May 4
INDONESIA:
Family of Brazilian executed in Indonesia campaign for pardon ---- Rodrigo
Gularte, who was diagnosed with schizophrenia and did not realise he was to be
shot until appearing before firing squad, is buried in home country
The Brazilian man executed in Indonesia last week is due to be buried in his
home country, as his family launch a campaign to have him posthumously pardoned
on the grounds of mental health problems.
Rodrigo Gularte, who was twice diagnosed with schizophrenia, only realised he
was about to be shot minutes before he stood before the firing squad. According
to the priest who administered his last rites, he was hearing voices in his
empty cell and asked at the last "Am I being executed?...That's not right." He
reportedly declared that he would be resurrected 10 days after his death.
His family and friends, who will attend a funeral mass in Curitiba on Sunday,
told the Guardian the signs of mental instability were apparent from before
Gularte's adolescence.
Juliana Gularte said her cousin had been diagnosed firstly with cerebral
dysrhythmia, which made him particularly impulsive, from the age of 10. 6 years
later, when he was sent to a rehabilitation centre as a result of drug and
alcohol abuse, doctors discovered he had bipolar disorder.
"They wanted to put him on medication, but he refused. He never liked that,"
she said.
He was twice been hospitalised for drug abuse and dropped out of 3 college
courses.
Marcelo Penayo, a friend, said Gularte exhibited strong mood swings. "He would
switch between moments of euphoria, going to the beach, going surfing, always
inviting everyone to come along. Then he would sometimes become very
introspective and sad, even when he was among friends and with his girlfriend,"
he said.
His condition and his drug abuse reportedly worsened after his parents'
divorce, though his mother tried to help by buying him a restaurant. The family
claim international drug smugglers took advantage of Gularte's recklessness to
persuade him to act as a mule while he was on a trip to Asia.
But he was also remembered for his loyalty and courage. In 2004, when he and 3
friends were caught with 6kg of cocaine concealed in their surfboards, Gularte
claimed full responsibility which allowed his friends to go free.
In prison, Gularte attempted suicide. His behaviour was so erratic that other
inmates reportedly refused to share a cell with him. When his behaviour
worsened 3 years ago, relatives hired psychiatrists to examine his mental
condition. They diagnosed paranoid schizophrenia with delusions and
hallucinations and recommended he be transferred to a psychiatric hospital.
Indonesia's attorney general rejected this and ordered a 2nd opinion from
police doctors but the report of their findings has never been made public,
prompting accusations of a lack of transparency.
Gularte's mother said her son had lost 15kg in the weeks leading up to his
execution, when he was prone to talking to the walls and hearing voices. One of
the last people to see him, Leonardo Monteiro, charge d'affaires of the
Brazilisn embassy in Jakarta said the convict alternated between lucidity and
delirium, declaring the execution mere "theatre and fiction."
Father Charlie Burrows, a priest who ministers to prisoners on death row in
Cilacap, said he had tried unsuccessfully for 3 days to explain to Gularte that
he was about to die. It was only when guards took the condemned to the
execution yard that he realised.
"He's lost because he's a schizophrenic. He asked if there was a sniper outside
ready to shoot him, and I said no, and whether somebody would shoot him in the
car, and I said no," Burrows said.
His killing continues to prompt outrage in Brazil, where the death penalty was
abolished more than 100 years ago. The head of the Chamber of Deputies, Eduardo
Cunha called it "absurd" and said Brazil should implement retaliatory measures
against Indonesia. Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff has warned the execution
- the 2nd of a Brazilian national this year - would have a serious impact on
relations. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty have condemned Indonesia's actions.
Gularte's relatives say the fight is not over. "What the family and friends who
are out in Jakarta are going to do now is continue the process to prove that he
was mentally ill and that the authorities were wrong," said his cousin Juliana
Gularte.
