April 26
BELARUS:
Until recently Belarus was the only country in Europe and Central Asia to
execute prisoners
Until recently Belarus was the only country in Europe and Central Asia to
execute prisoners However, after reintroducing capital punishment in territory
they hold, pro-Russian Ukrainian rebels have sentenced at least 1 man to death
since September 2014.
Belarus executed 3 people by shooting in 2014 after a 24-month break in state
killings, Amnesty International told EurActiv. It is the only European and
Central Asian country which uses the death penalty.
The executions were secret with lawyers and family only being told after the
prisoners were dead, Amnesty, which on 1 April published its annual Death
Penalty Report, said.
Authoritarian leader Alexander Lukashenka hosted the February Minsk talks to
end fighting in eastern Ukraine. They were attended by Russian President
Vladimir Putin, Ukraine's Petro Poroshenko, Germany's Angela Merkel and
France's Francois Hollande.
Ukraine abolished the death penalty in 2000. In August last year, pro-Russian
rebels in the so-called Donetsk People Republic, in eastern Ukraine, introduced
a criminal code in August, reserving the death penalty for the "gravest
crimes". The same session approved the setting up of military "courts" in the
territories they control.
The Lugansk People's Republic has also re-introduced the death penalty. On 26
September, rules were introduced that homosexual rape could be punished by
death.
In October, a YouTube video surfaced which appeared to show a "people's court"
of about 300, judging 2 alleged rapists of women. After gunpoint confessions
and a vote by the kangaroo court, one was sent to the frontline.
The other was sentenced to death by firing squad, with only his mother speaking
out for mercy. Amnesty International has not been able to confirm if he was
shot, but the sentence did not appear to be carried out immediately.
While there have been numerous reports of summary executions in Ukraine, they
were not committed within the pseudo-legal framework of the criminal code.
European Union
The European Union does not recognise either the Lugansk or Donetsk republics,
branding November elections held in the territories "illegal and illegitimate".
It has called for the rule of law and order to be reestablished, so that human
rights violations can be prevented and investigated.
"Capital punishment cannot be justified under any circumstances. The death
penalty is a cruel and inhuman punishment, which fails to act as a deterrent
and represents an unacceptable denial of human dignity and integrity," an EU
official said.
Every EU member state has abolished the death penalty in law or practice. The
last country to do so was Latvia, which banned capital punishment in wartime in
2012. The absolute ban on the death penalty is enshrined in the Charter of
Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Lukashenka, described as leading "Europe's last dictatorship", was able to play
the international statesman at Minsk, shoring up his position at home,
campaigners told EurActiv.
But there was little choice in the location for the summit if EU leaders wanted
to stop the fighting. The EU can leverage hardly any influence over the police
state, which is heavily backed by Russia.
A lack of interest from the west, hastened by the Ukraine crisis, have also
ruled out any Maiden-style revolution in Belarus, according to analysis by
Belarus Digest, published in The Guardian. Lukashenka has been in power since
1994.
"Legal" executions
The EU has urged Belarus to join a global moratorium on the death penalty as a
step towards its universal abolition. Despite repeated EU condemnations,
Belarus continues to execute by shooting, and to sentence prisoners to death.
In April 2014 Belarus secretly executed Pavel Selyun, sentenced in June 2013
for a 2012 double murder. The UN Human Rights Committee had requested a stay in
execution, which was ignored.
Such requests are legally binding on state parties to the First Optional
Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which
Belarus agreed to in 1992.
In May, the Mogilev Regional Court in Belarus confirmed that Rygor Yuzepchuk
had been executed. He was sentenced to death in 2013 for a 2012 murder. The
authorities have not made public the date of his execution or the location of
his grave.
Aliaksandr Haryunou was executed in October. He was sentenced to death in 2013
for a murder committed in 2012. Haryunou appealed to the UN Human Rights
Committee in April, arguing that his trial had been unfair.
The Committee asked the Belarusian authorities to stay his execution until it
had considered the case. They ignored the legally binding request. Neither his
relatives nor lawyer were given the chance to have a final meeting with
Haryunou.
In March 2015, Siarhei Ivanou was sentenced to death by the Homel Regional
Court of the Republic of Belarus. The EU's foreign policy bureau called for his
right to appeal to be guaranteed, while expressing sympathy to the family of
the victim.
Counter-terrorism
Worldwide, there was a sharp spike in the handing down of death sentences in
2014, up more than 500 on the previous year to at least 2,466. This was due to
more governments in countries such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Pakistan using
sentences handed down on trumped up terror charges to quell dissent, Amnesty
International said.
Writing exclusively in EurActiv today, it warned that "mainstreaming
counter-terrorism" into EU foreign policy in the guise of "international
cooperation" could undermine its principled stance on the death penalty.
Targeted and upgraded security dialogues with countries such as Pakistan and
Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan, were dialogues with countries that executed as
a matter of course, warned Iverna McGowan, acting director of Amnesty
International's European Institutions Office.
