July 8
INDONESIA:
Family of 3 in Aceh facing death penalty for smuggling meth from Malaysia
A husband and wife, as well as their son and a business partner, are currently
on trial in Aceh for smuggling 14.4 kg of methamphetamines from Malaysia into
Indonesia.
Accoding to Detik, Ramli and Nina, a husband and wife who live in Gampong Jawa
in the Idi Rayeuk district of East Aceh, flew to Penang on February 1. After 9
days of waiting, Ramli and Nina met with a man at a gas station in the city of
Jeti Penang and received the methamphetamines, worth billions of rupiah in the
Indonesian market.
The couple then arranged for their son, Muzakir and Ramli's brother Jamil to
transport the meth back to Indonesia by sea. Their business partner, Herman,
arranged for a ship and they departed for Aceh on February 11.
But on the way the ship broke down around Pelabuhan Jeti in Malaysia, close to
Kualo Jambo. The group then made their way to Terminal Panton Labu, where
Herman and Muzakir were meant to take a rented minibus to deliver the meth
home, while Ramli and Nina returned separately.
But the bus Herman and Muzakir took was stopped by North Aceh police in Tanah
Jambo Aye, leading to a high speed chase in which the bus rammed 2 police
motorcycles. Later they hit a civilian riding his motorcycle and, in a panic,
got out of the car. Police quickly caught up to them and arrested the pair
without further resistance.
When the car was searched all police found at first were boxes of tea packets.
But they quickly realized tea packets were filled with narcotics. They were
then taken to the police station, where the whole story was revealed. Ramli and
Nina were tracked down and arrested soon after.
Because of their crimes and the suspicion that they are part of an
international drug syndicate, the prosecutor in their case has demanded that
Ramli, Nina, Muzakir and Herman all receive the death penalty.
(source: Coconuts news)
***************************
http://www.amnestyusa.org/get-involved/take-action-now/indonesia-halt-executions-of-two-foreign-nationals-ua-30514
(source: Amnesty International USA)
BOTSWANA:
Death row inmate's attorney fails to impress CoA
An attorney for death row inmate Patrick Gabaakanye has pleaded for mercy from
the Court of Appeal (CoA) saying that a death penalty was too harsh for his
client.
Yesterday before the bench of 3 judges, Martin Dingake argued that Gabaakanye
was convicted purely based on circumstantial evidence.
The 55-year-old Gabaakanye was convicted and sentenced to death by the High
Court in 2014 for the murder of an elderly couple at Ga-Mosu Lands in 2010 that
left an old blind man dead and his wife wounded.
He was also sentenced to 5 years for unlawfully wounding. Dingake submitted
that in the absence of solid evidence, his client was entitled to an acquittal.
"My client's conviction was largely based on circumstantial evidence. This is
so because none of the state witnesses said they saw Gabaakanye commit the
crime in which he stood charged and subsequently convicted for," he said.
He argued that the stolen items that were found in his client's possession and
used to link him to the murder could have changed hands in a short space of
time.
Dingake said the trial court disregarded the evidence of recent possession
given the nature and value of the alleged stolen items that they can change
hands much quicker.
"The trial court failed to consider the doctrine of recent possession and
nature and value of items stolen in the context of the passage of time from the
date of the alleged offence and when they were found in my client's
possession," he said.
He further argued that a conviction could not be based purely on the doctrine
of recent possession especially where interference is possible. However, when
the judges pressed hard on the submission of circumstantial evidence, Dingake
changed tune and said that if indeed it was his client who attacked the old
couple, the act was not premeditated.
Justices Monametsi Gaongalelwe, Justice Isaac Lesetedi and Justice Elijah
Legwaila were adamant that circumstantial evidence was still admissible in
court; he did not challenge most of the evidence put before him, and therefore
he should not push for acquittal of Gabaakanye.
Dingake said his client was not a murderer and that given a second chance he
can change for the better.
"It is respectfully submitted that this is not a proper case where the death
sentence should be imposed and in the solemn circumstances, we beg for mercy
and for a 2nd chance and for a custodial sentence other than death penalty," he
said. However, the judges insisted this was a premeditated murder. The bench
questioned why Gabaakanye went to the old couple's place armed and concealing
his face.
"He was armed with dangerous objects, the old man was reported to have died
from deep head injuries. He had many blows to the head and when he thought the
couple was dead, he proceeded robbing them. That is premeditation," the judges
said.
