March 22
PAKIStAN:
Lies about Shafqat case being exposed ----- Jail, police record shows he was 23
when he killed child
The Interior Ministry's initial probe into the age of condemned prisoner
Shafqat Hussain negates the claim of certain NGOs and civil society that he was
a juvenile when he killed a 7-year-old child in 2004.
Not only does the jail and police record confirm that the killer was 23 in
2004, but his latest photo obtained by the Interior Ministry shows him to be
above 30 now.
His 2004 picture, taken soon after his arrest, also negates the propaganda
which forced the government to defer his execution for 30 days.
The authorities are now considering constituting a medical board to determine
the age of the convict.
The motives behind the campaign are also being looked into, as the case has
also got the attention of the international community because of the NGOs'
false propaganda.
Facts show that Shafqat Hussain had not only killed the boy, but also demanded
ransom from his parents.
Shafqat, presently confined to the Central jail Karachi, had killed the
7-year-old child whose family lived in a flat of the same building where he
served as a watchman (chowkidar). The NGOs' lately discovered Shafqat lured the
child into his room and killed him.
According to the killer's confession, he lured the child into showing him a
rabbit. Since there was no rabbit and the killer's intentions were also wrong,
the child shouted and tried to run away. Shafqat hit the child on his head with
a rod, killing him on the spot.
Later he threw the body in a nearby nullah. Since no one suspected him, he
started making phone calls to the parents demanding ransom for the release of
the child already killed.
He was caught red-handed while collecting the ransom money, as the parents had
already engaged the police. The phone record also spoke against him.
Following the police interrogation, Shafqat not only confessed to his inhuman
act, but also took the police to the nullah where he had thrown the child's
body.
According to the police record, the killer was admitted to the Central Prison
Karachi on May 31, 2004. At the time of his arrest, the killer was 23 years of
age. Because of his confessional statement and the relevant evidence, the
Anti-Terrorism Court No III Karachi awarded him death on September 1, 2004.
According to a police report, the convict filed an appeal with the Sindh High
Court against his conviction but the court upheld his death penalty in May
2006. Later, Shafqat approached the Supreme Court, which dismissed his criminal
appeal in October 2007.
On July 11, 2012, the president also rejected his mercy petition and his
execution was fixed for August 8, 2012 but was later postponed till June 30,
2013. His 2nd execution was fixed for August 22, 2013 but the same was also
postponed following the Interior Ministry's letter which held in abeyance all
executions.
After the December 2014 decision of the government to end the moratorium on the
death penalty, Shafqat Hussain's black warrant was issued on January 14, 2015.
But again a letter dated January 6, 2015 issued by the Interior Ministry stayed
his execution.
Later, the Interior Ministry issued another letter to all the provinces
directing them to proceed in cases of condemned prisoners strictly as per the
law where all legal options and avenues had been exhausted and mercy petitions
rejected.
The Sindh Home Department again processed Shafqat Hussain's case for execution
of his death penalty. A black warrant was again issued and he was to be sent to
the gallows on March 19 at 05:30 am, but his execution was again postponed
initially for 3 days and later for another 30 days.
A reliable Interior Ministry source admitted that the NGOs' campaign to prove
Shafqat Hussain a juvenile had forced the government to stop the execution. The
source said a preliminary inquiry into the case showed the campaign was
misleading.
The source said the age factor, which has been the focus of the NGOs and civil
society campaign, had never been an issue before the court or the law at any
stage.
"We minutely went through all the relevant police and jail records, which
proved that the killer was 23 and not 14 in 2004," the source said, adding that
the "juvenile" factor was a recent twist based on 'sheer lies'.
The authorities also question the credibility and authenticity of the recent
emergence of a birth certificate of the killer, whose old (2004) as well as
latest photos have also been obtained by official quarters concerned to correct
the facts.
According to a report, Shafqat Hussain's birth certificate was issued by a
local council in Neelum Valley only recently on the basis of an affidavit by
the family.
Although the police, jail and judicial record of Shafqat Hussain and his old
and new photos strongly negate the propaganda, the government may decide for
its own satisfaction to get Shafqat's medical examination done by a team of
doctors.
However, it is apprehended that the NGOs which are hell-bent on protecting the
killer may try to create further complications by using the media.
There have been several voices from the civil society and the media too to
protect the killer on the basis of sheer lies, but no one has bothered to look
into facts or show any feelings for the parents of the young child killed by
Shafqat Hussain.
However, the NGO campaign may continue and there have been several voices from
civil society and the media too to protect the killer.