"In the wake of the sharp spike in death sentences, and closer security
cooperation with many state perpetrators, the burning question the EU needs to
answer is whether and how it is making sure partners stop using the death
penalty," she said.
Russia and the Council of Europe
Ironically, Belarus' sponsor Russia has had a moratorium on the death penalty
since 2009. All 47 member-states of the Council of Europe, including Russia,
have stopped using capital punishment due to commitments under the European
Convention on Human Rights.
Becoming a member of the international organisation for cooperation, human
rights and rule of law, would mean Belarus would have to give up the death
penalty. It would also be open to legal challenges over its dismal human rights
record.
Council spokesman Andrew Cutting stated, "The Council of Europe is firmly
opposed to the death penalty in all circumstances. The Committee of Ministers
has repeatedly called upon non-member countries including Belarus, the United
States and Japan to cease using the death penalty and move towards abolition."
Japan (3 executions last year) and the United States have observer status at
the Council. Executions in the US dropped from 39 in 2013 to 35 in 2014,
Amnesty International said.
China again carried out more executions than the rest of the world put
together. Amnesty International believes thousands are executed and sentenced
to death there every year, but with numbers kept a state secret the true figure
is impossible to determine.
Without China, there were 602 executions in 22 countries in 2014. The world's
top 5 executioners apart from China in 2014 were Iran (289 officially announced
and at least 454 more that were not acknowledged by the authorities), Saudi
Arabia (at least 90), Iraq (at least 61) and the USA.
(source: eurobelarus.info)
INDONESIA:
Planned executions "a shameful stain" for President Widodo
The planned execution of 10 inmates convicted of drug-related offenses is a
shameful stain on President Joko Widodo's policymaking, FIDH and its member
organization KontraS said today. The 2 organizations reiterate their appeal to
President Widodo for a halt to all executions and the commutation of all death
sentences.
"President Widodo's green light for more executions despite massive
international calls for clemency is a shameful stain on his policymaking," said
FIDH President Karim Lahidji. "He must immediately end this barbaric practice
and ensure that Indonesia complies with its international human rights
obligations."
10 individuals are scheduled to be executed by firing squad within days in
Nusakambangan prison in Central Java. They are: Rodrigo Gularte (Brazil), Serge
Atlaoui (France), Okwudili Oyatanze (Nigeria), Raheem Agbaje Salami (Nigeria),
Sylvester Obiekwe (Nigeria), Martin Anderson (Ghana), Mary Jane Veloso
(Philippines), Andrew Chan (Australia), Myuran Sukumaran (Australia), and
Zainal Abidin (Indonesia). On 23 April, the Attorney General Office instructed
authorities to prepare for the executions, after many of the 10 drug convicts
repeatedly failed to secure a judicial review of their cases.
"President Widodo's tough stance on capital punishment for drug convicts is a
disgraceful ploy to shore up his sinking approval ratings," said KontraS
Executive Director Haris Azhar. "It's time for President Widodo to heed the
international communities' repeated calls for an end to executions."
Instead of implementing a moratorium on executions, President Widodo has
repeatedly ruled out an amnesty for drug traffickers facing execution. In early
December 2014, President Widodo refused to grant clemency to 6 inmates,
including 2 women, who had been found guilty of drug trafficking. On 18 January
2015, the 6 were executed by firing squad in Nusakambangan prison.
Ironically, and in a move that exposes the Indonesian government to
hypocritical double standards on capital punishment, President Widodo's
administration protested the execution of 2 Indonesian women in Saudi Arabia on
14 and 16 April 2015.
On 2 April 2015, it was reported that the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) had
downgraded Indonesia to 'E', on a scale of 'A' to 'E', for its failure to
respond to the HRC's call in August 2013 to stop executing prisoners for
drug-related crimes. The HRC monitors implementation by states parties to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The 'E' rating
indicates that Indonesia took measures that went against the HRC's
recommendations related to the death penalty. The HRC has repeatedly stressed
that capital punishment for drug-related offenses is a clear violation of
Article 6 of the ICCPR on the right to life.
FIDH and KontraS, both members of the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty
(WCADP), reiterate their strong opposition to the death penalty for all crimes
and in all circumstances. Our organizations insist that there is no conclusive
evidence of the deterrent value of the death penalty on drug-related offenses.
(source: FIDH)
*******************
Bali 9: Indonesia issues execution orders
At least 3 of 10 people on death row in Indonesia for drug smuggling have been
given formal notice of their imminent execution.
2 Australians, Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, and a Philippines woman, Mary
Jane Veloso were notified by Indonesian officials on Saturday.
Under Indonesian law, convicts must be given 72 hours' notice of execution, but
no formal date has yet been set.
The appeals process for a French national is still under way.
The group is being held on the prison island of Nusakambangan.
Appeals for clemency
"Indonesian authorities today [Saturday] advised Australian consular officials
that the executions of Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran will be scheduled
imminently at Nusa Kambangan prison in central Java," Australian Foreign
Minister Julie Bishop said in a statement.
She said she would continue to press for clemency. However, Indonesia's
government has rejected all appeals so far.
