July 10
INDIA:
India's Use of the Death Penalty Rises
New figures on the use of the death penalty in India show the punishment is
being awarded more often than at the start of the century and give a
state-by-state breakdown of where it was used most by courts in that time.
More than 1,600 people ended up on death row in India between 2001 and 2013,
according to the data, which was requested under India's right to information
law from the National Crime Records Bureau by the Commonwealth Human Rights
Initiative, a Delhi-based rights' group.
1 in 4 death sentences was handed down in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh,
not perhaps surprising given it is India's most populous with 200 million
people - roughly the same as Brazil.
3 people were executed at the request of India's courts between 2001 and 2013.
The most recent recorded cases were the execution in Delhi in 2013 of Mohammad
Afzal Guru who was found guilty of helping to obtain weapons for an attack on
India's Parliament in 2001 that killed 14 people, including 5 militants.
Before that, in November 2012, Ajmal Kasab, the only surviving militant of the
attack that killed over 160 people in Mumbai in 2008, was hanged in the state
of Maharashtra.
Once the death penalty is handed down, convicts have the right to appeal in
higher courts and eventually to India's president for clemency. Any such appeal
must be routed through the home ministry and then to the cabinet for
recommendations before it reaches the president's desk. If he rejects the mercy
plea, the convict can go back to the Supreme Court on appeal. All this can be a
very long process, meaning convicts often wait years for a final outcome.
In January last year, death row convicts who have spent decades on death row in
India were granted a reprieve by the country's top court in a landmark ruling
that said inordinate delays in executions warranted reducing the sentence to
life imprisonment.
"The recent executions broke with a trend of gradual abandonment of the death
penalty," in India according to deathpenaltyworldwide.org a database maintained
by the Cornell University Law School.
A crime must fall under the heading "rarest of rare" to warrant the death
penalty in India.
That language comes from a 1980 Supreme Court ruling on whether the Indian
Penal Code section on murder, which allows for either the death penalty or life
in prison as punishment, was constitutional.
The court was asked to consider whether the lack of guidance on how to use the
death penalty meant it was being applied arbitrarily, and was therefore a
violation of constitutional rights. It upheld the legitimacy of offering judges
a choice of sentencing, but said the death penalty should be used sparingly.
But calls for its use have been growing in the world's largest democracy and
were particularly loud during the trial of the men later convicted of the rape
and murder of a young woman in Delhi in 2012. 4 of the 5 people convicted of
the crime were awarded the death sentence. They are appealing the penalty in
the Supreme Court. The other, who was a juvenile at the time of the crime, was
tried separately and sentenced to 3 years in a correctional facility. Juveniles
cannot be awarded the death penalty.
The figures were released by the group ahead of a consultation by Law
Commission of India on the punishment slated to be held on Saturday in Delhi.
The delegates will discuss, among other things, whether the death penalty
should be abolished.
The law commission is a government body that advises on legal reform.
Since India's top court ruled that the death penalty did not contravene the
constitution 35 years ago, about 2/3 of the world has abolished the death
penalty in law or in practice.
Some 98 countries have abolished the death penalty for all offenses, seven have
gotten rid of it for ordinary crimes, and 35 others have imposed an effective
moratorium on its use.
In recent cases, the Supreme Court has recognized that despite the "rarest of
rare" doctrine in India, the punishment continues to be applied arbitrarily.
"These changes in India and elsewhere make it an opportune moment to revisit
questions of the constitutionality and desirability of the death penalty," the
Ministry of Law and Justice said in a statement on Thursday.
(source: Wall Street Journal)
*****************
Law panel consultation tomorrow
The Law Commission of India will hold a 1-day consultation with stakeholders on
the issue of the death penalty on Saturday. The advisory body's consultation
aims to debate and discuss various aspects of the death penalty.
The meeting, to be inaugurated by Gopalkrishna Gandhi, will bring together a
select group of leading figures in the judiciary, the bar, academia, media, and
political and public life for the consultation.
