June 16
BELARUS:
Unprecedented Supreme Court decision to suspend death sentences
Responding to the news that the Supreme Court of Belarus has in an
unprecedented move decided to suspend and review the death sentences of Ihar
Hershankou and Siamion Berazhnoy while their appeals are under consideration,
Marie Struthers, Director of Amnesty International???s Eastern Europe and
Central Asia Regional Office, said:
"This is a hugely significant and unprecedented decision for the only country
in the region that has continued to execute people all these years. We are not
aware of other cases where the Supreme Court of Belarus has suspended an
execution."
"We continue to monitor the case closely, but it gives us hope that after years
of discussion on the death penalty Belarus is ready to walk the talk. We urge
Belarus' highest authorities to build on this development by immediately
establishing a moratorium on executions and commuting all death sentences as
first steps towards making Belarus death penalty-free."
Since 1994 the Supreme Court of Belarus has upheld all convictions and death
sentences that came before it and President Alyaksandr Lukashenka has only once
granted clemency.
Ihar Hershankou and Siamion Berazhnoy were convicted and sentenced to death by
the Mahiliou Regional Court in eastern Belarus on 21 July 2017. They were found
guilty of murdering 6 people between 2009 and 2015 with the aim of
appropriating their property. Their convictions and death sentences were upheld
by the Supreme Court on 20 December 2017 and the 2 men have since been at risk
of imminent execution. Amnesty International has campaigned for their sentences
to be commuted and for the President to introduce an immediate moratorium on
executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty.
Despite continuing assurances from the Belarusian authorities that it is
progressing toward a moratorium on the implementation of the death penalty,
Belarus has shown a flagrant disdain for global and regional trends towards
abolition. Amnesty International believes that the death penalty is the
ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, and a violation of the right
to life as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As of
today, 106 countries have fully abolished the death penalty in law and 142 are
abolitionist in law or practice.
(source: Amnesty International)
KENYA:
Muslims in Thika back calls for death penalty as punishment for graft
The Muslim community in Thika has asked the government to reintroduce the death
penalty as a measure towards ending corruption.
They said anyone found guilty of corruption should face death and all their
property gained through such illegal means confiscated.
? Supkem central region chairman Al Haji Shaban Bakari said there is need for
the authorities to be tough on culprits as a deterrent to the vice.
He addressed the press at the Thika sub-county stadium after the Eid prayers on
Friday.
Bakari said corruption in Kenya is rampant since criminals were let off lightly
and the death penalty was the best option.
"If there is no severe punishment, corruption will get out of control. We need
to safeguard national interests by recovering money and property embezzled from
the public," he said.
Also read: Lifestyle audit will 'expose us', Murkomen jokes on Uhuru's call for
wealth review
He suggested an amendment to the law, further asking MPs to borrow a leaf from
China whose death penalty has yielded positive results.
"Our MPs should enact laws to the effect that anyone found guilty of corruption
be hanged. We should emulate China who are among our biggest financiers."
The Supreme Court in December last year ruled that the mandatory death sentence
is unconstitutional.
Section 204 of the penal code states that any person found guilty of murder,
robbery with violence, treason and other capital offences shall be sentenced to
death by hanging.
But Justice Njoki Ndung'u said the section "is out of sync and cannot stand as
it is inconsistent with the constitution".
The court made the landmark ruling after a petition by 2 death row convicts
Francis Murwatetu and Wilson Thrombus.
Earlier this month, Makueni MP Daniel Maanzo rooted for a referendum to
reintroduce death penalty.
"Corruption in Kenya is at levels it cannot be fought without the death
penalty," he said.
Separately, the Muslims lauded the government for providing security during the
month of Ramadhan stating that they felt safe and ended their fast without any
reported incidents.
The lot also praised the government for what they termed as a friendly budget
which was read by Treasury CS Henry Rotich on Thursday.
Bakari singled out provision of enough funds to cater for the elderly,
introduction of NHIF cover to students, and enough funds for electrification of
villages across the country.
(source: the-star.co.ke)
**********************
Death penalty call worthless in fighting graft
Graft levels in Kenya are at the highest ever. The statistics are there for all
to see. Corruption levels have steadily risen over the years, and with it the
tolerance levels among the populace. It is also undisputed that our legal
system has failed to deliver accountability.
It is not a surprise that some politicians, including Nominated Senator Isaac
Mwaura and Nyeri Town MP Ngunjiri Wambugu, have voiced plans to introduce
legislation to make corruption a capital offence.
If they make good their intention, it would be the most useless and worthless
effort in fighting graft so far, however populist.
Graft war has not failed for want of stiff punishment.
Our laws are adequate to address runaway corruption.
The 'lenient punishment' in our laws, if applied consistently, are sufficient
to turn the tide against the corrupt.
Take, for instance, the provisions of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes
Act, 2003. Part V thereof creates the offences of secret inducements for
advice, deceiving principal, conflicts of interest, improper benefits to
trustees for appointments, bid rigging, abuse of office, dealing with suspect
property as well as attempts and conspiracies to engage in graft all of which
are our bane as a country. Section 48 thereof provides for the penalties for
these offences.
The general penalty provided is a fine not exceeding Sh1 million or a prison
term of not more than 10 years. What is unique is that the law proceeds to
provide for a mandatory fine if, as a result of the conduct that constituted
the offence, the accused received a quantifiable benefit or any other person
suffered a quantifiable loss.
The mandatory fine is fixed as 2 times the amount of the quantified benefit or
loss. The law further states that where the conduct that constituted the
offence resulted in a benefit and a loss, the mandatory fine shall be equal to
2 times the sum of the amount of the benefit and the amount of the loss.