Justice Lesetedi also indicated that he was not impressed with the manner in
which the state handled the case, especially not marking and identifying
exhibits. "This case looks like it was handled by someone who did not do law
and procedure. This is disappointing because here we are dealing with a case
where someone was murdered and the other's life (the appellant) is hanging in
the balance.
"You ought to do a proper job," he said.
(source: mmegi.bw)
ISRAEL:
Online Campaign Launched for Terrorist Death Penalty Law
Yisrael Beytenu's Sharon Gal pushes for public pressure ahead of critical
debate Sunday on his bill to execute terrorists.
An online campaign calling for the death penalty to be applied to terrorists
was launched on Wednesday by MK Sharon Gal (Yisrael Beytenu), whose terrorist
death penalty bill is facing a critical Knesset discussion on Sunday.
The new bill would alter the law, requiring that those found guilty of murder
for terrorist reasons be executed. Gal lost no time in fulfilling his party's
campaign promise on the matter and submitting the bill as soon as the 20th
Knesset was sworn in.
On his Facebook page Wednesday, Gal launched a campaign calling for concerned
Israelis to post pictures of themselves with a sign reading "I'm also in favor
of the death penalty for terrorists."
He called for the pictures to be shared widely, so as to exert pressure on the
governmental ministers to respond to the mandate of the public calling for more
stringent methods of deterrence against terrorism.
"We promised and we are earnest to deliver," stated Gal. "We must change the
reality and topple terrorism. The death penalty law will strengthen Israeli
deterrence - it is moral and ethical to legislate it for the preservation of
the life of our citizens."
He stated the bill has "wide support among the people - it is clear to all that
this is a law that must pass."
While Israel already has a death penalty on the law books, it has only been
implemented once, in the case of Nazi leader Adolf Eichmann, who was put to
death back in 1962.
Gal's bill includes a clause specifying that those murdering innocent Israeli
civilians through terrorist activities in Judea and Samaria - which remains
under martial law given that Israel has yet to annex the region following its
liberation in the 1967 Six Day War - will also be liable to the death penalty.
Majority of military judges will suffice
Currently only a unanimous vote by judges in Judea and Samaria military courts
can lead to a death penalty, a result that has yet to be recorded. Instead the
new law would require only a majority to rule the death penalty, and likewise
it will prevent the regional IDF commander from being able to lighten the
sentence.
In a previous effort to address the situation whereby Arab terrorists sit in
jail in privileged conditions before being released in terror swaps, such as
the 2011 Gilad Shalit deal that saw 1,027 terrorists go free, the Jewish Home
initiated a "life without parole" law that was passed last November, during the
term of the last coalition.
However, Meir Indor, head of the Almagor terror victims organization, revealed
to Arutz Sheva last year that the Jewish Home law is "practically ineffective."
One of the key flaws, he pointed out, is that it doesn't address terrorists
sentenced in military courts in Judea and Samaria, where the majority of
attacks and concurrent trials occur. Another shortcoming, he noted, was that
the law didn't apply retroactively to terrorists who were already sentenced
prior to its passage, and that it leaves it up to the judge's discretion
whether or not to sentence a terrorist without chance of parole.
(source: Israel National News)
PAKISTAN:
Pakistan executions on the rise
It's almost 7 months since the attack on a school in Peshawar that left more
than 140 children dead and shocked the world. That atrocity prompted Pakistan
to lift its moratorium on the death penalty. Since then, it's become one of the
world's most prolific executioners, with 178 inmates executed. There are also
concerns that many of those on death row were forced to give false confessions
under torture or were under age at the time of their sentencing.
(source: france24.com)
GHANA:
Facilitate hearing of constitutional review case; Emile Short tells Chief
Justice Musah Yahaya Jafaru
A former Commissioner of the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative
Justice (CHRAJ), Mr Justice Emile Short, has expressed worry over the delay by
the Supreme Court in hearing and determining the petition challenging the
constitutionality of the constitutional review process.
He has, therefore, urged the Chief Justice, Mrs Georgina Theodora Wood, to
facilitate the hearing and determination of the case. The petition, which has
been pending before the Supreme Court for a year now, is asking the court to
determine the power and authority of the Constitutional Review Implementation
Committee (CRIC) to continue the Constitution review process before the 2016
elections.
Justice Short said the determination of the case was crucial because some of
the recommendations of the CRIC would have some bearing on the elections.
Besides, he said, the expected referendum on the entrenched provisions,
including the abolition of the death penalty, could not go ahead if the Supreme
Court did not decide on the matter.