In May 2014, the commission had invited public comments on the subject by
issuing a consultation paper.
The 1-day consultation is being held further to the comments received in
response to that paper, and the views set forth during the consultation will
aid the commission in formulating its report on the issue.
The agenda for discussion at the consultation will be aimed at finding answers
to questions like: Is the death penalty applied arbitrarily? How can this be
avoided or removed? Does the death penalty discriminate against marginalised
and vulnerable people?
It will also aim to discuss the state of the criminal justice system in the
country, including the challenges faced by the criminal justice system,
including the police, investigation processes, the judiciary and jail systems,
and how the system can be improved to allow for fair, impartial, and error-free
application of the death penalty.
The consultation process will also try to dwell upon the penological purposes
of the death penalty. What purpose does the death penalty serve? What
alternatives can replace the death penalty to serve the same purpose?
The larger question of should the death penalty be retained in its present or
modified form in view of India's constitutional and international legal
commitments will also be discussed.
It may be noted that the Supreme Court in Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar
v. Maharashtra and Shankar Kisanrao Khade v. Maharashtra, had suggested that
the Law Commission should study the death penalty in India to "allow for an
up-to-date and informed discussion and debate on the subject".
The present law of the death penalty was laid down in Bachan Singh v. UOI
(1980), when the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the penalty.
However, the court confined its application to the rarest of rare cases, to
reduce the arbitrariness of the penalty.
In 1980, when Bachan Singh was decided, only 18 countries had abolished the
death penalty for all offences. Since then, about 2/3 of the world has
abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. So far 98 countries have
abolished the death penalty for all offences, 7 have abolished the death
penalty for ordinary crimes and 35 others have imposed an effective moratorium
against the death penalty.
(source: Asian Age)
****************
Death Penalty in present or modified form to be discussed in LCI meeting
The critical issue of whether the death penalty should be retained in its
present or modified form in view of Indias constitutional and international
legal commitments will be thoroughly discussed during a one-day consultation
being organised by the Law Commission of India (LCI) on July 11.
Inaugurated by Shri Gopal Krishna Gandhi, the consultation will explore the key
themes of: Arbitrariness and discrimination: Is the death penalty applied
arbitrarily? How can this be avoided and whether the death penalty
discriminates against marginalised and vulnerable people.
A select group of leading figures in the judiciary, the bar, academia, media,
and political and public life will debate various aspects of the death penalty.
Stakeholders from all walks of society including distinguished judges, retired
judges Prabha Sridevan, SB Sinha, Hosbet Suresh, K Chandru and Rajinder Sachar
will attend.
The present law of the death penalty was laid down in Bachan Singh v. UOI
(1980), when the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the penalty.
However, the SC confined its application to the rarest of rare cases, to reduce
the arbitrariness of the penalty. In arriving at its decision in that case, the
apex court had relied on the 35th Report of the Law Commission among others,
which the judiciary now feels needs to be re-visited, especially since it was
submitted in 1967, and thus did not account for the over-hauling of the death
penalty framework in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as well as changes
in Indias socio-political and legal landscape.
The legal landscape has also transformed in the 35 years since Bachan Singh. In
1980, when Bachan Singh case was decided, only 18 countries had abolished the
death penalty for all offences. Since then, about two-thirds of the world has
abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. 98 countries have abolished
the death penalty for all offences, 7 have abolished the death penalty for
ordinary crimes, and 35 others have imposed an effective moratorium against the
death penalty.
In international criminal law, the death penalty has been abolished for even
the most grave and heinous offences, such as genocide, crimes against humanity
and war crimes. Acccording to the organisers, these changes in India and
elsewhere make it an opportune moment to revisit questions of the
constitutionality and desirability of the death penalty.