Veloso's parents, 2 sons and sister travelled to the island on Saturday to see
her.
Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran were the leaders of the "Bali 9" group
arrested in 2005 while attempting to smuggle heroin to Australia.
A court ruled that they had organised a 9-member smuggling operation and they
were sentenced to death in 2006.
Indonesian President Joko Widodo, who took office last year, has taken a tough
stance on drug crime.
In January he authorised the executions of 6 people, including 5 foreigners,
convicted of drug offences.
The group of 10 awaiting execution also includes Brazilian and Nigerian
nationals.
Who are the Bali 9?
The 8 men and 1 woman were arrested in April 2005 at an airport and hotel in
Bali, Indonesia after a tip-off from Australian police. They were trying to
carry 8.3kg (18lb) of heroin back to Australia
In 2006 a court ruled that Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran had recruited the
others and paid their costs. They were sentenced to death
The other 7 are serving sentences of between 20 years and life, after some had
death sentences revoked on appeal
Chan and Sukumaran have repeatedly appealed against their sentences and say
they are reformed characters - Chan teaches Bible and cookery classes in prison
while Sukumaran is an artist.
(source: BBC news)
************************
Mary Jane set to be shot on Tuesday
Mary Jane Veloso told a group of Filipino lawyers in Indonesia on Saturday
(April 25) that she has already received a letter setting the date of her
execution - April 28.
Veloso said she received the letter early Saturday evening and the 72-hour
period will therefore fall on Tuesday.
According to Atty. Cris Yambot of the National Union of People's Lawyers
(NUPL), Veloso received the notice a few minutes past 6 p.m.
Atty. Minnie Lopez added that executions in Indonesia were usually carried out
at midnight.
Meanwhile, Migrante International chairman Gary Martinez said an emergency
press conference will be held later in the evening at the Migrante office in
Cubao, Quezon City.
For his part, Foreign Affairs spokesperson Charles Jose noted that the
Philippine embassy in Kuala Lumpur has not yet received the 72-hour notice.
Veloso was arrested at the Yogyakarta Airport in March 2010 for carrying 2.6
kilograms of heroin in her luggage. In October of the same year, she was given
the death sentence.
(source: CNN)
*********************
Stop Imminent Executions ---- Death Penalty for Drug Crimes Violates
International Law
President Joko Widodo of Indonesia should urgently commute the death sentences
of 10 people who face imminent execution for drug trafficking, Human Rights
Watch said today. Following the exhaustion of legal appeals on April 24, 2015,
Indonesian authorities advised foreign diplomats and the prisoners' family
members to convene on the island of Nusa Kambangan, where the executions are
slated to occur.
"President Widodo has an important opportunity to signal Indonesia's rejection
of the death penalty by sparing the lives of the 10 people facing looming
execution," said Phelim Kine, deputy Asia director. "Widodo can demonstrate
true leadership by ending capital punishment as unacceptable state brutality."
The 10 prisoners include one Indonesian and nine foreign nationals, from
Brazil, Australia, France, Ghana, Nigeria, and the Philippines. The pending
executions have provoked a diplomatic firestorm from foreign governments whose
nationals are scheduled to face the firing squad. The Brazilian government has
expressed concern that its citizen Rodrigo Gularte faces execution despite
evidence that he has bipolar disorder and paranoid schizophrenia. In 2000 the
United Nations Commission on Human Rights expressed its opposition to imposing
the death penalty "on a person suffering from any form of mental disorder." The
UN special rapporteur on torture, Juan Mendez, stated in December 2014 that
imposing the death penalty on people with mental disabilities violated the
prohibition on torture and other cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or
punishment.
6 other convicted drug traffickers were recently executed in Indonesia. Widodo
has sought to justify the death penalty spree on the basis that drug
traffickers on death row had "destroyed the future of the nation." In December
he told students that the death penalty for convicted drug traffickers was an
"important shock therapy" for anyone who violates Indonesia's drug laws.
According to the Attorney General's Office statistics, 136 people were on death
row in Indonesia at the end of 2014, of whom 64 have been convicted of drug
trafficking, 2 for terrorism, and the rest for murder and robbery. Indonesia
ended a 4-year unofficial moratorium on the use of the death penalty on March
15, 2013, when it executed by firing squad Adami Wilson, a 48-year-old Malawian
national. An Indonesian court had convicted Wilson in 2004 of smuggling 1
kilogram of heroin into Indonesia.
Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances because of
its inherent cruelty. Indonesia's use of the death penalty is inconsistent with
international human rights law, statements of UN human rights experts, and
various UN bodies. Human rights law upholds every human being's "inherent right
to life" and limits the death penalty to "the most serious crimes," typically
crimes resulting in death or serious bodily harm. Indonesia should join with
the many countries already committed to the UN General Assembly's December 18,
2007 resolution calling for a moratorium on executions and a move by UN member
countries toward abolition of the death penalty.