"I urge the Chief Justice to take steps to ensure that this matter is decided
as quickly as possible, so that we know the way forward. It should be decided
before the elections," he stressed.
Justice Short expressed the worry at a workshop organised by Amnesty
International, Ghana and sponsored by the French Embassy to discuss the way
forward on the campaign for the abolition of the death penalty, vis-a-vis the
constitutional review process. He noted that Ghana was among the countries that
still had the death penalty on the statutes book for murder, genocide and
treason.
He said although there had not been any execution since 1993, the conditions
under which those sentenced to death lived in the prisons were deplorable.
"Those sentenced to death are at separate places where conditions are horrific.
They can hardly breathe. They are enduring a lot of hardship and trauma. The
uncertainty of not knowing when you will be executed is itself cruel," he said.
Justice Short, therefore, called for urgent steps towards the abolition of the
death penalty in the country.
Amnesty International
The Constitution Review Commission recommended that the death penalty should be
changed to life imprisonment, which had been accepted, according to the
Government's White Paper. The Director of Amnesty International, Ghana, Mr
Lawrence Amesu, said the major challenge hindering progress towards the
abolition of the death penalty in the country "is that the constitutional
review process has come to a standstill" because of the pendency of the
petition against the process.
French Ambassador
The Ambassador of France to Ghana, Mr Frederick Clavier, said the death penalty
was a violation of a fundamental human right and should be abolished across the
globe. He said the commitment of France to the universal abolition of the death
penalty was part of its international diplomacy efforts.
(source: graphic.com.gh)
INDIA:
Death Without Legal Sanction
Asian Centre for Human Rights in its report, India: Death Without Legal
Sanction
(http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/India-Death-without-legal-sanction.pdf),
stated that India has been imposing death penalty without conforming with
international standards for fair trial i.e. Article 14 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), United Nations (UN) Safeguards
Guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of Those Facing the Death Penalty, UN
Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, UN Basic Principles on
the Role of Lawyers, UN Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors, UN Body of
Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or
Imprisonment, and UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners.
"Imposition of death penalty without ensuring respect for the fair trial
standards provided under international human rights standards constitutes
arbitrary deprivation of the right to life. Such death penalty is nothing but
judicial murder". states the study.
This study highlights that India has not been complying with its obligations
under the ICCPR and has indeed been imposing death penalty without legal
sanction. While the violations of international fair trial standards such as
denial of legal assistance of the defendant's own choosing at every stage of
the proceedings and trial without delay are plenty, this report highlights six
critical instances of imposition of death penalty without legal sanction.
First, judicial discretion is one of the cardinal principles of independence of
judiciary which stands violated in case of mandatory death penalty as it
prevents any possibility of taking into account the defendant's personal
circumstances, the circumstances of the particular offence and any related
mitigating factors by the judiciary. The UN Human Rights Committee has stated
that "the automatic and mandatory imposition of the death penalty constitutes
an arbitrary deprivation of life, in violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 of the
ICCPR", and is fundamentally incompatible with the right to fair trial and due
process guaranteed under Article 14 of the ICCPR. India's Supreme Court had
declared mandatory death penalty under Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code
(IPC) as unconstitutional in Mithu v. State of Punjab in 1983.
Though the Supreme Court had declared mandatory death sentence as
unconstitutional in 1983, the government of India continued to enact laws to
provide for mandatory death sentence while the courts too continue to impose
mandatory death penalty under various laws including Section 27(3) of the Arms
Act of 1959, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985, the
Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act of
1989, and the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against Safety of Maritime
Navigation and Fixed Platforms on Continental Shelf Act of 2002.
Second, India imposes death penalty in clear violation of the fair trial
standards provided under the ICCPR. Article 6.2 of the ICCPR provides that
death penalty "can only be carried out pursuant to a final judgement rendered
by a competent court". In this regard, the features of the "competent court"
ought to be considered as the establishment of a court by law by itself cannot
be considered as 'competent' unless the trial complies with the international
fair trial standards and the court itself meets the UN Basic Principles on the
Independence of the Judiciary. A competent court must conduct the trial through
the common laws of the country such as Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and
Evidence Act. However, when the common laws relating to trial are circumscribed
and made subservient to special laws while trying the cases relating to
national security, counter terrorism or anti-drug measures, the special courts
or designated courts are effectively reduced to military tribunal/summary
trial.