(sourve: webindia123.com)
***************
The Death Penalty Litigation Clinic fights for the death-row convict's
fundamental right to life
Close to noon on May 20 this year, Lubhyathi Rangarajan and Nishant Gokhale,
associates and lawyers at the Death Penalty Litigation Clinic (DPLC), waited in
Agra Central Jail for a meeting with Saleem. 5 days earlier, the Supreme Court
had confirmed the death sentences of Saleem and Shabnam, convicted for killing
7 members of Shabnam's family, including a 10-month-old infant, in 2008.
Rangarajan and Gokhale spoke with Saleem for nearly 2 hours and conveyed the
Delhi-based clinic's desire to help him. The duo went through the case records
with Saleem, took him through the evidence and testimony, and he in turn gave
his inputs and insights. "Strangely, no one had asked him these details
earlier," says Gokhale. The trial court proceedings were still fresh in
Saleem's mind. As the case went through High Court and Supreme Court, he had
often banked on newspaper reports to know the progress.
The morning after their meeting at the Agra jail, Rangarajan, Gokhale and
Saleem learnt - again from newspapers - about the death warrants issued for
Shabnam and Saleem by the Sessions Judge of Amroha. "He had absolutely no idea
and it was a coincidence that we were there the day before. We were shocked and
taken aback by the hastiness," says Rangarajan. The warrant had come 6 days
after the confirmation of death sentence, bypassing the mandatory 30-day period
available to convicts to explore all legal options. Silent on the date and
time, the warrant merely instructed a swift execution, says Rangarajan.
"Usually, there is a hearing where the accused is produced and given a lawyer.
None of this had happened," she adds.
Gokhale and she immediately filed a Public Interest Litigation in the Supreme
Court. The case was listed 2 days later, and the court quashed the warrants,
citing the death-row convict's fundamental right to life. A review petition has
now been filed in Saleem's case in the Supreme Court.
For the barely year-old DPLC, getting the warrant quashed was a small but
significant milestone. Part of Delhi's National Law University (NLU), the
clinic aims to provide 'competent and effective legal representation' free of
cost to indigent prisoners on death row, and is a 1-of-its-kind resource linked
to a university in India. For a team that tracks death sentence cases
countrywide, it is a small one. Apart from Rangarajan and Gokhale, it has
Shreya Rastogi and Maitreyi Misra; Anup Surendranath, an assistant professor at
NLU, is the director. Through advocates on record, the clinic currently
represents around 35 death-row prisoners, mainly in the Supreme Court.
Story behind the sentence
The clinic did not figure initially in their plan, which had been about
research, largely carried out by university students, on the lack of empirical
data on death penalty in India. While mainstream narratives often focus on
death sentences when there are Supreme Court decisions or executions, the
researchers and students looked for the stories behind the sentences - the
profile of prisoners, their experiences with the police, the evidence the
courts relied on for the sentencing and so forth. They recreated the legal
processes that preceded the conviction. Rather than debate death penalty in the
abstract, the group wanted to analyse it from within the criminal justice
system. Yes/No, For/Against were no longer the questions; instead it was 'How.'
"Unless you go into the details of the criminal justice system and what it has
used to bring upon the death penalty, you cannot do the debate," says
Surendranath.
First, they needed data - accurate and up-to-date. Information on the exact
number on death row was often unavailable. In 2013, the university collaborated
with the National Legal Services Authority and researchers visited central
jails around the country that housed death-row prisoners. They interviewed
prisoners in Jorhat and Jammu, Tihar and Nagpur. Of the 385 prisoners on death
row till June 2014, the researchers included 373 in their study. "Some states
were easier than others. Some were particularly difficult, like Maharashtra,
where it took us 9 months just to get the permission to interview. They did not
allow us to interview prisoners sentenced to death for terrorist attacks," says
Surendranath.
In the process they realised if there was an outsider in this system it was the
prisoner. "One thing that stood out was how all of this could have been carried
out without the prisoner ... all of it is based on documentation, the police
produce documents and the defence lawyers rely on these documents. Nobody had
ever spoken to the prisoner. We were the 1st to talk to them and get their
version," he says.