In a March 2010 report, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime called for an end to
the death penalty and specifically urged member countries to prohibit use of
the death penalty for drug-related offenses while urging countries to take an
overall "human rights-based approach to drug and crime control." The UN Human
Rights Committee and the UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or
arbitrary executions have concluded that the death penalty for drug offenses
fails to meet the condition of "most serious crime."
"President Widodo should recognize that the death penalty is not a crime
deterrent but an unjustifiable and barbaric punishment," Kine said. "Widodo
should promote Indonesia as a rights-respecting democracy by joining the
countries that have abolished capital punishment."
(source: Human Rights Watch)
*********************
Rise in Indonesia executions bucks global trend: Amnesty
Indonesia has sharply increased executions, bucking a global trend of fewer
death sentences being carried out, Amnesty International experts said, as
Jakarta prepares to execute nine foreign drug convicts.
Amnesty said that the number of executions carried out globally went down to
607 in 2014 -- a reduction of 22 % from 2013 -- even though capital sentences
handed out increased 28 % to 2,466.
In Indonesia, no convicts were executed in 2014 but 6 have been so far this
year and the government has promised to bring that total to 20 -- an
unprecedented level for the country in recent years.
This number of executions would bring Indonesia to the 2014 level of countries
like Yemen (22), Sudan (23) or the United States (35), although far below the
hundreds killed every year in China and Iran.
An Amnesty report showed there were 5 executions in Indonesia in 2013, then
none 2009-2012 and 10 in 2008.
Indonesia is not alone in justifying the death sentences as part of a crackdown
on crime.
The rapid rise in death sentences in 2014 was mainly caused by Egypt and
Nigeria where hundreds of Islamists have been convicted in terror cases.
Below are comments made by 2 Amnesty experts in interviews with AFP:
- Audrey Gaughran, Director of Global Issues, Amnesty International -
"We've seen a reduction thankfully in executions globally... The long-term
trend in the world is definitely towards abolition even though each year we see
some negative developments that cause us concern," she said.
"We have very significant concerns in Egypt because of the mass death sentences
which have followed extremely unfair trials and in Nigeria we're concerned
about the way the military courts have imposed death sentences."
"There is a trend of countries using the death penalty and saying it's to
combat terrorism, it's to combat violent crime. There is no evidence that the
death penalty is any more of a deterrent to violent crime or terrorism than
other forms of punishment like imprisonment."
"It becomes an excuse, a justification for imposing death sentences."
"The death penalty isn't the solution to these problems, the death penalty
isn't justice."
- Papang Hidayat, Indonesia researcher, Amnesty International -
"I think the Indonesian government will continue with the 2nd wave of
executions because they don't want to lose face in front of the population. A
majority of Indonesians are in favour of the death penalty and execution,
particularly in drug cases."
"I think the international outcry is playing an important role and will prevent
them carrying out all 20 executions this year.... I think the reaction of the
international community made President Widodo a bit surprised. They thought the
death penalty was a small issue that could not hamper the bilateral
relationship with any country."
"To execute more than 10 in a year would not be usual."
"If Indonesia executes 10 people, it means that the number would be 16. It puts
Indonesia between the top 10 and top 15 countries in terms of executions. It's
very uncommon in Indonesia."
"They want to be seen as strong on law enforcement but more educated people are
now joining the anti death-penalty movement, which is getting larger."
"There was a very good manoeuvre made by the Australians when they sent a
famous Islamic cleric to Jakarta to meet his Indonesian counterparts and he
shared his view that according to Islamic teaching the death penalty should be
abolished. It received a positive reception -- unlike if Amnesty condemned
through a press release or report. They would consider us a Western
organisation trying to interfere with Indonesian values."
(source: Amnesty International)
************************
There is no evidence that the death penalty acts as a deterrent ---- Joko
Widodo argues that Indonesia needs to execute drug offenders like Andrew Chan
and Myuran Sukumaran to deter others, but he can produce no evidence to support
this claim.
Australia has executed no-one for half a century. Following the abolition of
the death penalty by various states, the federal government abolished capital
punishment in 1973.
Nevertheless, Australian citizens - like all of those from abolitionist
jurisdictions - face the death penalty when they commit serious crimes in
countries that retain it. Bali 9 pair Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran are
facing execution in Indonesia following their convictions on drug trafficking
charges almost 10 years ago. On Saturday, they and 7 others were given official
notice that they will be killed by firing squad on the prison island of
Nusakambangan. Under Indonesian law, the minimum period between receiving
notice and execution is 72 hours.
Indonesian President Joko Widodo, popularly known as Jokowi, has insisted all
along that he will reject clemency petitions for drug traffickers on death row.
In January, 6 were executed - 5 of them foreigners - straining Indonesia's
diplomatic relations with Brazil and the Netherlands. These countries abolished
the death penalty in the 19th century.
Jokowi claims that Indonesia is in the grip of a national drug "emergency". He
argues that it needs to execute drug offenders to deter others and thereby
reduce the rate of deaths following illicit or illegal drug use. However, he,
like others who support the death penalty, can produce no evidence to support
this claim.