The incentive for engaging in graft is the personal gain. Removing this gain
from the equation means there is no incentive to engage in graft. The law, as
far back as 2003, sought to make sure that whenever there was a conviction, the
punishment would completely overshadow the gain. In other words, for the
billions that are stolen, besides the general penalties, we should be seeing
double the amounts in fines.
The reason this harsh punishment is never meted is what legislators should
address.
It is quite clear that capital punishment would remain useless in our statutes
if the due process of the law does not result in convictions and for the few
convictions, the courts discretion is applied to the benefit of the thieves. It
should then be a no brainer that our problem is not lenient punishment. Our
problem is a legal system that has failed to deliver justice for Kenyans.
Simply put, corruption pays in Kenya.
To paraphrase Nobel Prize Laureate Rigoberta Menchu Tum, impunity has become
the very foundation upon which systems of corruption are built, and if impunity
is not abolished, all efforts to bring an end to corruption are in vain.
It is not the first time MPs have responded to public outcry by a promise to
make it a capital offence. These promises are at best populist to hide the
failure of Parliament to discharge its oversight role on the other arms of
Government, particularly the Executive.
It should be appreciated that within our constitutional architecture,
Parliament is the supreme oversight body. All the key actors in the justice
chain report to Parliament. It should be Parliament holding to account the
institutions that ensure effective investigation, prosecution, punishment and
restitution for all offences committed against the Kenyan people.
This article has not gone to the merits or demerits of the death penalty, which
deserves a separate treatment. It has simply illustrated the lack of
imagination, or dishonesty on the part of those who promise Kenyans the sun
when they cannot deliver the moon.
(source: Samuel Kimeu; The writer is Executive Director, Transparency
International Kenya----standardmedia.co.ke)
ZIMBABWE:
Inmates on death row seek stay of execution
2 men who are on a death row will have to endure more anxiety after the
Constitutional Court (Con-Court) yesterday postponed indefinitely a case in
which they are challenging their sentence.
Njabulo Ndlovu of Cowdray Park and Shadreck Noel Sibanda of Nguboyenja were
convicted of murder and sentenced to death in 2013 by former Bulawayo High
Court judge Nicholas Ndou who found them guilty of murder with actual intent.
The duo was found guilty of assaulting and raping a United College of Education
female student until she lost consciousness before murdering her male friend,
Themba Mafunga.
Ndou found no extenuating circumstances when he gave his murder verdict -
prompting the pair's lawyer - Vezokuhle Eric Ndlovu to approach the superior
courts to have the judgment reviewed.
However, the Con-Court bench yesterday postponed the matter indefinitely, after
ruling that the respondent, the Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs
ministry, had not been properly served with the court papers.
"There appears to be improper service," deputy chief justice Elizabeth Gwaunza,
who was leading the Constitutional Court bench said.
In his judgment, Ndou said the murder was pre-planned, adding that it was trite
in law that where a robbery results in death, the inference was that the act
would have been pre-meditated.
According to court papers, the murder took place on March 9, 2011, at a bush
behind the UCE campus, as the student and Mafunga were walking along a gravel
road behind the college campus to Highmount.
The pair emerged from the bush and drew knives which they used to threaten the
2 before assaulting and force-marching them into the bush, where they murdered
Mafunga and raped the woman.
After raping the woman, the court heard, Sibanda and Ndlovu fled from the scene
leaving her unconscious.
When she regained consciousness, she sought help from a passer-by who assisted
her to make a report to the police, leading to the pair's arrest.
Zimbabwe's Constitution prohibits the death penalty for all women, as well as
men who were under 21 at the time of the crime and those over 70.
It also bans using the death penalty as a mandatory punishment.
The charter, overwhelmingly approved by Zimbabweans during a national
referendum on March 16, 2013, puts greater limits on the use of capital
punishment.
(source: nehandaradio.com)
INDIA:
2000 Jamnagar triple murder case: Death penalty of prime accused commuted to
life, son acquitted----The division bench of Justice M R Shah and Justice
Mohinder Pal also acquitted Bhavan Sodha's son, Pankaj, who was sentenced to 7
years in jail for destroying evidence.
Citing the convict's old age, the Gujarat High Court on Friday commuted the
death sentence of a 65-year-old man to life imprisonment in an 18-year-old
murder case, but upheld the lower court's finding that the case fell in the
category of the rarest of rare case. The division bench of Justice M R Shah and
Justice Mohinder Pal also acquitted Bhavan Sodha's son, Pankaj, who was
sentenced to 7 years in jail for destroying evidence.
Sodha and his son, who were convicted for killing a woman and her 2 children in
Jamnagar in 2000 and cutting their bodies into pieces in order to destroy
evidence, had filed an appeal in the High Court.
Sodha had killed Ranjanben Keshavlal Shukla and her 2 children- Devdat (15) and
Avni (13) at their Jamnagar home. Ranjan was allegedly in a relationship with
Sodha for over 7 years after her husband's death.
Sodha was reportedly interested in her property worth crores.
On the day of the incident, Sodha hacked all the 3 victims to death and chopped
their bodies into pieces. He disposed the bodies by dumping them in a water
tank and at a roadside.
His son, Pankaj who is his forties, was alleged to have acted as an accomplice
to his father in destroying the evidence.
Sodha's lawyer argued in the court that he had been in jail since 2000 and was
suffering from several diseases, including cancer. He also said that his vocal
chords have been removed as a result of which he can not speak.
(source: The Indian Express)
_______________________________________________
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