(source: The Guardian)
********************
Plans to scrap death penalty still in infancy: AGO
Attorney General M Prasetyo said on Monday that a proposed plan to abolish the
death penalty was still only at the discussion stage, following a proposal from
several legislators to have it scrapped in the upcoming revision of the
Criminal Code (KUHP).
"It's still far too early to discuss it. There is a proposal, but we haven't
discussed it yet," said Prasetyo. The House of Representatives has included the
revision of the KUHP in this year's priority programs.
International demands for Indonesia to abolish the death penalty have
intensified following 2 rounds of executions of drug convicts since January.
The 1st-round consisted of 6 inmates from Indonesia, Vietnam, Brazil, the
Netherlands, Nigeria and Malawi. The 2nd batch comprised 8 citizens of
Indonesia, Australia, Nigeria, Ghana and Brazil
(source: Jakarta Post)
**********************
Abolition of death penalty just a proposal, Indonesian attorney general says in
report
Indonesia will not scrap the death penalty any time soon despite a proposal by
some of its lawmakers to abolish it during a review of the country's criminal
code, Indonesia's attorney general said.
According to a Jakarta Post report, Attorney General M Prasetyo said it "is
still far too early to discuss" lifting the death penalty in Indonesia.
"There is a proposal, but we haven't discussed it yet," Prasetyo also said.
International pressure on Indonesia to scrap the death penalty has been
mounting after it executed 8 convicts, including foreign nationals, last month.
It has executed 14 convicts since January.
Mary Jane Veloso, the Filipino sentenced to death over a drug case, was spared
from execution at the last minute after the illegal recruiter who allegedly
tricked her into transporting 2.6 kilograms of heroin turned herself over to
police in Nueva Ecija province on April 28.
Hours before she was scheduled to be executed, President Benigno Aquino III
talked to Indonesia's foreign minister about the need to turn Veloso into a
witness against the drug syndicate that she says tricked her into becoming a
drug mule.
A Malacanang spokesperson said Monday that the Philippine government is already
working with Indonesia to build a case against the drug syndicate.
Despite that, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima said on Monday that the
government will not press Indonesia to allow Veloso to come back to the
Philippines to testify against her alleged recruiter Christine Pasadilla, alias
Kristina Sergio, and others.
(source: GMA news)
AUSTRALIA:
Bali 9 executions highlight Australia's hypocrisy on the death penalty
Australia is up in arms over Indonesia's execution of the Bali 9 pair Andrew
Chan and Myuran Sukumaran.
And rightly so: the death penalty is abhorrent and must be abolished. Australia
agreed to this long ago: we abolished it in 1973. My thoughts and sympathy are
with the families of the 2 Australians executed on Wednesday. I cannot imagine
how I would feel if it had been one of my brothers.
Australia is right to raise an objection - and right to exercise diplomatic
protection over Australians in trouble abroad. Both Prime Minister Tony Abbott
and Opposition Leader Bill Shorten, typically, unanimously, expressed their
outrage. We even withdrew our ambassador to Indonesia in protest.
But if only Australia's outrage at the death penalty (that is, execution after
due process) was principled and consistent, that is, it extended to our friends
and allied nations like the United States, which executed 35 people last year
alone.
And if only Australia's outrage at the death penalty was directed at
Indonesia's execution of West Papuans? without due process. Hundreds of
thousands of West Papuans? have been murdered by Indonesia's security services.
Without the benefit of legal defence or their day in court, West Papuans? are
killed on mere suspicion or, worse, for simply expressing a political opinion.
Headlines about the execution of the Bali 9 pair screamed that Jokowi? has
blood on his hands - but we only care if it's Australian blood. No one seems to
care when it's our Fuzzy Wuzzy Angel friends and Anzac allies just 300
kilometres north of our shores.
If we, as Australians, are opposed to the death penalty, shouldn't we also be
outraged about the fact that Australia is accused of providing financial,
operational and forensic assistance to Indonesian "death squads" in West Papua?