The prisoner profile was often all-too-similar - socially and economically
backward; deprived of sound legal assistance in the lengthy and complicated
processes involved. To complete their narratives, the researchers went looking
for the families and met with mixed results. They came across hostile families
that had snapped all ties, moved villages and wanted nothing to do with the
prisoner. On the other hand, they also met resilient and supportive ones, eager
to talk and help despite their poverty.
Given an opportunity to talk, the crime was often what the convicts talked
about - of being trapped, about why they did it or why their reasons never came
out in court. Surendranath says, the hope they gave the prisoners after a
series of interviews was overwhelming. "Dealing with their expectations was
tough. We were doing interview after interview. We were using them and not
offering anything in return," he says.
The university was clear this was an academic project, not an intervention.
Despite being constantly reminded that the interviews did not mean legal
assistance, it did not stop the prisoners from hoping. "They thought we had
access to things that they did not. They thought we were a medium to get their
stories out," adds Surendranath.
As researchers uncovered gaping holes in the legal processes, the project
evolved to include intervention. "In the end, it was merely the way these cases
were carried out. A basic level of legal representation would have averted the
death penalty," he says.
During the research, 1 query they refrained from asking prisoners was - 'Did
you do it?' At that point, they say, it was irrelevant. The back story of crime
was often gruesome; sordid details frequently played out in the media. "You
learn to slowly not obsess with 'Did they or did they not do it' and it's the
most difficult thing to do. We learn and teach at the law school that even if a
person has committed the most horrific crime, there is a process by which they
have to be sentenced ... You may not be able to tune yourself completely out of
it, but that is the challenge," he adds.
It is a challenge the DPLC members face not only when they meet prisoners.
Their work is at times not endorsed by others, including family and friends.
For instance, when the India's Daughter controversy raged, the team was at the
receiving end of taunts. 'Now, you would want to defend them too. Look what
they think', was a refrain they heard often.
Rastogi knows she is working in an area that polarises opinion. A layperson may
not be willing to comprehend or acknowledge the fundamental rights of a
prisoner convicted of multiple murders or respect the legal processes he/she is
entitled to. Rastogi, who quit her corporate job for the clinic, says what
often works is the general prisoner profile. "Like, why persons of a certain
economic and social background often end up getting these punishments."
Constant interactions with the prisoners have shown her that despite their
lives hanging in limbo for years, most of them have tried to move beyond the
crime, however tough that may be. "There are so many prisoners we meet who tell
us 'Yes, I did that'. But they tell the story around it. They do not want to be
locked in that period of time," she adds.
Beyond the crime
Saleem, for instance, was a school dropout at the time of arrest. The DPLC
members say he now has a diploma in agricultural science and human rights and
is doing his final year bachelor's degree. "He corresponds with us. And all
these prisoners, whenever they write, are profusely apologetic for taking our
time. On the other hand, it is their time that is precious," says Rastogi.
Misra believes the change in narrative should begin by giving the prisoner
his/her identity. "We do not even see them as a person. He/she is defined by
their crime," she says. Mainstream narratives should move towards ensuring that
the state and courts fulfil their responsibilities in this process, she adds.
Though the clinic currently deals with cases that are at an advanced stage,
where time is rapidly running out for the prisoner, Surendranath says that
ideally any intervention should take place at the base, where foolproof legal
representation will negate the possibility of a death sentence.
The clinic is handling cases where the members know they might exhaust legal
options soon. Once the President rejects a mercy petition, they explore
possibilities like a writ petition, a 2nd mercy petition or a review petition,
if it has not been filed. "The game is never really over. But in some cases we
pretty much have the last option," says Surendranath. He adds, "Taking life
must be difficult; it has to be made as difficult as possible. A. You be
goddamn sure. B. The person should be given all opportunity to represent their
case."
