March 26
GLOBAL:
Report: Death Penalty Applied in Large Numbers in a Few Countries
Amnesty International says the number of death penalty-related executions in a
small number of countries is alarming, and runs counter to the global trend
against carrying out executions. The rights group is calling for a worldwide
moratorium on the punishment and eventually the end of what it says is a cruel
and inhumane practice.
Amnesty says at least 676 people were executed worldwide last year. But this
figure does not include the number of executions in China, where the statistics
are deemed a state secret. Its numbers are believed to be in the thousands.
Iran ranked second, with more than 360 executions. Amnesty warns that number
also could be much higher, because it has credible information that
“substantial numbers” of executions are not officially acknowledged.
Amnesty International’s U.N. director José Luis Díaz told reporters that last
year only 18 of the 193 U.N. member states carried out executions.
"A small, we believe, increasingly isolated number of countries are carrying
out the bulk of the executions," said Diaz. "The states that year-on-year are
consistently among the highest executioners include China, Iraq, Iran, North
Korea, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, the U.S. and Yemen.”
The United States was ranked fifth on Amnesty’s list, having carried out 43
executions last year. Díaz said it was the only country in the Americas and the
only member of the Group of Eight (G8) leading economies to put prisoners to
death in 2011.
Belarus was the only country in Europe or the former Soviet Union that carried
out the death penalty last year. In the Asia-Pacific region, 7 countries
carried out executions and more than 800 new death sentences were imposed in 18
countries in that part of the world.
In sub-Saharan Africa, Amnesty said executions are rare and limited to a small
number of countries - last year it was Somalia, South Sudan and Sudan.
In the Middle East, executions were up almost 50 % over last year for Iran,
Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, which accounted for 99 % of all recorded regional
executions.
Amnesty’s Díaz said the death penalty is frequently applied during judicial
proceedings that fail to meet international standards, and often for
non-violent crimes.
"Adultery and sodomy in Iran, for example; blasphemy in Pakistan; sorcery in
Saudi Arabia; the trafficking of human bones in the Republic of Congo; and drug
offenses in over 10 countries - a number of these in Southeast Asia," he said.
"We believe the death penalty should not be applied in any case, but even under
international law, should be applied to the most serious cases, and I would
challenge anyone to really justify these as being among the most serious cases
for applying the death penalty.”
At the end of 2011, nearly 19,000 people were under a death sentence worldwide.
Amnesty says it wants to see a moratorium on the death penalty, with a view to
abolishing it completely. In the meantime, the organization would like to see
countries reduce the number of crimes for which the penalty is applied.
(source: Voice of America)
CHINA:
Wu Ying and China's death row
The case of Wu Ying, the Chinese businesswoman who faces execution for raising
money illegally (Loans that led to death row: tycoon's case brings renewed
cries for reform, 22 March), is another reminder of the vast scope of China's
capital punishment system. As our new report published today on the death
penalty shows, the overwhelming majority of countries no longer carry out
executions but, among those that do, few come even close to China in the use of
capital punishment for non-lethal crimes. Some 55 crimes are punishable by
death, including corruption and organising prostitution.
China's leadership argues the country is not ready to abolish the death
penalty, even for economic crimes, but Wu Ying's case has sparked public
outcry. In response the Chinese authorities should end capital punishment for
economic crimes, offer clemency procedures in other cases and – after years of
secrecy – publish figures on how many it actually executes.
Kate Allen, Director, Amnesty International UK
(source: Letter to the Editor, The Guardian)
INDONESIA:
Bali Bombers Given Rp 500,000 to Leave Island, Defendant Tells Court
A witness at the trial of terror suspect Umar Patek said on Monday that the
2002 Bali bombers were all given Rp 500,000 ($55) to flee the island after the
blast.
Mohammad Ihsan, also known as Idris, who was sentenced to 10 years in jail for
his involvement in the Bali bombing that killed 202 people, said the money was
distributed during an evaluation meeting a week after the attack.
“What I remember is that during the evaluation, it was discussed how we should
flee and each of us was given Rp 500,000 by Mukhlas to flee,” Ihsan told the
West Jakarta District Court.
He was referring to key Bali bomber Mukhlas, also known as Ali Ghufron, who was
executed by a firing squad in 2008.
Ihsan said that Imam Samudra, Amrozi, Dulmatin, Patek and bomb expert Azahari
Husin were at the meeting.