As the ABC has reported, an elite counter-terrorism unit called Detachment 88,
funded and equipped by Australia, has been involved in tortures and killings in
West Papua as part of operations by the Indonesian authorities to stamp out the
West Papuan? independence movement and assassinate its leaders.
The simple fact is: we are against the death penalty in Indonesia when it's
applied to our citizens with due process. We will even recall our ambassador in
protest to make sure voters at home know this and see that objection. But we
aren't against Indonesians killing West Papuans? without any due process. In
fact, we will help Indonesia to kill them by providing training and support to
their "death squads" - and our ambassador will be celebrated in Jakarta for it.
At least, when he is allowed to go back.
If we, as Australians, are so outraged about the death penalty, shouldn't we be
conducting an inquiry about the role of our own police in tipping off
Indonesian authorities about the Bali 9, when they were fully aware of the
consequences under Indonesian law, as one AFP police chiefs admitted in a 2006
interview?
And if we, as Australians, were really against the death penalty and actually
cared about governments putting people to death ??? in Indonesia or elsewhere -
we would oppose it, whether it was with due process or (worse) without it. And
we certainly wouldn't let our police or our overseas aid budget support it.
(source: Jennifer Robinson is an Australian human rights lawyer; Sydney Morning
Herald)
*****************
A diplomatic mission to abolish the death penalty would be a fitting response
to executions
Indonesia's executions of Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan, along with 6 other
drug convicts, have thrown light on what George Orwell called "the unspeakable
wrongness of cutting a life short when it is in full tide".
Many Australians are heartsick and furious at President Joko Widodo's approach
to this case. Significant damage has been done to the relationship between
Australia and Indonesia. No doubt there is more to come.
However, the Australian government should channel some of its anger in a
constructive direction. Sukumaran and Chan are now lost to their families and
friends, but the qualities they discovered in themselves in their years in
Kerobokan prison could animate a new Australian initiative of lasting benefit.
Our government should signal that abolition of the death penalty is an
Australian diplomatic priority, and devise a strategy to advance the issue. We
should aim to become a leader in the international movement against the death
penalty.
This initiative should be guided by the principles of effectiveness and
prudence. The issuing of condemnations and the raising of sanctions would
damage our interests without, in all likelihood, saving a single life. Instead
we should look for creative new approaches to nudge the world towards
abolition.
We should start with our own region. Asia is where we do most of our diplomatic
and commercial business. It also contains the world's worst offenders when it
comes to the death penalty. Last year China executed thousands of people, far
more than the rest of the world combined. We don't even know exactly how many
people the Chinese authorities executed. It is a state secret.
Half a dozen other Asian states, including several ASEAN members, carried out
executions in 2014.
However, there is good news to go with the bad. Progress towards abolition is
being made: 140 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice.
In the past 20 years, 40 countries have abolished the death penalty for all
crimes. 5 Asian states have abolished it in the past quarter of a century:
Cambodia, Nepal, Timor-Leste, Bhutan and the Philippines.
If we are to focus on reducing the use of the death penalty in Asia, then we
must make common cause with abolitionist Asian states. Australia cannot win
this fight alone.
Our government should initiate a regional coalition of Asian states opposed to
the death penalty. There are several ways to structure the coalition's work,
none of them absolutist in tone. We should avoid slogans and focus on
practical, achievable gains. We may decide, for example, to focus our resources
on de facto abolitionist countries such as Sri Lanka and try to move them
towards formal abolition.
There are other strategies we could employ, all of them more nuanced than
simply demanding universal abolition. For example, the regional coalition could
encourage retentionist countries to restrict the type of offences for which
capital punishment is imposed; announce a moratorium on executions as part of a
move towards abolition; abolish mandatory death penalties; release
comprehensive official statistics about their use of the death penalty;
guarantee that death sentences will not be carried out on children, pregnant
women, or the insane; and institute safeguards to protect the rights of those
on death row - for example the right not to be executed pending a legal appeal.
