be shown that there was an intention to kill, which resulted in the loss of
life'. The abolitionists are of the view that sentencing people to death denies
them the right to life as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights of 1948, and execution is the ultimate, irrevocable punishment since the
risk of executing an innocent person can never be eliminated. In the spirit of
universality, Article 6 of ICCPR sets direction towards abolition of the death
penalty by establishing state obligations to progressively restrict its use
only for the most serious crimes.
There is a clear international trend away from the death penalty. According to
the UN, more than 150 countries have abolished the death penalty from their
laws. In an effort to abolish death penalty throughout the world, the General
Assembly of the UN has adopted resolutions for a moratorium on the death
penalty. It calls for states which maintain the death penalty to establish a
moratorium on the use of the death penalty with a view to abolishing it, and in
the meantime, to restrict the number of offenses with the death penalty. It
also calls for the states which have abolished the death penalty not to
reintroduce it. However, like all General Assembly resolutions, it is not
binding on any state.
Despite this global trend, some countries continue to apply the death penalty
on the basis that it deters crime and should be applied to a broad range of
criminal acts, even when there is no intention to kill or actual loss of life.
As a comparison, in the neighboring countries of Indonesia such as Singapore
and Malaysia, the death penalty is mandatory for drug trafficking and the
manufacturing of drugs, genocide involving the killing of any person, and other
capital offenses under the Singaporean Penal Code. However, the courts are now
given more discretion on whether to impose the death penalty. In Malaysia, the
death penalty is mandatory for drug trafficking, acts of terrorism, and other
capital offenses under the Malaysian Penal Code.
In the last 10 years, Indonesia has executed 10 people for drug offenses.
Compared to Singapore and Malaysia, this number can be viewed as slightly
conservative. Singapore has executed more than 80 people for drug offenses.
Meanwhile, Malaysia has executed more than 50 people for similar offenses.
Therefore, the 'seriousness' of a crime may vary according to national culture,
religion, tradition and political context.
While the imposition of the death penalty is a legal move, the decision on
whether or not to carry it out, particularly in Indonesia, is a political one.
Under the new administration, President Joko Widodo, there was a hope at the
beginning that the new administration will afford more respect human rights and
there were signs that Indonesia would abolish the death penalty for all crimes.
In fact, quite the opposite has occurred. President Joko Widodo has proven to
be a staunch supporter of the death penalty, overseeing the execution of 6 drug
traffickers on January 2015 and making several public statements that he will
not grant clemency to any of the other drug traffickers currently on death row.
The number of countries that put an end to the death penalty since the late
1980s increased nearly three-fold, from 35 to 99. These notes confirm Indonesia
as one of the few countries moving in the opposite direction.
(source: mondaq.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