Because it would be morally repugnant to conduct random experiments in the use
of capital punishment, it remains difficult - if not impossible - to find
empirical data on the deterrent effects of the threat of capital punishment
that would persuade a committed proponent of the death penalty to change their
mind.
As far as some crimes punishable by death in several countries are concerned -
such as importing or trading in illegal drugs, economic crimes, or politically
motivated violence - there is no reliable evidence of the deterrent effects of
executions. What evidence there is - which is mostly from the US - should lead
any dispassionate analyst to conclude that it is not prudent to accept the
hypothesis that capital punishment deters murder to a marginally greater extent
than does the supposedly lesser punishment of life imprisonment.
One rather unsophisticated way of considering deterrence is to analyse homicide
rates before and after the death penalty is abolished. This at least can show
whether countries that abolish capital punishment inevitably experience more
murders, as those who support the deterrent argument claim.
In Australia, where the last executions occurred in the mid-1960s, the reported
murder rate has, a few fluctuations aside, fallen.
Prior to the abolition of the death penalty in Canada in 1976, the reported
homicide rate had been rising. But in 2003, 27 years after abolition, the rate
was 43% lower than it was in 1975, the year before abolition.
Likewise, the homicide rate in countries of Central and Eastern Europe declined
by about 60% after abolition in the 1990s. In most countries, abolition, and a
strengthening of the rule of law, results in a decline in the homicide rate.
While recent studies on deterrence in the US are inconclusive as a whole, and
many suffer from methodological problems, they do not produce credible evidence
on deterrence as a behavioural mechanism.
Therefore, the issue is not whether the death penalty deters some - if only a
few - people where the threat of a lesser punishment would not. Instead, it is
whether, when all the circumstances surrounding its use are taken into account,
the death penalty is associated with a marginally lower rate of the death
penalty-eligible crimes than the next most severe penalty, life imprisonment.
There is no evidence that it is.
As far as Indonesia's claims for a deterrent effect are concerned, Oxford
scholar Claudia Stoicescu has shown that this claim is based on inaccurate
statistics on the number of drug users that need rehabilitation and the number
of young people that die each day as a result of drug use.
Quite simply, rigorous analysis of the available data does not support the
claims made for the need to retain the death penalty to reduce social harms.
About 1/2 of the people on death row in Indonesia have been convicted of
drug-related offences. Many are foreigners.
Secrecy surrounds the administration of the death penalty in Indonesia.
Prisoners learn about the exact time of their execution only 72 hours in
advance.
Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Foreign Minister Julie Bishop have
not been able to persuade Jokowi that his belief in deterrence is misguided.
However, they could perhaps remind him that his apparent approach to clemency
is in breach of Indonesia's binding obligations under Article 6(2) of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Indonesia became a party
to this in 2006.
Clemency should always be considered on a case-by-case basis for each and every
prisoner. Jokowi's statement that he will reject clemency for all prisoners
sentenced to death for drug offences is in clear contradiction of that
principle.
(source: Carolyn Hoyle, Director of the Centre for Criminology at University of
Oxford; Roger Hood, Emeritus Professor of Criminology at University of
Oxford----The Conversation)
*******************************
Foreign minister fears worst for Australians on death row
Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said on Friday (April 24) she feared
the worst for 2 Australians facing execution on drug charges in Indonesia and
appealed to President Joko Widodo to show mercy.
"I fear the worst, I fear that Indonesia will seek to proceed with the
execution of the two Australian citizens. I'm deeply and profoundly concerned
by this, I have sought to make contact with Foreign Minister Marsudi to
register a concern and to speak with her to see if there is any opportunity for
Australia to persuade Indonesia to change its mind," Bishop told reporters
during a visit to NATO headquarters in Brussels.
"I am asking of President Widodo what he asks of other countries in relation
with Indonesian citizens who face death row overseas. Australia opposes the
death penalty, whether at home or abroad, and we again appeal to President
Widodo to show mercy," she added.
Bishop registered her concern on Friday with her Indonesian counterpart after
Jakarta asked foreign embassies to send representatives to a maximum security
prison ahead of the expected execution of 10 drug convicts, including 2
Australians.
The executions, which will be the 2nd round under President Joko Widodo, have
drawn international criticism and sparked diplomatic tensions with Australia,
France, the Philippines and Brazil, which have nationals on death row.
Widodo has pledged no clemency for drug offenders, citing a "drug emergency" in
the world's fourth-largest country, but has said he was open to abolishing the
death penalty in the future.
No date for the executions has yet been announced.
(source: Reuters)
*****************
Do the Right Thing and Show Mercy, President Jokowi
A day that no rational, compassionate human being could ever wish for appears
to be at hand: the day that 10 fellow human beings, nine of them foreign
nationals, are gunned down in a hail of bullets because the Indonesian
government wants to make a barbarous point.
The Attorney General's Office, which seems to be taking an awful lot of
pleasure in organizing the executions, has summoned officials from foreign
embassies to the prison island of Nusakambangan on Saturday. The AGO is
required to give the inmates 72 hours' notice about their execution, so it
appears that the killings - yes, killings; make no mistake, this is
state-sanctioned murder - could take place as soon as Tuesday.