Governments should also consider appointing a high-level advisory body composed
of eminent citizens of their countries. This group would provide gravitas to
the exercise and cover for their governments.
Working harder to close death row - rather than just to get Australians off it
- would be the right thing to do. It would also be the smart thing to do. At
the moment we are open to accusations of special pleading. It is entirely
appropriate that Australia prioritises the welfare of its own citizens. Foreign
Minister Julie Bishop has been indefatigable in her efforts on behalf of the
Bali 2 and deserves credit for that. But if we are loud when it comes to
Australians and quiet when it comes to everyone else, then we undermine our
credibility and effectiveness.
The better position from which to petition foreign governments on behalf of our
nationals is one of active, not declaratory, opposition to the death penalty
regardless of the nationality of the condemned. Such a stance would enable the
government to deal with the issue positively and continually, rather than
negatively and sporadically. It would increase the momentum towards universal
prohibition and shield us from claims of hypocrisy.
Australia has an activist diplomatic history and some experience in building
regional constituencies for particular initiatives. A new push against capital
punishment would be hard, grinding work, but it would be in the best traditions
of principled Australian diplomacy.
Myuran Sukumaran, Andrew Chan and their fellow inmates died on Nusakambangan
island in the middle of the night, in darkness. But perhaps something positive
- a tiny ray of light - can escape from "Execution Island" after all.
(source: Commentary; Dr Michael Fullilove is executive director of the Lowy
Institute for International Policy----Canberra Times)
***********************************
AFP's Bali 9 actions 'imported death penalty into Australia' ---- Barrister who
tipped off Australian federal police says 'there's no sufficient answer' to why
AFP told Indonesian counterparts about Bali 9's plans
Australian federal police imported the death penalty into Australia when they
arranged for the Bali9 to be arrested in Indonesia, the barrister who tipped
them off said.
Bob Myers said the AFP had all the evidence they needed to arrest the 9 before
they left Australia on a heroin smuggling mission. Instead, it let them travel
to Bali and then told Indonesian police about the crime they were about to
commit, Myers said.
Bali 9 ringleaders Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran were executed because the
AFP betrayed its obligation not to expose Australians to the death penalty, he
said.
"They effectively imported the death penalty into Australian law by acting they
way they did," Myers told ABC radio on Monday.
The AFP commissioner Andrew Colvin is due to face the media later on Monday to
discuss the organisation's role in the Bali Nine arrests.
But Myers said he would not get an answer to the question he really wants
posed: Why?
"There's not an answer. They're going to try and say 'to curry favour with the
Indonesians, cooperation in terms of security and terrorism, alternatively
sending a message to other young Australian kids'. Not one of those is a
sufficient answer," he said.
Myers said that when he went to Bali in the wake of the arrests a decade ago,
AFP officer Paul Hunniford, who was the AFP???s senior liaison officer in Bali
at the time, told him it was "virtually inevitable that one or more of them was
going to die".
The barrister said he regarded the AFP as effectively being the author of the
men's death warrants.
It was Hunniford who wrote to Indonesian police to provide the Bali 9's names,
passport numbers, and details of what they were planning.
"If there is a suspicion that ... the couriers are carrying the illegal
narcotics at the time of their departure, please take whatever action that you
consider necessary," the letter to Indonesian police said.
Myers is a friend of the Bali 9 drug courier Scott Rush, who is serving a life
sentence for his role in the heroin ring.
Myers tipped off the AFP about the drug plot, after his friend, Scott Rush's
father Lee, called him, desperate for help to head off a crime he feared his
son was about to commit.
(source: The Guardian)
********************
Oz Police Unapologetic Over Bali 9 Tip-Off ---- Australia's police chief
defends the decision to alert Indonesia about smugglers - 2 of whom have since
been executed.
Australian police have refused to apologise for telling Indonesia about the
Bali 9 - despite knowing they could face the death penalty.
