May 15
VIETNAM:
US-Vietnamese prisoner's wife appeals for US help
The wife of a US citizen held in Vietnam urged Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton Tuesday to push for his release, as a senior US official said Hanoi's
respect for human rights is deteriorating.
A House of Representatives panel heard the plea from Mai Huong Ngo, the wife of
Nguyen Quoc Quan who was reported arrested on April 17 in Ho Chi Minh City.
"I come here to appeal for your assistance in securing my husband's release
from arbitrary detention in Vietnam," Mai Huong Ngo told the Tom Lantos Human
Rights Commission panel.
Her voice breaking at times during the testimony, Ngo personally appealed to US
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the US ambassador to Hanoi, David Shear,
to "call for the immediate release of my husband."
She was due later to meet with Michael Posner, the assistant secretary of state
for democracy, human rights and labor who told the commission that Vietnam's
"respect for human rights continues to deteriorate."
Ngo said US consular staff have visited her husband once and were due to visit
him again at the end of May. She said he needed cooler clothes to make him more
comfortable in the hot weather.
State media said Quan, also known as Richard Nguyen, was detained at Tan Son
Nhat airport upon "trying to enter Vietnam to instigate a demonstration and
undermine celebrations" on the anniversary of the 1975 fall of Saigon.
The Vietnam News Agency (VNA) said he will be detained for 4 months pending an
investigation for the charge of "terrorism against the people's
administration," which could lead to the death penalty if convicted.
Communist Vietnam, however, has never executed a foreign citizen for political
charges.
The 59-year-old Nguyen, a member of the outlawed Viet Tan Party, received a
6-month jail sentence for terror charges and was deported out of Vietnam in May
2008, VNA said.
Viet Tan, the Vietnam Reform Party, describes itself as non-violent and
pro-democracy group. Vietnam however labels it as "terrorist."
Posner said Vietnam continues to "unjustly detain and imprison individuals for
exercising their basic human rights," estimating the government holds around
100 "prisoners of conscience."
He also charged that there is growing restrictions on the print media,
television and the Internet, citing recent decrees that "stifle an already
restricted press."
Posner complained about legal provisions that allow the government to target
peaceful protesters and outlaw "propaganda," which he said was used against a
musician who posted a political song on the internet.
He also said the United States is concerned about harassment of Christian
groups and disputes with Buddhist groups, even though Vietnam's constitution
guarantees freedom of religion.
Activist Vo Van Ai told the panel that many Americans "believe that the
strengthening of US relations with Hanoi means that human rights are improving
in Vietnam."
"But this is far from the case," according to the president and founder of Que
Me: Action for Democracy in Vietnam.
"The government has pursued a systematic crackdown on freedom of opinion,
expression, religion and assembly," he said.
"Arbitrary detention, torture and harassments are the daily lot of citizens who
express opinions in contradiction with the ruling Communist Party of Vietnam,"
he said.
President Barack Obama's administration has frequently urged Vietnam to make
progress on human rights but it has nonetheless rapidly expanded relations,
which both sides have sought amid the rise of China.
During a speech in Hawaii in November, Clinton said that Vietnam must improve
its human rights record if it seeks better relations as the two countries held
talks on the issue.
(source: Agence France-Presse)
INDIA:
Will life term now mean 30 years in jail?
Increasingly reluctant to award death penalty even in the "rarest of rare
cases" involving unspeakable brutality, the judiciary appears to be gradually
enhancing the spell of life term to not less than 30 years in order to meet
society's cry for adequate punishment for heinous crimes.
Those sentenced for life, strictly speaking, are supposed to spend their
remaining years behind bars. In practice, however, life imprisonment means
incarceration for 14 years when lifers become entitled to remission of the rest
of the sentence as per Prison Manual provisions.
That might change as the apex court seeks to balance the growing judicial
aversion towards imposing death sentences with the need to deter heinous
crimes. In potentially trendsetting verdicts, an SC bench of Justices B S
Chauhan and F M I Kalifulla set the 30-year imprisonment benchmark for 2
accused - a father who raped and killed his 4-year-old daughter and the other
who brutally killed his girlfriend after she refused to abort her pregnancy.
Justice Chauhan wrote the judgment for the bench in punishing the father while
Justice Kalifulla imposed the 30-year prison term on the boy who killed his
girlfriend for her refusal to abort the fetus after having lured her away to
Haridwar with the promise to marry her.
The common thread in the two judgments separated by three days, one on May 8
and the other on May 11, was the well-settled principle "life sentence is the
rule and death is an exception", and that the application of "rarest of rare
case" principle differed from case to case.
In the May 8 judgment awarding 30-year jail term to the accused father, Justice
Chauhan said, "We are of the considered opinion that the case does not fall
within the rarest of rare cases. However, considering the nature of offence,
age and relationship of the victim with the appellant and gravity of injuries
caused to her, appellant cannot be awarded a lenient punishment. Thus, in the
facts and circumstances of the case, we set aside the death sentence and award
life imprisonment. The appellant must serve a minimum of 30 years in jail
without remission, before consideration of his case for premature release."
In the May 11 judgment, Justice Kalifulla explained that the "rarest of rare
case" principle could be applied in a "deliberately planned crime, executed
meticulously in a diabolic manner, exhibiting inhuman conduct in a ghastly
manner touching the conscience of everyone, thereby disturbing the moral fiber
of society", which would call for imposition of capital punishment in order to
ensure that it acted as a deterrent.
The bench of Justices Chauhan and Kalifulla was convinced that the boyfriend,
Sandeep, deserved no leniency given the manner in which the young woman became
a victim of the "avaricious conduct and lust" of the appellant and the manner
in which her life was snatched away by causing multiple injuries all over her
body with all kinds of weapons.