(source: The hindubusinessline.com)
*******************
Courts awarded 2,052 persons with death penalty in 15yrs: Report
The debate over capital punishment may be still going on, but the courts in
India awarded death penalty to 2,052 individuals between 1998 and 2013, a
report released on Thursday said.
The Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative said it meant 186 individuals were
sent to gallows every year during the period. In the first 13 years of this
century, the number was 1,0677.
"The maximum number of death sentences was in 2007 when courts across India
punished 186 individuals. In 2000, 165 individuals received death sentences
while 164 individuals received the punishment in 2005. The least was 55 in
1998," the report, released in the wake of a consultation by the Law Commission
on death penalty, said. The commission's consultation paper said there was no
spurt in crime between 2000 and 2013 when no person who received death penalty
was hanged. The consultation is being held on directions of the Supreme Court
which wanted an informed debate on this issue.
1/4 of the death penalties awarded were in Uttar Pradesh, followed by Bihar
(178) and Madhya Pradesh (162).
In 2013, Madhya Pradesh topped the list with 22 death sentences. Maharashtra
took the 4th place followed by Tamil Nadu. Interestingly, in Karnataka, no
death sentences were handed down between 1998 and 2013, the report said.
The report, based on National Crime Records Bureau data, said, "In Jammu and
Kashmir and Manipur where the Armed Forces Special Powers Acts (AFSPA) is in
force, the number of death sentences is lower," the report said.
The period also saw death sentences of 4,497 persons commuted to life
imprisonment by the courts.
(source: Hindustan Times)
INDONESIA/SAUDI ARABIA:
FM helps RI workers on death roll
The Foreign Ministry has continued its diplomatic and legal work to try and
free four migrant workers who have been sentenced to death for murders in Saudi
Arabia.
The ministry said that the 4 migrant workers, all originating from West Java,
were Tuti Tursilawati and Etty Toyib from Majalengka, Ato Suparto bin Data from
Cirebon and Agus Ahmad Arwas from Sukabumi.
"We are still giving legal assistance to the 4 [migrant workers]. President
[Joko 'Jokowi' Widodo] already asked Saudi Arabia King [Salman] for help. Bu
Retno [Foreign Minister Retno LP Marsudi] already talked with her counterparts
to help our citizens," the ministry's director for Indonesian citizens and
legal entities Lalu Muhammad Iqbal told The Jakarta Post on Thursday.
Tuti, 36, was convicted of murdering her employer in 2010 after he allegedly
physically and sexually abused her on separate days before the murder.
Etty, 35, was convicted of poisoning her employer to death in 2001 after he had
allegedly physically abused her.
Meanwhile, Ato and Agus were convicted of raping and killing an Indonesian in
Saudi Arabia in 2011.Tuti has undergone 2 trials as the first one was annulled
after the Indonesian Foreign Ministry filed an appeal. In the 2nd trial this
April, the local court in Saudi Arabia found her guilty and sentenced her to
death once again. She was sentenced to death under qisas law (law of
retaliation), where she could only be freed upon forgiveness from the victim's
heirs.
Etty was also charged under qisas.
"We have filed a number of appeals for both cases and contacted the [Saudi]
King and Foreign Minister. They really wanted to help but under qisas, the
forgiveness is given only by the victims' heir, not the King," Iqbal said.
He said that the ministry was still working to contact the families of the
murdered victims.
"We manage to keep in touch with 1 of Tuti's employer's relatives, but not yet
the heirs. Meanwhile, in Etty's case, 1 of the heirs is still a minor so we
need to wait for his forgiveness around next year," he said.
The good news, he said, was that the court in the city of Thaif had not asked
for permission from the King to go ahead and conduct the execution of
Tuti.Iqbal expressed his optimism for Ato and Agus' case as the victim was an
Indonesian, known only by her 1st name Fatimah, an illegal immigrant in Saudi.
"We are still trying to find her relatives and ask them to forgive the
convicts," he said, adding that she was not registered as a migrant worker in
the ministry's database.Member of the House of Representatives Commission IX
overseeing labor affairs, Irma Suryani urged the President to give legal
assistance and protect the workers as mandated by the Law No. 39/2004 on the
placement and protection of migrant workers.