But the AGO has said it will carry out the executions once all the inmates'
appeals have been exhausted. And 1 of the 10, Indonesian Zainal Abidin, still
has an appeal to be heard on Monday.
If, as appears likely, Zainal avoids the firing squad at the last minute, the
government will have confirmed what everyone already suspects: that the
executions are a stunt - bloody and grotesque - to impress upon the rest of the
world the Indonesian government's disturbingly nationalist bent.
Why persist with a practice as savage as the death penalty when much of the
world cries out against it? What can Indonesia gain from this?
It is in the president's power to end this shameful travesty and grant these
individuals clemency. So it is to President Joko Widodo that we beseech mercy
for Mary Jane Fiesta Veloso; for Serge Areski Atlaoui; for Myuran Sukumaran;
for Andrew Chan; for Rodrigo Gularte; for Raheem Agbaje Salami; for Martin
Anderson; for Sylvester Obiekwe Nwolise; for Okwudili Oyatanze; and for Zainal
Abidin.
We stand for mercy, Mr. President. Will you stand with us?
(source: Editorial, Jakarta Globe)
PHILIPPINES:
Lacson confirms presidential bid: Wants death penalty back
"My platform of government remains to be what I started as a Senator and that
is to eradicate graft and corruption in the government," former Senator Ping
Lacson said today confirming that he is running for president next year as an
independent candidate, Philippine government-owned news agency reports.
He also stated his views on several issues that the country is currently
facing. On the issue of peace talks in Mindanao, he said sub-regions should be
established to cater different needs of tribes like Tausug, Maranao and the
Maguindanao. He added that Bangsamoro Basic Law has flaws and should be looked
into prior to approval.
Lacson also said death penalty, once protected the Filipino people against
crimes, should be restored.
The only confirmed opponent of Lacson next year is Vice President Binay, while
Secretary Mar Roxas is yet to officially confirm. Among the possible opponents
are Davao Mayor Duterte, Senators Grace Poe, Miriam Santiago, Alan Cayetano and
Bongbong Marcos.
(source: angmalaya.net)
***************
Not all cases of OFWs on death row are equal
As predictable as rain, and as tedious, is the usual response of Philippine
newspaper columnists and editorial writers whenever Filipinos end up on death
row in foreign prisons for various alleged offenses, including drug
trafficking.
They will ask the government to educate overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) on the
perils of serving as drug couriers, or "mules." This suggests that those OFWs
who have been convicted of drug trafficking knew what they were doing, but
thought they could get away with it, or were ignorant of the host country's
laws.
In some cases they squarely lay the blame on the OFW, or imply that he or she
deserves execution for breaking the laws of the country whose courts have
sentenced him or her to death. Seldom do they take the time and effort to look
at the specifics of each case.
True, one or all of these assumptions are valid in many cases of OFW
convictions for drug trafficking. The excuse that they did not know the
contents of the package containing the drug often strains credulity for its
disingenuousness.
In other instances, the alleged drug mules were not familiar with the laws of
the country into which they were bringing the package, or else thought that
they would not be detected, perhaps because they think the same impunity
rampant in the Philippines reigns as well in other countries.
The prospect of easy money is usually the reason some OFWs agree to bring
prohibited drugs into another country. In not a few cases, it???s not the first
time that the OFW has served as a drug courier.
The case of Mary Jane Veloso is entirely different, but has elicited
practically the same response from the Philippine media, which have implied
that she knew what she was doing, but did not know that the death penalty has
been restored in the new administration of Indonesian President Jokowi Widodo -
and that, in any case, appeals for either a stay or a stop to her execution
gloss over these essential points, as well as the fundamental one of the need
for OFWs to respect the laws of the countries to which they have been deployed
or through which they're transiting.
Veloso was in the first place not entrusted with any package, but was given a
"gift" - by a quasi-relative who was also her recruiter - of a suitcase the
lining of which, it turned out, concealed 2.6 kilograms of heroin. While it
seems only common sense to those of us who are more skeptical of human motives
and acts never to carry for anyone, whether for love or money, any package, bag
or suitcase the contents of which we don't know, Veloso apparently trusted this
individual, whom her family has identified as a certain Christine, or "Tintin,"
and who was known to her as the wife of the son of her godfather.
In feudal Philippines, ties of kinship bind not only blood relatives but also
those individuals with whom one has developed such relationships as Veloso had
with "Tintin." Not only are godfathers (ninong) and godmothers (ninang) treated
as members of the family, so are their children (Filipinos even have a name for
them: kinakapatid) - and their children's spouses. To Veloso's implicit trust
of "Tintin" was apparently added her sense that she owed her a debt of
gratitude (utang na loob). Her lawyers from the National Union of People's
Lawyers (NUPL) have pointed out how excessive the death sentence on Veloso is,
given these issues.