Samudra and Amrozi were later executed by firing squads, and Dulmatin was
killed in a police raid in Tangerang last year. Azahari was killed in a police
raid in Batu, East Java, in 2005.
Ihsan was arrested in Medan, North Sumatra, and received a 10-year prison
sentence in 2004. He was released in January 2009 after being granted several
cuts to his sentence.
“I was sentenced to 10 years in jail but now I am free,” he said.
Ihsan also confirmed a statement made last week by Ali Imron to the same court
that Osama bin Laden paid $30,000 to fund the 2002 bombings of two Bali
nightclubs.
The funds were used to purchase the Mitsubishi L300 minibus that delivered the
bombs, 2 motorcycles, bomb-making materials, as well as to cover living
expenses prior to the attacks on Paddy’s Pub and Sari Club in the tourist
district of Legian, Kuta.
According to Ihsan, the group was well funded.
“There were actually other funds, but I don’t know where they came from,” he
said.
Patek, a former head of the Al Qaeda-linked terrorist network Jemaah Islamiyah,
is facing the death penalty for his role as the mastermind of the 2002 attacks.
Ihsan also told the court that he saw Patek assembling the explosives that were
used in the 2002 Bali bombings.
Patek said in court last week that he didn’t have any experience in making
bombs.
“I saw him [Patek] assembling the explosives when I delivered food to the house
that had been rented to build the bombs,” Ihsan testified. “Umar took part in
the assembling.
“I didn’t see exactly what he used to make the bombs, but I saw that the raw
materials for the bombs sent from Lamongan had been unpacked.”
Patek, who fled the country in 2003, was arrested along with his Filipino wife
early last year in Pakistan, and extradited to Indonesia.
Prosecutors have demanded the death penalty for Patek, who is believed to be
one of the main protagonists in the 2002 Bali carnage.
Patek’s wife, Siti Ruqayyah, was jailed for 2 years and 3 months in January for
falsifying data in order to get travel documents.
(source: Jakarta Globe)
INDIA:
NDPS repeat offender gets death sentence
In its 2nd such judgment, the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge
(ADJ) Shalini Nagpal today awarded the death sentence to an Amritsar resident
in a Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act case. The court laid
emphasis on his past, wherein he was convicted for 10 years for the same
offence.
Balwinder Singh (36) was awarded the death penalty by the Court while his
accomplice Satnam Singh, former warden of Sangrur Jail, was awarded a 12-year
jail term. A fine of Rs 1.5 lakh was also imposed on Satnam.
Balwinder was convicted under Section 21(c) read with 31A(1) of the NDPS Act.
The latter section prescribes the death sentence if a person is convicted for
the 2nd time.
Balwinder Singh had previously been awarded 10 years’ imprisonment by an
Amritsar Court for smuggling over 2.9 kg heroin. He was brought on production
warrant to the Chandigarh Court to appear in a drug pedaling case dating back
to the year 2005.
The public prosecutor had pressed for the death penalty, terming Balwinder a
habitual offender who had already been convicted in a similar case. However,
the defence lawyer had contended that Balwinder was not a habitual offender and
that they had already challenged his (Balwinder’s) previous sentence in the
High Court.
“The repeat offence committed by the convict Balwinder Singh affects social
security and deserves the extreme penalty for taking the lives of innocents
deliberately for astronomical scales of gain. Death penalty for the accused
would stand the test of social justice for the the protection of society,”
reads the Court’s judgment.
The Court order further mentioned that Satnam Singh was a government servant
working as a warden of Punjab Jail, posted at Sangrur, at the relevant time. He
was holding a public office at the time and, thus, the gravity of the offense
became even more serious.
The Case
Satnam was arrested by Chandigarh Police on December 11, 2005. He was
accompanied by Balwinder and Sarpanch in an Indica but fled on seeing the
police. They were on their way to supply a consignment of contraband to a
smuggler. On searching the car, the police recovered two packets of heroin,
each weighing a kg, wrapped in khaki tape from the door panel of the car. 2
similar packets were recovered from the back of the car. In March 2007
Balwinder was arrested by Punjab Police from Amritsar for smuggling over 2 kg
heroin.
Previous death sentence
On January 28 the same court had awarded the death sentence to Amritsar
resident Paramjit Singh while his accomplice Festus Benson, a national of the
Republic of Burundi, was given 15 years’ rigorous imprisonment (RI), besides a
fine of Rs 1.5 lakh.