(source: The News)
*************************
A Patchwork Of Modernity
The recent decision of the President to lift a 5-year old moratorium on the
execution of all regular death sentences has attracted strong criticism from a
number of human rights groups and activists. However, it is disappointing to
note that, despite being a momentous occasion, it has not offered any promise
of meaningful reform in the use of the President's discretion or the critic's
privilege.
While the human rights groups may want to take credit for initial imposition of
the moratorium, the fact is that the moratorium was announced on 21 June 2008
to mark the 1st posthumous birthday of PPP's slain leader Benazir Bhutto. This
moratorium was initially lifted in the wake of the attack on APS Peshawar last
December so as to execute only "jet black" terrorists with or without the help
of military courts.
However, riding on that slippery slope, the Government has now restored the
orders for execution of all death row prisoners without any hope of relief from
the President.
It is understandable that human rights groups and activists should oppose the
death penalty. Their argument is simple: since it is humanly impossible to
devise an infallible criminal justice so as to completely eliminate the risk of
error in awarding the death penalty, we must not use this peculiar form of
punishment.
While this is a logically sound argument, it fails to realize that the argument
against death penalty in its present form has evolved in Western Europe over
the past 500 years and cannot easily be applied to Pakistan without accounting
for the local historical and philosophical context. Indeed, their argument is
relevant to Pakistan only because of the existence here of a modern-looking
judicial system.
The fact is that Pakistan is now operating on constitutionally protected
Islamic criminal law that provides for justice under the principle of Qisas -
that is, life for life unless pardoned by the heirs of the deceased. As it
happens, this tribal approach to criminal justice adopted by Islamic law sits
rather well with the cultures of biradri and ghairat prevalent in Pakistan.
The fact that there are more than 40 other countries still using death penalty
- including secular democratic countries like the United States, India, and
Japan - further weakens the argument by way of universal morality.
In these conditions, the demand for the repeal of, or a moratorium on death
penalty appears to be premature, if not a misconceived and misdirected
patchwork of modern jurisprudence on an essentially medieval social fabric.
Having said this, though the problematics of an admittedly difficult situation
cannot be ignored, it is morally repugnant to ignore the barbarity of
questionable executions.
There might be no one systematic point from which to begin reforming the
system, but protesting unabashed injustice is a good place to start.
(source: The Nation)
THAILAND:
Suspect 'tried to shut down bomb plot'
The volunteer nurse accused of helping to plan a string of bomb attacks across
Bangkok has denied any role in the plot, and said she warned her alleged
co-conspirators against embarking on a campaign of violence.
Speaking through her lawyer from a cell at Klong Prem Central Prison - formally
called the Central Women's Correctional Institution - Nattatida Meewangpla
admitted to being a member of the Line group called Thai Pakee ("Thai
Assembly"), along with several of her co-accused.
She alleged that fellow suspect Supaporn "Dear" Mitarak had informed her that
the group members wanted to launch a string of bomb attacks in the capital as a
"Valentine's Day present" to deposed former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
Ms Nattatida's lawyer said that she opposed the plan, and tried to persuade the
group to abandon it. "She told Dear that Mr Thaksin wouldn't appreciate it
since he is not a violent person," her lawyer, Winyat Chatmontree, told the
Bangkok Post Sunday.
Mr Winyat said Ms Nattatida had denied any involvement in the planning or
execution of the bomb attacks. "She said it is true that she knew people who
were [allegedly] involved with the attacks, but she had nothing to do with the
planning," he said.
When her warnings were not heeded, Ms Nattatida said she left the Line group.
She did not specify when this occurred, although she said it was before the
twin blasts at Siam Paragon on Feb 1 and the Criminal Court grenade attack on
March 7.
However, she maintained her friendship with one of the group members, Surapol
Iam-suwan, who she later asked for a loan of 5,000 baht to help cover the rent
of a laundry shop she was running with her boyfriend in Muang Thong Thani.
She said she intended to borrow from Mr Surapol's personal funds, and was not
aware that the money transferred to her had allegedly come from donations made
to the group by red-shirt supporters.
Police have alleged Mr Surapol was hired by the group to plant bombs in five
locations around Bangkok, for which he was to allegedly collect a fee of 50,000
baht.
The comments were the 1st time Ms Nattatida, a key witness in the 2010 Wat
Prathum Wanaram killing case in which 6 people were shot dead by soldiers, has
spoken to the media since her release from military custody last week.
She was taken from her cousin's home in Samut Prakarn by a group of soldiers on
March 11, after which she claims she was blindfolded and moved to an
unidentified military installation.
During her detention, Ms Nattatida said she was kept in a windowless room. She
told Mr Winyat that she faced threats of violence and feared she would be
killed.