The Government of India made self-incrimination prohibited under ICCPR
admissible for the purposes of imposing death penalty under the Terrorist and
Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) and the Prevention of Terrorism
Act (POTA) and further allows in camera trial under the National Investigation
Agency Act. Though the courts under the TADA and the POTA were established by
law, because of the violations of the principles of fair trial, these courts
cannot be considered as "competent court" as provided in the ICCPR; and
therefore imposition of death sentences by these courts are illegal
irrespective of the review by the Supreme Court. Death sentences have been
imposed in terror cases in clear violations of the ICCPR and therefore, without
proper legal sanction as provided under international human rights law.
Third, imposition of death penalty in clear violation of stare decisis
constitutes imposition of death penalty without legal sanction. The Bachan
Singh judgement held that death penalty can be imposed only in the "rarest of
rare" cases after considering aggravating circumstances relating to the crime
and mitigating circumstances relating to the criminal. A balance sheet of these
elements is required to be spelt out in the judgement. A number of judgements
have so far been declared as per incuriam for being "inconsistent with Mithu
and Bachan Singh".
Fourth, the President of India has been held responsible for violations of
Article 21 of the constitution of India in considering the mercy pleas of the
death row convicts. Further, there is prohibition under Section 32A of the NDPS
Act against any suspension, remission or commutation in any sentence awarded
under the Act. The Supreme Court had commuted the death sentence of a number of
death row convicts for violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India by
the President of India.
Fifth, India carries out execution of death row convicts in clear violation of
Article 14 of the Constitution of India and international human rights law
relating to equality and non-discrimination. The Supreme Court of India in the
landmark judgement in the case of Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India
delivered on 21 January 2014 held: "It is well settled law that executive
action and the legal procedure adopted to deprive a person of his life or
liberty must be fair, just and reasonable and the protection of Article 21 of
the Constitution of India inheres in every person, even death row prisoners,
till the very last breath of their lives. We have already seen the provisions
of various State Prison Manuals and the actual procedure to be followed in
dealing with mercy petitions and execution of convicts."
As the rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India extend to till the
last breath, it implies that all death row convicts are equal before law even
after rejection of their mercy pleas and the laws of India do not differentiate
between those convicted under anti-terror laws and other criminal offences. The
right to equality and non-discrimination among the death row convicts does not
get extinguished by rejection of mercy pleas.
However, there are at least 2 recent cases where the President of India jumped
queue ahead of others to reject the mercy petitions and subsequently executed
them ahead of others.
Sixth, the courts in India continue to impose death sentence on juveniles
though the same have been reversed, at times with great difficulty, when the
issue of juvenility was brought to the notice of the courts.
In the report, Asian Centre for Human Rights calls for the abolition of death
penalty in India.
(source: Kashmir Watch)
***********************
Dr APJ Abdul Kalam, Kanimozhi favour abolition of death penalty----Supporting
his view, DMK leader Kanimozhi has said that most of the countries have
abolished the deterrent punishment as it deprived people of the opportunity to
reform.
Former President Dr APJ Abdul Kalam has favoured abolition of death penalty
from the statute in the country and urged the Law Commission of India to
revisit its earlier report which had supported the retention of the capital
punishment.
Supporting his view, DMK leader Kanimozhi has said that most of the countries
have abolished the deterrent punishment as it deprived people of the
opportunity to reform.
A law commission source told dna, Dr Kalam in his letter said "we all are the
creations of God. I am not sure a human system or a human being is competent to
take away a life based on artificial and created evidence."
Dr Kalam, an Indian scientist who had served the nation as President during the
period 2002-2007, had to confirm the capital punishment awarded by the trial
court to some convicts including the 2004 execution of West Bangal's Dhananjay
Chaterjee, a lift operator who had raped and murdered an 18 year girl in 1990.
The Bharat Ratna awardee has referred to his book "Turning Points" in which he
has mentioned about his difficulty as President to take a decision to confirm
the capital punishment awarded to the convicts.
According to his book, as a common man he found that most of the death penalty
case were socio- economic biased and the person who was least involved in the
enmity and did not have a direct motive for committing the crime.
In yet another opinion through an e-mail sent by former union minister
Kanimozhi Karunandhi cited the reasons that there is no conclusive proof that
capital punishment acts as a deterrent to future crimes and there is a chance
that an innocent may be sentenced to death.
Both Dr Kalam and Kanimozhi have expressed their views to the panel, which has
floated consultation paper on the issue of death penalty and invited public
comments on the subject.