If there are reasons to doubt that Veloso knew she was carrying illegal drugs
into Indonesia, there are equally sound reasons to doubt that her trial was
fair. The NUPL argues that "she was denied her basic right to due process; the
death penalty is too harsh given her disputable participation in the crime; and
humanitarian considerations militate against the taking of her life through
execution by firing squad." (Yes, they still do that in Indonesia.)
Veloso, continued NUPL Secretary-General Edre Olalia, was not represented by a
competent lawyer during her 2010 trial, and the interpreter she was provided
with was a student whose own competence in either Bahasa Indonesia or English
could be questioned. (Veloso did not then know Bahasa Indonesia; neither was
she fluent in English.)
Olalia also questioned the court's failure to apply in Veloso's case the
Indonesian Law on the Eradication of the Criminal Act on Trafficking in
Persons, which, he said, contains a "non-punishment" clause for criminal acts
committed by trafficked persons. (Philippine anti-human trafficking groups
point out that Veloso, by being exploited as an unwitting drug courier, was a
victim of human trafficking.) Olalia has also asked the Indonesian government
for leniency on humanitarian grounds. Veloso, who is from a poor family, is a
young single mother with 2 small children.
Incidental to the Veloso case, but crucial to Veloso's fate nevertheless, is
the political situation in Indonesia, where President Widodo is apparently
using his mindless advocacy of the death penalty for drug-related crimes as a
platform from which to enhance his domestic political support. It helps explain
why he's made much of his supposedly uncompromising stand on drug trafficking
by refusing to heed appeals for a stay of execution not only from the
Philippine government and various local groups, but also from such
international bodies as the United Nations and Amnesty International.
But Filipinos have to ask why the Philippine embassy in Jakarta did not provide
Veloso a competent lawyer and interpreter to begin with, rather than allowing
her to be represented by a lawyer designated by the Indonesian government and
to have a less than able interpreter. Apparently, as in many other instances
involving Filipinos in trouble with the laws of other countries, Philippine
embassies are hardly of any help, even if only by seeing to it that the rights
of Filipinos accused of crimes in foreign places are protected.
One would have expected the Philippine foreign service - after years and years
of seeing OFWs hanged, decapitated or killed through some other method across
the planet - to have developed by now those mechanisms of support that can make
the difference between life and death. Too little and too late are the (self-)
publicized efforts of the Aquino administration to save Veloso 5 long years
after she was convicted.
The question of State accountability aside, the flaws in Veloso's trial alone
should be enough grounds for a mistrial. Together with the other unique
circumstances surrounding her case, that glaring possibility suggests that hers
deserves closer scrutiny on the part of both the public, and, what's even more
crucial, the Philippine media. Surely among the "lessons from a drug case"
rather than the usual cliches is the need for the media to look closely at
every case of OFWs landing on death row, rather than lumping them all together
as if they were the same. They're not.
(source: bulatlat.com)
INDIA:
4 Get Death Penalty in J and K Teen's Rape-murder Case
a court in Srinagar on Friday awarded death penalty to 4 men, convicted in the
brutal gangrape and murder of a 13-year-old girl, Tabinda Gani, in 2007.
Mohammad Ibrahim Wani, district and sessions court judge, Kupwara, handed down
the death sentence to 4 men -- Sadiq Mir, Anzar Ahmad (both locals) and 2
non-locals -- Jahangir Ansari of West Bengal and Suresh Kumar of Rajasthan --
for raping and killing the class 8th student, in the Langate area of the border
district of Kupwara.
Wani upheld the death sentence awarded to the 4 by the trial court, saying the
offence committed falls in the category of rarest of rare cases. The convicts
are in jail since August, 2007.
"Death reference is accepted. Death sentence awarded by the trial court is
affirmed and appeals of the convicts are dismissed," the court said. Wani said
there is no scope for sympathy for their barbaric crime. Subject to
confirmation of the death sentence by the J&K High Court in terms of Section
368 CrPC, he directed that the convicts be hanged.
The court had on April 18, held the 4 guilty of offences of murder (302 RPC),
gangrape (376(G)), abduction with intention to kill (364 RPC) and crime done
with common intention (34 RPC) but scheduled the pronouncement of the quantum
of punishment for Friday.
A total of 86 witnesses including medicos, forensic experts, police men and
civil society members, had deposed before the court during the trial. On July
20, 2007, the teenaged girl was abducted as she was on her way back from school
at Batpora in Kupwara. Her decapitated body was recovered from an apple orchard
in the area in the evening. Medical tests had confirmed that before slitting
her throat, she had been brutally raped by her abductors.
The incident had triggered massive protests across the Valley with people
demanding the arrest of the culprits and awarding of death sentence to them.
As part of protests, the native place of the victim remained shut for 21 days.
In view of the tremendous public pressure, police intensified the investigation
and a month later, arrested 4 men, who, during the interrogation, confessed to
their involvement in the crime. The J&K Government has instituted a bravery
award for children in memory of Gani.
The public hailed Friday's verdict and chanted pro-judiciary slogans.