The military initially denied it had played a role in Ms Nattatida's
disappearance, but was later forced to admit it had "invited" her for talks
which lasted 7 days.
4 of the 9 suspects in the case have claimed they faced torture during military
detention, including one who showed photographs to the media of severe bruising
to his chest. The army has threatened to launch legal action against anyone who
alleges that the military tortured any of the suspects. Ms Nattatida's lawyer
also suggested she had been mistreated.
"She told me that one military officer took the phone from her and read her
Line messages. He was trying to force her to admit that she was part of the
bomb attack plan, but she refused," Mr Winyat said. "So that officer took the
phone and hit her on her chest. She explained that she was terrified and cried
a lot." She also said her initial request for her own lawyer was denied.
The Thai Lawyers for Human Rights on Saturday demanded a full investigation
into the allegations of mistreatment, saying in a formal statement members had
seen "the traces of torture still visible on the bodies of some suspects".
"Any attempt contrary to that, including the threatening of a lawsuit against
the complainants... shall further intimidate the suspects making them too
scared to seek any legal remedies," the group said.
Ms Nattatida has been charged with terrorism, conspiracy to commit crime,
possession of illegal war weapons, violating NCPO orders and lese majeste. Mr
Winyat said she faces the prospect of the death penalty or life in prison.
(source: Bangkok Post)
MALAYSIA:
Johor Sultan Grants Full Pardon To One Prisoner, Commutes Death Sentence To
Life Imprisonment For 10 Others
Sultan Ibrahim Almarhum Sultan Iskandar has consented to grant full pardon to a
prisoner and commute the death sentences of 10 other prisoners to life
imprisonment in conjunction with his coronation as the 5th Sultan of modern
Johor Sunday.
Johor State Secretary Datuk Ismail Karim said the prisoner granted full pardon,
a juvenile offender when he committed a murder offence in 2004, was released on
March 19 after an audience with the Johor Sultan.
"Sultan Ibrahim had chaired a meeting of the Johor Pardons Board on March 5.
"The meeting gave consideration to 10 cases for pardon on the death penalty
under Rule 114, Prison Regulations 2000 and 13 cases for review of sentences
every 4 years (KHETS) under Rule 54, Prisons Regulation 2000," he told
reporters at the Sultan Ibrahim Building, Bukit Timbalan, here.
Ismail said the meeting was attended by Johor Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Mohamed
Khaled Nordin, Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani and 3 other Pardon Board
members appointed by the Sultan.
He said on the advice of the Johor Pardons Board, Sultan Ibrahim gave the
juveniles offender, now 28 years old, a reprieve and was released with the
condition that he seek an audience with the Sultan to ensure he had repented.
Following that, the prisoner released under KHETS, had an audience with the
Sultan at noon on March 19, at Istana Bukit Serene here, in the presence of his
parents and accompanied by prison officers.
With the amnesty given, it was hoped that the pardoned prisoner would use his
2nd chance to contribute to his family, community and country, he said.
For the commutation of sentences for the 10 prisoners, Ismail said Sultan
Ibrahim had consented to pardon them on the death penalty and commute their
sentences to life imprisonment for three prisoners who had committed an offence
under Section 39B (1) (a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952.
The sentences of 3 other prisoners who had committed offences under Section 3
of the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971 were also commuted to life
imprisonment.
"A prisoner who committed an offence under Section 3 of the Firearms Act
(Increased Penalties) Act 1971 and 3 others who committed offences under
Section 302 of the Penal Code also had their death sentences withdrawn and
instead were commuted to life sentence without parole," he said.
(source: Bernama)
UNITED KINGDOM/SAUDI ARABIA:
British money 'may be supporting' executions of drug mules in Saudi Arabia ----
Prisoners' rights group calls on Home Office to rethink funding for UN
narcotics programme
A United Nations agency that receives millions of pounds in UK funding has come
under fire over its support for Saudi Arabia's efforts to combat drug
trafficking at a time when the death penalty is increasingly being used against
drug mules in the kingdom.
The last 2 annual reports from the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) both
state that in the kingdom "UNODC has agreed to intensify its cooperation with
the general directorate of narcotics control on drug control-related matters,
including support to law enforcement efforts to combat illicit drug
trafficking".
The UK provides funding for specific UNODC programmes, although none of the
money goes to Gulf countries.
"The UK does not provide funding to any UN Office on Drugs and Crime programmes
in Saudi Arabia," said a Home Office spokesman. "We oppose the death penalty in
all circumstances as a matter of principle, and the UK government frequently
states this position in the strongest terms."