(source: Daily News & Analysis)
****************
Death penalty cases have economic bias, says Kalam
Former President Abdul Kalam has favoured abolition of the death penalty,
adding more credence to a debate on capital punishment initiated by the Law
Commission after a reference was made to it by the Supreme Court last year.
In a response sent to the panel, which had floated a consultation paper on the
subject in May 2014 inviting public comments, Kalam said he had been in pain
deciding such cases. Capital punishment was one of the most difficult tasks for
him as President, he said.
The Commission has called a day-long meet on July 11 on death penalty to
conclude the process of consultation. A final report would be submitted to the
apex court sometime next month. Judges of high courts and SC, besides eminent
persons from academia, politics and international experts have been invited to
the day-long discussion.
Kalam referred to a TOI story on the public consultation paper floated by the
Commission and said he desires that the Law panel pursues his views.
The former President said he had constituted a study while he was at
Rashtrapati Bhavan to examine "from a normal citizen's point of view in terms
of the crime, intensity of the crime and the social and financial status of the
individuals who were convicted and awarded capital punishment." "This study
revealed to my surprise that almost all the cases which were pending had a
social and economic bias," the former President said.
Speaking about his conviction on the issue, the former President said he had
also published them in his book - Turning Points: A Journey Through Challenges
- and attached a copy of the extract.
Among politicians, DMK's Rajya Sabha MP Kanimozhi, who is also facing trial in
the 2G spectrum allocation scam, has supported Kalam's views. She praised the
efforts of the panel to review capital punishment.
"I hope that we can abolish this practice altogether at the earliest,"
Kanimozhi wrote to the panel submitting a detail response to a questionnaire.
She said: "No mode of execution can be acceptable. Any technique used to take
away life is nothing short of barbaric, against universal human rights
principles and it has no place in the modern society."
About 2/3 of the world has already abolished the death penalty for even the
most grave crimes, such as genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
(source: The Times of India)
BANGLADESH:
Salauddin's appeal verdict July 29
After the end of arguments, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court has
fixed July 29 for delivering verdict on an appeal filed by BNP leader Salauddin
Quader Chowdhury, challenging his death penalty awarded for committing genocide
and systematic killings during the Liberation War in 1971.
A 4-member bench headed by Chief Justice SK Sinha set the date yesterday. Other
members of the bench are Justice Nazmun Ara Sultana, Justice Syed Mahmud
Hossain and Justice Hasan Foez Siddique.
The same bench on June 16 dismissed the appeal petition of the Jamaat Secretary
General Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mujahid and upheld his death penalty. His lawyers
will file a review petition.
Supreme Court lawyer Khandaker Mahbub Hossain, also an adviser to the BNP
chief, placed arguments for the convict while Attorney General Mahbubey Alam
opposed the arguments.
Mahbub prayed to the apex court to acquit his client claiming that Salahuddin
had not been in Bangladesh during the war. The convict made the same claim
during the trial.
On the other hand, Attorney General Mahbubey Alam prayed to the court to uphold
the death penalty as the charges brought against Salauddin had been proven
beyond reasonable doubt.
After the hearing, the attorney general said: "We hope that the Supreme Court
will uphold the death penalty."
Mahbub claimed that most of the prosecution witnesses had not been eye
witnesses and gave hearsay statements.
"We hope the Apex court will acquit him from all the charges as no one can be
given death penalty considering faulty witness accounts," he claimed.
On Monday, another defence lawyer SM Shahjahan placed arguments on the 7
charges. The defence started placing arguments on July 5.
Earlier the state concluded their argument part on July 1.
The court started holding the hearing on June 16. The former BNP lawmaker from
Raozan, Chittagong ad appealed against the verdict on October 29, 2013.
The tribunal on October 1 found him guilty of 9 of the 23 charges brought
against him.
The tribunal sentenced him to death on 4 charges - for his involvement in 2
acts of genocide, the killing of Nutan Chandra Singha, and Awami League leader
Mozaffar Ahmed and his son in Raozan of Chittagong.
While pronouncing the verdict, tribunal Chairman Justice ATM Fazle Kabir said:
"We are of the unanimous view that the accused deserves the highest punishment
as provided under law for committing such gravest crimes that tremble the
collective conscience of mankind."
It also awarded him 20 years in jail for 3 charges and 5 years in jail for 2
other charges.