The bench said, "Imposition of death penalty to the accused Sandeep was not
warranted and while awarding life imprisonment, we hold that accused Sandeep
must serve a minimum of 30 years in jail without remission before consideration
of his case for premature release."
In the Swami Shraddhanand case, the apex court had set aside the death penalty
but ordered that the accused would remain in prison till the end of his life.
There are other instances where the court has specified that the accused must
spend at least 20 years in prison before being entitled for remission.
But these 2 consecutive judgments asking the accused to spend a mandatory 30
years in prison has set the bar up in murder cases where the court awards life
sentence while setting aside death penalty given to him by the trial court and
upheld by the high court.
Times View
The world over, the trend is towards abolishing the death penalty. We have
advocated that India too should move in that direction, except in cases of
crimes like terrorism. What complicates the debate, however, is the fact that a
life sentence in India has more often than not actually meant 14 years. We have
consistently argued that life must mean life. Where the courts feel 14 years is
sufficient punishment for a crime, they should spell it out as a 14-year
sentence. And life sentences should mean imprisonment till death. That would
strengthen the case for doing away with the death penalty without seriously
harming the idea of punishment as deterrent. Seen in this context, the move
from 14 years to 30 years is a step in the right direction, but perhaps not
enough.
(source: The Times of India)
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO:
British man charged over African massacre after discovering bodies
A pilot from North Yorkshire is being held in prison in Africa after
discovering 'bodies with machete wounds'.
David Simpson, moved from his home near Pickering to the Central African
Republic 2 years ago to work on a game reserve.
However, the 24-year-old was arrested 6 weeks ago after stumbling upon a
gruesome scene, in which he reported to the local police that he had discovered
18 mutilated bodies.
His family says Mr Simpson, who works as a manager and pilot for a Swedish
safari company, is now being treated as an official murder suspect following
his arrest. He is being held along with his boss, Swede Erik Mararv, and 10
Central Africans.
Mr Simpson says that he is innocent, but could face the death penalty if found
guilty.
He told the Daily Mail in a mobile phone conversation: "It's like a nightmare.
I just want this to be over".
Mr Simpson's family have told ITV Tyne Tees that he has spent time in a crowded
cell though his conditions have now improved.
His brother Paul told ITV News reporter Geraint Vincent, that the Foreign
Office has not done enough to aid his release.
The Foreign Office has responded:
“Consular staff have visited Mr Simpson regularly since his arrest and are also
in regular contact with his family in the UK. We have asked the CAR authorities
for assurances that the legal process will be followed and for the matter to be
concluded as swiftly as possible.
Following the incident, his family set up a Facebook group to campaign for his
release, which now has more than 3,000 members.
Many commentators have linked the killings to supporters of the Ugandan warlord
Joseph Kony, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes
and crimes against humanity.
(source: ITV)
ZAMBIA:
2 Ex-Soldiers to Hang
2 former Zambia Army soldiers have been sentenced to death for the brutal
killing of 2 Finance Bank employees and stealing more than K900 million which
was being transported to Kaoma.
The 2 former staff sergeants, Festus Shandulu and Namushi Ngundamai, who were
based at Luena Barracks, ambushed a vehicle in 2009 which was transporting cash
meant for Government workers' salaries and shot dead Chisala Chishimba, a
driver, and Chrispin Mushele, a bank teller.
The duo also got away with K958,550,000 from John Kaunda, an employee of
Finance Bank.
Delivering his judgment in Lusaka, Kabwe-based High Court Judge, Freddie
Sikazwe, said the bloody attack resulted in the death of 2 innocent people who
were carrying out their duty.
Mr Justice Sikazwe said that there was, therefore, no other punishment for
aggravated robbery when a weapon is used more so that the soldiers shot dead 2
people.
"I have no other option other than sentencing you to death by hanging until you
are pronounced dead," Mr Justice Sikazwe said.
Mr Mushele and Mr Chishimba were killed at Namusheshe area on their way from
Mongu to collect money for civil servants in Kaoma.
Shandulu and Ngundamai, who were charged with 2 counts of murder and 1 count of
aggravated robbery while armed with an AK47 rifle, shot dead the duo while they
were in their vehicle seats.
"I have no doubt this type of robbery was organised by a band of expert armed
robbers as could be seen from the way the murder and aggravated robbery was
committed.
"Mr Chishimba and Mr Mushele were shot dead in cold blood and whoever killed
them must have known that such an act would cause death or grievous bodily
harm," the judge said.
Mr Justice Sikazwe noted that the witnesses were reliable and as such the
prosecution proved the offences against Shandulu and Ngundamai beyond
reasonable doubt.
He said it was not in dispute that the money found in different situations was
part of the one snatched from the cash-in-transit van.
"The AK47 rifle, GC 1674 and 30 live ammunition which were recovered in the
bush where Shandulu led a team of police officers were part of the guns used to
shoot the occupants of the cash-in-transit van," Mr Justice Sikazwe said.
He said there was overwhelming evidence that the armed men who snatched the
money were the same ones who murdered the 2 bank employees.
The Zambian Constitution under Part III on the Protection of Fundamental Rights
and Freedom of the Individual allows for death penalty.
Article 12 in this section, dealing with the protection of the right to life,
clause (1) states that: "No person shall be deprived of his life intentionally
except in execution of the sentence of a court in respect of a criminal offence
under the law in force in Zambia of which he has been convicted".
The Technical Committee on Drafting Zambia's next Constitution has upheld the
death penalty.Zambia, has, however, not witnessed any hanging of convicts since
1997.
Then president, Frederick Chiluba authorised hanging of 8 prisoners, the only
executions he assented to during his 10 years in office.
(source: All Africa News)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/deathpenalty@lists.washlaw.edu/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