However, UK money does help pay for the general administration of UNODC, which
has an annual budget of $600m (401m pounds). Critics question whether this
support is consistent with the UK's opposition to the death penalty.
"The Home Office, as one of UNODC's biggest donors, can no longer remain
silent," said Maya Foa, director of the death penalty team at prisoners' rights
group Reprieve. "Theresa May must urgently raise this matter with UNODC, and
come clean over how British money may be supporting executions by some of the
world's most abusive regimes."
By 17 February this year, the Saudi authorities had reportedly executed 31
people, putting the country on course to surpass the 240 people executed in
2014. Of these, 11 appear to have been charged with drugs offences. According
to Saudi media reports, a number of those executed were then "crucified", a
practice that involves placing the severed head of the offender back on the
body and mounting it on a cross for display.
"This year has seen Saudi Arabia carry out executions at an alarming rate - 1/2
of which appear to be for non-violent drugs offences," Foa said. "This must
ring alarm bells for those supporting counter-narcotics policing in the
kingdom. The UNODC must stop helping countries like Saudi Arabia send
ever-greater numbers to the swordsman's blade."
UNODC's presence in the Gulf has grown as the region has become a big
heroin-trafficking route. Seizures of the drug in Saudi Arabia have increased
from one kilo a year in the early 2000s to 111kg in 2011. Much of the trade is
overseen by terrorist groups who force mules into smuggling heroin and other
drugs through the kingdom by holding members of their family hostage.
Saudi attempts to combat the heroin trade are framed by UNODC executive
director, Yury Fedotov, as a counter-terrorism measure. Fedotov has praised the
kingdom's efforts to clamp down on drug trafficking and highlighted the need
for all Gulf countries to step up their efforts against heroin smuggling.
The Observer has repeatedly asked UNODC to comment about the nature of its work
in helping Saudi Arabia combat drug trafficking but it declined.
However, in a letter to Reprieve, UNODC said it shared concerns about Saudi use
of the death penalty, but its cooperation with the kingdom was "focused on
technical assistance and capacity building".
(source: The Guardian)
GLOBAL:
Hung Jury ---- Buddhists aren't as unanimously opposed to the death penalty as
you might think.
The Dalai Lama had just finished speaking at an event on the Capitoline Hill in
Rome when I sought him out and asked him to be one of the first signatories of
the Community of Sant'Egidio's Appeal for a Moratorium on the Death Penalty. He
accepted immediately and signed in earth-green ink, which came as no surprise.
Who more than the Dalai Lama is identified around the world with the need to
respect life?
Indeed, all schools of Buddhism emphasize respect for life in all its forms.
Though the Buddha did not specifically address capital punishment in his
teachings, he encouraged his adherents not to do anything that could harm
others, saying, "An action, even if it brings benefit to oneself, cannot be
considered a good action if it causes physical and mental pain to another
being."
The respect for life that permeates Buddhism is inextricably connected to the
principle of samsara, the infinitely repeating cycle of birth, suffering,
death, and rebirth. Buddhists believe that samsara is the world's nervous
system, and when the death penalty is applied, both the person whose life is
taken and the person who takes that life are negatively affected. It follows
that trying to gain recompense for evil and even for violent death by
inflicting more death simply causes a greater imbalance; only rehabilitation
can restore balance and harmony in this world and the world of the spirit.
But, of course, the devil is in the details: in many countries where Buddhism
is influential, such as Thailand and Japan, the death penalty is still thriving
in spirit and in practice.
What accounts for this contradiction? One explanation may be that there is a
wide disparity between the practices of Buddhist monastic orders and lay
Buddhist followers, as in any religion. In their article "Mercy and Punishment:
Buddhism and the Death Penalty," crimonlogy professors Leanne Fiftal Alarid and
Hsiao-Ming Wang argue that while "the death penalty is inconsistent with
Buddhist teachings," historical reality is more complicated:
Buddhist doctrines hold nonviolence and compassion for all life in high regard.
The 1st precept of Buddhism requires individuals to abstain from injuring or
killing all living creatures and Buddha's teaching restricts Buddhist monks
from any political involvement. Using historical documents and interviews with
contemporary authorities on Buddhist doctrine, our research uncovered a long
history of political involvement by Buddhist monks and Buddhist support of
violence.
The website ProCon.org gathers opinions from different cultures and religions
on capital punishment. In the case of Buddhism, one voice on the "pro" side is
that of Tomoko Sasaki, a former member of the Japanese Diet. Writing in a
Washington Post article titled "Why Japan Still Has the Death Penalty," he
evokes "retribution" to justify his opinion: "A basic teaching [in Japanese
Buddhism] is retribution. If someone evil does something bad, he has to atone
with his own life."