The tribunal's judgement said that Salahuddin sought to wipe out the Hindus by
launching large-scale systematic attacks and killed unarmed civilians,
unleashing a reign of terror in the locality.
"As a result, millions of people were compelled to leave the country and took
refuge in India," it said.
During his detention at Kashimpur High Security Jail, Salauddin was sued on
sodomy charges in March 2013. After the judgement, his family members, lawyer
and manager were sued for their alleged involvement in leaking the draft
verdict from the tribunal's computer.
(source: Dhaka Tribune)
PHILIPPINES:
The hell with 'human rights' of heinous criminals
Appalled by reports on the arrest of a British national for child exploitation
and sexual abuse in the country, Valenzuela City Rep. Sherwin Gatchalian
reiterated his call for the reimposition of capital punishment in such cases
and other heinous crimes.
"It's about time that Congress reconsider bringing back the death penalty which
convicted pedophiles deserve for dastardly acts they committed against Filipino
children," Gatchalian said.
I share the congressman's sentiment over the case of 73-year-old Douglas
Michael Slade who has sexually abused at least 25 children.
I agree that concerned authorities should stop the entry and the activities of
pedophiles in the country.
Slade has been repeatedly arrested for taking nude photos and molesting minors
but has been able to post bail and continue his activities.
For me, that pig should be castrated with a razor blade and let him bleed to
death.
What is this foreign scumbag doing in the country, anyway?
That is the only way to deal with filthy animals like Slade and many others who
made the tabloids' headlines recently.
There have been a number of men who were arrested for turning their own little
daughters into sex slaves, even impregnating some of them.
There were those who abducted girls in their neighborhood, raping and killing
them.
Just last week, 2 women were found dead in separate incidents, allegedly
murdered by their spurned lovers.
Crime incidence is drastically lower in countries where violent criminals are
meted with capital punishment.
Instead of pampering hardened criminals at the New Bilibid Prisons at public
expense, we can adopt extreme measures to penalize heinous crimes.
The hell with "human rights" of notorious convicts, who abuse the loopholes and
weaknesses of the criminal justice system.
It is unthinkable how the human rights of crime victims are discriminated
against and disregarded while lawless elements enjoy full protection of the
law.
Whatever happened to the Mamasapano massacre case, this administration's most
horrendous crime?
(source: Erwin Tulfo, The Manila Times)
CHINA/COLOMBIA:
China and Colombia accelerate talks to repatriate convicted 'drug-mules'
Colombia's government on Tuesday reported advancements in discussions with
Chinese authorities to repatriate convicted drug-traffickers, some of whom have
been sentenced to death in the Asian country.
There are reported 108 Colombians imprisoned China on drugs-trafficking
charges, three of which currently are facing death sentences in the country
according to official reports. China has become one of the most lucrative
destinations for drug-trafficking resulting in an increase in this illegal
business and consequent convictions.
In response to pleas for repatriation the President of the Congress and the
Senate, Jose David Name spoke at press conference at the Colombian embassy in
Beijing on Tuesday.
"I see it is very possible that in the coming months we will be visiting China
and we can reach an agreement on repatriation of prisoners with sentences other
than the death penalty or life imprisonment" said Name.
He claimed that there would be possibilities to return those with minimal time
remaining to serve, but as there is no equivalent death penalty or life
sentencing in Colombia these individuals would likely remain in China.
This April, from prisons in Shanghai, 12 Colombian nationals appealed to the
government for a treaty of repatriation back to the country, through a series
of letters delivered to the Senate.
Colombians detained in China beg to be returned home
These letters detailed the pain and torture experienced in Chinese prisons
requesting action from the Colombian government on their behalf to sign an
agreement with the Chinese government allowing them to serve their sentences on
Colombian soil.
"These prison officers are the devil; they don't have a heart, you cannot
imagine the torture, they treat us worse than trash, worse than animals, I am
like someone who has been kidnapped," wrote Luis Eduardo Ramirez, from Bogota,
who 5 years ago traveled to China concealing drugs inside his body.
Prisoners in Qingpu, Shanghai, have additionally claimed that there exists a
business within Chinese prisons, requiring prisoners to pay for a "degree of
reform," a condition required to allow the convicted to access sentence
reductions. This began in 2012 and is something that does not apply to Chinese
citizens.
Within prison walls Colombian detainees are also required to pay elevated
prices for phone calls, high costs for translators, lose the right to all
communications with their families and report xenophobic treatment from Chinese
prison guards.
(source: Colombia Reports)
_______________________________________________
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