"The government is liable to give legal assistance based on the presumption of
innocence," she said on Wednesday.
Data from Migrant Care Indonesia recorded that by April, the death penalty had
been delivered to 60 migrant workers, 45 of them in Malaysia, 5 in Saudi
Arabia, 1 in Qatar and 9 in China. Meanwhile, another 219 cases are still
ongoing.
"We demand that the government give its best effort in diplomacy to free the
convicts from the death penalty, as we are against the death penalty. Moreover,
they are often the victims of physical and sexual abuse from their employers,"
Migrant Care executive director Anis Hidayah said.
(source: The Jakarta Post)
JAPAN:
Prosecutors seek death penalty for defendant charged with killing 5
Public prosecutors on Friday sought the death penalty for a 65-year-old man who
allegedly killed 5 people and set fire to their homes in a remote community in
Yamaguchi Prefecture, western Japan, in July 2013.
The defendant, Kosei Homi, has been charged with murder and arson.
The prosecutors filed their request with a panel of 3 professional and 6
citizen judges at the Yamaguchi District Court.
Homi was caught 5 days after the bodies of a woman and a couple, all aged in
their 70s, were found in their fire-gutted houses in the mountainous community
in the city of Shunan on July 21, 2013. The bodies of 2 more elderly people
were discovered in their respective homes a day later.
During the trial, the defendant pleaded not guilty, with his defense counsel
arguing that he had not been capable of judging between right and wrong due to
a delusional disorder.
(source: The Mainichi)
THAILAND:
Thailand murder trial: Victim's father weeps in court after dead daughter's
photos shown
The father of the Brit backpacker murdered on a Thai beach wept in court today
after photos were shown of his dead daughter.
Hannah Witheridge, 23, and David Miller, 24, were brutally killed on the Thai
holiday island of Koh Tao last September.
Hannah's dad Tony lowered his head as bloody pics of his daughter were shown.
Migrants Zaw Lin and Wai Phyo both deny murder and claim they made false
confessions after being tortured by Thai police. They face the death penalty if
convicted.
David Miller's father Ian told the BBC at court: "We are here for David because
of his tragic death.
"We'll go with the flow as much as we can. We won't comment on the trial
process. We'll be dignified for David."
Mrs Miller said: "It's been hard, very hard. Part of the reason for coming out
was to go to Koh Tao.
"We had 1 day on Koh Tao, it was really hard."
On the 2nd day of the trial of 2 Burmese men accused of the killings, police
admitted forensic evidence "may have been destroyed".
Doubts have already been cast over the case with British authorities understood
to have submitted evidence proving the accused men are innocent.
Under cross-examination, a police lieutenant admitted moving David's body
before forensic teams arrived so it "wouldn't be washed away".
In bizarre scenes in the opening two days of the trial, the defendants passed
notes to journalists pleading their innocence.
One of the court translators is also a key witness, sparking fears the
proceedings may not be fair.
Hannah, from Norfolk, and Jersey lad David met while in south east Asia on a
holiday of a lifetime.
(source: Daily Star)
AUSTRIA/EGYPT:
Austria Parliament Moves to Stop Egypt Executions, Human Rights
Violations----In a special session Wednesday, Austrian Parliament condemns coup
crimes, repression and brutality in Egypt.
Austria's Parliament called upon the country's government to intervene through
the European Union and the United Nations to put pressure on the military
regime in Egypt to stop the execution of death sentences against President
Mohamed Morsi and other political opponents, irrespective of ideological
differences with the Muslim Brotherhood.
The Austrian Parliament also called for the government to intervene with the
Egyptian military regime to respect the general principles of the European
Union and the United Nations which provide for the abolition of the death
penalty and respect for human rights in general.