Sasaki assumes that capital punishment restores balance in karmic terms. But in
reality, the death penalty creates a double negative: one life is lost, and
then another follows. Capital punishment, seen in this way, is a violent
disruption to the possibility of balancing different karmas and improving the
world by favoring mercy and life. The flow and intercommunication of the
reproductive karma, the supportive karma, the obstructive karma, and the
destructive karma are dealt great blows by every death sentence.
When the Dalai Lama subscribed to the appeal I submitted on behalf of the
community of Sant'Egidio, he also submitted this message, read at an event
organized by the Peace Center on April 9, 1999:
The death penalty fulfills a preventive function, but it is also very clearly a
form of revenge. It is an especially severe form of punishment because it is so
final. The human life is ended and the executed person is deprived of the
opportunity to change, to restore the harm done or compensate for it. Before
advocating execution we should consider whether criminals are intrinsically
negative and harmful people . . . The answer, I believe, is definitely not.
However horrible the act they have committed, I believe that everyone has the
potential to improve and correct themselves. Therefore, I am optimistic that it
remains possible to deter criminal activity, and prevent such harmful
consequences of such acts in society, without having to resort to the death
penalty.
(source: Mario Marazziti is the cofounder of the World Coalition Against the
Death Penalty. He lives in Rome, Italy. Excerpted from 13 Ways of Looking at
the Death Penalty [Seven Stories Press, 2015]----tricycle.com)
*******************
Pope: death penalty is inadmissible no matter how serious the crime
Pope Francis repeated the Catholic Church's total opposition to the death
penalty today, during his audience with a delegation from the International
Commission against the Death Penalty. Extracts from the letter the Pope gave to
Federico Mayor, president of the Commission, follow.
"I would like to take this opportunity to share with you some reflections on
what the Church contributes to the humanistic efforts of the Commission. The
Church's Magisterium, based on the Sacred Scripture and the thousand-year
experience of the People of God, defends life from conception to natural end,
and supports full human dignity inasmuch as it represents the image of God.
Human life is sacred as, from its beginning, from the first instant of
conception, it is the fruit of God's creating action".
"States kill when they apply the death penalty, when they send their people to
war or when they carry out extrajudicial or summary executions. They can also
kill by omission, when they fail to guarantee to their people access to the
bare essentials for life. ... On some occasions it is necessary to repel an
ongoing assault proportionately to avoid damage caused by the aggressor, and
the need to neutralise him could lead to his elimination; this is a case of
legitimate defence. However, the presuppositions of personal legitimate defence
do not apply at the social level, without risk of misinterpretation.
When the death penalty is applied, it is not for a current act of aggression,
but rather for an act committed in the past. It is also applied to persons
whose current ability to cause harm is not current, as it has been neutralised
- they are already deprived of their liberty".
"The death penalty is inadmissible, no matter how serious the crime committed.
It is an offence against the inviolability of life and the dignity of the human
person, which contradicts God's plan for man and society, and his merciful
justice, and impedes the penalty from fulfilling any just objective.
It does not render justice to the victims, but rather fosters vengeance".
"For the rule of law, the death penalty represents a failure, as it obliges the
state to kill in the name of justice. ... Justice can never be wrought by
killing a human being. ... With the application of the death penalty, the
convict is denied the possibility to repent or make amends for the harm caused;
the possibility of confession, by which a man expresses his inner conversion,
and contrition, the gateway to atonement and expiation, to reach an encounter
with God's merciful and healing justice.
It is furthermore frequently used by totalitarian regimes and groups of
fanatics for the extermination of political dissidents, minorities, and any
subject labelled as 'dangerous' or who may be perceived as a threat to its
power or to the achievement of its ends."
"The death penalty is contrary to the sentiment of humanitas and to divine
mercy, which must be the model for human justice. ... There is discussion in
some quarters about the method of killing, as if it were possible to find ways
of 'getting it right'. ... But there is no humane way of killing another
person". "On the other hand, life imprisonment entails for the prisoner the
impossibility of planning a future of freedom, and may therefore be considered
as a sort of covert death penalty, as they deprive detainees not only of their
freedom, but also of hope. However, although the penal system can stake a claim
to the time of convicted persons, it can never claim their hope."
"Dear friends, I encourage you to continue with your work, as the world needs
witnesses of God's mercy and tenderness, and may the Lord Jesus grant the gift
of wisdom, so that the action taken against this cruel punishment may be
successful and fruitful."
(source: Independent Catholic News)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/deathpenalty@lists.washlaw.edu/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