(source: The Times of India)
SOUTH AFRICA:
The death penalty is dead
Ever since the abolishment of the death penalty in 1995, most South Africans,
white, black, coloured, Durbanites and everyone in between, have been up in
arms, calling for its return as the saviour of justice and the answer to
violent crime as we know it.
Most people are of the view that the death penalty acts as a fear instilling
instrument, making any hardened criminal think twice before pulling the
trigger, or unzipping his pants with the grin of a school bully about to take
his lunch.
However, this assumption, albeit the originating reason for the death penalty
itself, is no more applicable than hiding your car keys so an 18 month old
child doesn’t take the car for a spin.
What very few people know is that the death penalty was abolished in a landmark
court ruling by the Constitutional Court, named S v Makwanyane and Another (CCT
3/94), and not an Act in itsself.
Without delving into various semantics surrounding the case, the bottom line
was that the Constitution...our Constitution, granted (and obviously still
does) the right to life in terms of chapter 3 of the interim Constitution of
1993.
For those that don’t know, Chapter 2 of the Constitution is the Human Rights
Charter, and became the single most important document in the history of this
country, and for that matter, any following modern democracy, when it
officially replaced the charter in chapter 3 of the interim Constitution.
Be that as it may, there are various reasons anyone would want to implement the
death penalty in its entirety, and immediately in this country, but none of
those reasons, unfortunately, are vested in logic.
The simple reason is that the death penalty cannot, without changing the
Constitution, be a sanction that forms part of our legal system, ever again.
Even if we wanted to, no one could, as you would require 75% of the National
Assembly, as well as 6 of the 9 provinces to change this.
Why not 2/3 you say?
Well, the negotiators were wiser than that in the early 90’s , as Chapter 1 and
2, which are by far the most important, require the larger margin, rather than
only 2/3.
By the way, Chapter 1 cements the total authority of the Constitution over
Parliament, making us a Constitutional Democracy, and I’ve already stated the
worth of Chapter 2 previously.
Now, legalities aside, personally, I think you would open Pandora’s box when
even considering to go down that route again, simply because that would totally
undermine legal development, and not come close to fulfilling the purpose we
may embark on, when attempting such a retrospective step.
Criminals simply aren’t flustered at the death penalty at all, and in most
instances, actually prefer the death penalty to lifelong incarceration.
In my mind, there are only 2 possible reasons one would want to consider the
death penalty in any legal system. The one being the obvious scare tactic, and
the other being cost effectiveness.
The former refers to criminals that are unable to rehabilitate, such as
psychotics, who will only be a burden on the tax payer in prison, as his or her
way to financial freedom is paved until their deaths in a lonely cell in C-Max.
There is no reason these people should remain in prison, as it would only be
fair to the world, and to be honest, to them, to be relinquished of their right
to life, as Mr. Makwanyane and Co was so eloquently granted.
On a serious note, the problem we face is not with the effects of a crime
committed, but rather with everything that went wrong until such time as it
occurred.
Normally, you would expect violent crimes from disturbed psychotics, but in our
case, we have created an atmosphere where young thieves and hijackers are
conditioned that the taking of a life is part of “business” and purely a means
to an end.
We should thus rather focus on breaking this atmosphere of acceptance of all
that is violent and pure evil.
Anyone that knows the story of Pavlov’s dogs, knows that positive reinforcement
is far more effective than negative reinforcement, especially in the case of
let’s say...China or North Korea (which evidently are some of the last
remaining promoters of capital punishment), where the outset in passing laws is
to instil fear, and rule autocratically.
Now, I know a lot of people will say our Government is totally incapable of
positive reinforcement amongst us all...maybe so, but does that mean we should
strive to develop systems around an incapable and hapless Government, so they
can at least get something done? The innuendo thereto is just as ridiculous as
anyone answering “yes” to such a question!
Maybe, we should look at prevention rather than cure and fix the education
system. On an interim short term, heavy jail sentences will have to do the
trick, and rehabilitation programs for lesser criminals should be increased to
make space for the real bad boys behind bars....but that’s just me.
This sounds like old news, but in reality, there simply is no better
alternative. Our violent crime problem is not one of policy, but one of
execution of policies, which seems to be the trend in all spheres of governance
in South Africa.
The illusion of an incompetent legal system has left people yearning for death
to protect them, when in fact the contagion of incompetence is squarely to
blame for our current predicament.
Maybe, in time, we will all have the guts to stand up to this nest of
incompetence, notwithstanding race, and strike where it hits hardest.
On a ballot paper.
(source: news24.com)
_______________________________________________
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