This significant move by the Austrian Parliament came during a visit by a
delegation from the legitimate Egyptian Parliament (in exile) headed by MP
Mohamed Al-Fiqi, along with MP Osama Suleiman and MP Amer Abdel-Rahim, on July
7-8, 2015.
The Egyptian parliamentary delegation was received with thunderous applause, at
the parliament's plenary session broadcast live by Austrian television. During
the session, the delegation detailed the tragic situation in Egypt after the
military coup, prompting the Austrian Parliament to set a special session to
discuss the Egyptian issue the following day (Wednesday - July 8, 2015) after a
request was made by the 4 major parties represented in parliament.
In the presence of the Egyptian parliamentary delegation and the Austrian
Foreign Minister, the July 8 session (which Austrian television also broadcast
live) discussed the overall situation in Egypt, the ongoing violations of human
rights there, the Rabaa massacre and the death sentences issued against
opponents of the coup.
During the session, a lawmaker from the ruling Socialist Party denounced the
atrocities in Egypt and human rights violations there, and condemned the death
sentences issued against President Mohamed Morsi, Muslim Brotherhood Chairman
Badie, members of parliament and along with many other opponents.
Austria's Parliament asked the government to intervene without delay, at all
levels of bilateral relations, the European Union and the United Nations, to
put pressure on the Egyptian government to respect human rights and to refrain
from implementing the death sentences issued recently.
During the vote on session resolutions, members of the Austrian Parliament
unanimously agreed that what happened in Egypt on July 3, 2013 was a military
coup. They also objected to the implementation of the death sentences and
condemned human rights violations.
The Austrian Parliament vowed to take part in the 2nd anniversary of the Rabaa
massacre, which will be August, 14.
The Austrian Parliament further agreed to send a congratulatory message to
reassure and congratulate Muslims in Austria for the holy month of Ramadan.
This move by the Austrian Parliament represents a unique step by any European
Parliament in favor of the Egyptian Revolution and human rights in Egypt. It
also represents a significant slap in the face of the military coup which is
making relentless efforts to blockade the Egyptian Revolution, to prevent it
from highlighting the atrocities and tragedies committed by this bloody coup.
(source: ikhwanweb.com)
PHILIPPINES/INDONESIA:
Manny Pacquiao wants to meet Jokowi to thank him for sparing Mary Jane Veloso's
life (for now)
As we told you yesterday, superstar boxer Manny Pacquiao is currently in
Indonesia. Part of the reason for his visit (his 1st to Indonesia) is to shoot
a commercial for Tolak Angin which he is currently filming in Semarang:
But another reason is to visit Mary Jane Veloso, the Filipina mother of 3 who
got a last-minute stay of execution in April but remains on death row. Pacquiao
had promised to meet her after his title fight with Floyd Mayweather Jr in May
and is set to meet her at the women's prison she is currently incarcerated at
in Yogyakarta after he finished filming his commercial.
Pacquiao told reporters another goal for this trip was to meet President Joko
Widodo, to thank him for sparing Veloso's life (for now).
"If given the opportunity to meet, I would like to thank President Joko
Widodo," Pacquiao told reporters yesterday, as quoted by Liputano.
Hopefully Pacquiao is being polite and not mentioning the real reason he wants
to talk to Jokowi, which is to persuade him to get Veloso off of death row.
Veloso's execution was delayed after after Kristina "Tintin" Sergio, the woman
suspected of recruiting her and tricking her into carrying drugs to Indonesia,
turned herself in to authorities in the Philippines. Veloso is still set to
testify in Sergio's case. If Sergio is indeed found guilty of human trafficking
it may be cause for Indonesian authorities to lift the death sentence on
Veloso.
But even that is not a guarantee that Jokowi will show mercy to Mary Jane - the
president has shown a stubborn refusal to even consider any death penalty
clemency requests in the past. Hopefully Pac-Man will be able to meet with him
and use his humble charms to help move the president.
(source: Coconuts news)
_______________________________________________
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