(source: New Indian Express)
SINGAPORE:
EU urges Singapore to reinstate halt on executions
The European Union (EU) has called on the authorities in Singapore to reinstate
its halt on capital punishment, following the execution of a convicted murderer
here last week.
Reiterating its opposition to the use of capital punishment, the EU said in a
statement yesterday it has consistently called for universal abolition of the
penalty, which it describes as "cruel and inhumane".
"The European Union calls on the Singaporean authorities to stop all pending
executions and to reinstate its earlier moratorium on capital punishment as a
1st step towards definitive abolition of the death penalty," it added.
The statement came after Muhammad Kadar, 39, was executed on April 17 at Changi
Prison Complex after he was convicted of stabbing a 69-year-old neighbour to
death in her flat while robbing her. He is the 1st murderer to be sentenced to
death after the law was changed to give judges discretion to mete out life
imprisonment and caning instead for certain murder offences.
A statement released by the Singapore Police Force (SPF) last week said
Muhammad had been accorded full due process under the law and was represented
by a lawyer throughout the legal process.
"The Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal against conviction on July 5, 2011,"
said the SPF. "On Sept 29 last year, after hearing further arguments, the Court
of Appeal dismissed his application for re-sentencing under the new death
penalty regime and affirmed the sentence of death." The SPF added that
Muhammad's petition for clemency was also rejected.
(source: Today)
***************
EU stresses opposition to death penalty after Singapore execution
The European Union reiterated its opposition to the use of capital punishment
following the execution of another convict in Singapore.
"The European Union calls on the Singaporean authorities to stop all pending
executions and to reinstate its earlier moratorium on capital punishment as a
1st step towards definitive abolition of the death penalty," the statement
said.
Muhammad bin Kadar was executed on April 17 for the murder of a 69-year-old
woman during a botched robbery in 2005. The execution was the 3rd since the end
of a 3-year moratorium on the death penalty in the city-state last year.
Death penalty opponents said Muhammad's sentence should have been commuted
because of his low IQ and influence under the drug Dormicum.
"Imposing the death penalty in cases like these has the opposite effect of
justice by disproportionately punishing the marginalised," the Singapore
Anti-Death Penalty Campaign said.
The number of death row inmates in Singapore is estimated to be about 25,
according to campaign activist Rachel Zeng. Official statistics are not
available.
(source: DPA)
******************
Statement on the execution of Muhammad bin Kadar
Muhammad bin Kadar, 39, was executed on 17 April 2015. He received the death
sentence for killing a 69-year-old woman during a robbery in the victim's flat
that occurred in May 2005. Muhammad had a low IQ of 76 and was under the
influence of Dormicum when he entered the flat of Mdm Tham Weng Kuen and
repeatedly attacked her with a knife and later a chopper from her kitchen. The
victim later died of blood loss from the profuse wounds she suffered.
In 2009, Muhammad was convicted of murder and sentenced to death by the High
Court. His appeal for diminished responsibility rejected by the Appellate Court
in 2011. After amendments to the mandatory death penalty regime were introduced
in late 2012, Muhammad applied for a re-sentence. The apex court determined
that he had caused death with the "intention to kill" and upheld the death
penalty. The final appeal for presidential clemency was rejected a week before
Muhammad's execution.
We at the Singapore Anti-Death Penalty Campaign (SADPC) believe that Muhammad's
death sentence should have been commuted in view of his low IQ and the
influence of Dormicum. The defence psychiatrist had stated that the drug likely
led to a "major reduction in self-control and regulation" of Muhammad's actions
and that the intention to silence the victim was likely to have formed under
the disinhibitory effects of Dormicum. So while Muhammad had planned to
forcefully rob Mdm Tham and consumed Dormicum to embolden himself, the fatal
attack was not premeditated and very much an afterthought influenced by the
drug.
The death penalty is often and instinctively put forward as an effective
deterrent of crime. Yet in the circumstances, we find great difficulty in
seeing how this tragedy could have been prevented by the threat of execution
given Muhammad's state of mind. Muhammad was a part-time odd job labourer with
a history of substance abuse who was desperate for money to feed his drug
habit. With a low IQ and only primary school education, Muhammad was
socio-economically vulnerable to substance abuse and attendant problems.
Imposing the death penalty in cases like these has the opposite effect of
justice by disproportionately punishing the marginalised.
Media reports on the case have highlighted and even headlined the brutal manner
of the murder. The SADPC maintains our opposition to the death sentence even
for such cases. The death penalty is an ethically questionable choice of
punishment as it shares the intentionality and instrumentality of violence with
every act of murder. Judicial executions are in effect the most premeditated of
all murders, even if they are aimed at achieving peace and security. We reject
the death penalty because justice requires the congruence of means and ends.
SADPC continues to call for the abolition of the death penalty. We urge the
country to look deeper into the roots of crime and find more humane and
holistic ways to rehabilitate and reintegrate people like Muhammad. We strongly
believe every person deserves a chance at atonement by contributing back to
society.
(source: theonlinecitizen.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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