The 9 Australian drug smugglers were arrested on the resort island of Bali in
2005 over their involvement with a syndicate taking drugs to Sydney.
Last week, 2 members of the so-called Bali 9 - Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran
- were killed by a firing squad despite pleas for mercy from Australia.
The 7 others are serving lengthy prison sentences in Indonesia.
Since the arrests a decade ago, there has been widespread criticism of the
police decision to ask Indonesia for help - knowing the country has the death
penalty for drug offences - rather than arrest the mules on their return to
Australia.
The commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (AFP), Andrew Colvin, says he
regrets the men have been executed but does not believe he owes their families
an apology.
"We can't apologise for the role that we have to try to stop illicit drugs from
coming into this community," he told an hour-long news conference to explain
the AFP's role in the arrests.
Federal Police deputy commissioner Mike Phelan - who gave approval for the
information to be given to the Indonesians - says he "agonised for 10 years"
over the tip-off.
But he says he was driven by a desire to stop the syndicate.
"To let them come back through to Australia, we may have grabbed a couple of
mules, but we would not have been able to have any evidence in relation to the
wider syndicate," he said.
Mr Phelan admitted the decision was made with the knowledge that Australians
could face the death penalty.
"Yes, I knew full well by handing over the information and requesting
surveillance, if they found them in possession of drugs they'd take action and
expose them to the death penalty," he said.
"And every time I look back, I still think it's a difficult decision, but given
what I knew at that particular time and what our officers knew, I would take a
lot of convincing to make a different decision."
It has long been reported that the Australian investigation was originally
triggered by a tip-off from the father of Scott Rush, 1 of the Bali 9 serving a
life sentence.
But Mr Colvin has denied this, saying the information given by Rush's family
made no difference to the investigation.
"I want to take the pressure off Scott Rush's father," he said.
The commissioner claims police had already been looking into the syndicate, but
did not have enough evidence to make any arrests prior to their departure for
Indonesia.
"I can assure you that if we had enough information to arrest the Bali 9 before
they left Australia, we would've done just that," he said.
Mr Colvin also said the police guidelines on dealing with countries with the
death penalty have been strengthened since 2005.
They now require officers to consider the risk of the death penalty at a much
earlier stage in investigations.
But he added: "We cannot limit our co-operation just to those countries that
have a similar judicial system or similar policies to that of our own."
(source: Sky news)
************************
Bali 9 executions: Key questions and answers from the Australian Federal Police
The following is an edited transcript of some of the questions directed at
commissioner Andrew Colvin and deputy commissioners Michael Phelan and Leanne
Close.
Q) Would you have changed anything about the way that the AFP conducted the
operations, and you mentioned at that the families were in your thoughts. Do
you think the AFP owes them an apology?
A) No, I don't believe we owe them an apology. It's a very difficult question.
I mean, we can't apologise for the role that we have to try to stop illicit
drugs from coming into this community. We've said many times that illicit drugs
are destroying families and our communities. In answer to your first question,
would I have changed anything? I said we regret that the Indonesian government
went through to the executions. - Andrew Colvin
Q) If Australians give you information on transnational crime, it could still
end up in an execution?
A) I'd love to give you a guarantee that that won't happen. We don't know where
the information will go. We don't know who is involved, what the drugs are,
it's easy in hindsight to look back. When you have the picture the jigsaw is a
lot easier to put together but when all you have is pieces it's very difficult
to gut together. - Andrew Colvin
Q) Given what you now know - that it resulted in those executions - would you
act in exactly the same way in terms of your relationship with the Indonesians?
A) I can't give you an ironclad yes or no, because each situation is different.
You must understand that investigations start from seed information and we
don't always know where they will go. In this case, it helped us identify a
broader syndicate. It helped us take out a broader syndicate. It helped protect
Australia from future importations and that's a difficult truth of the matter.
- Andrew Colvin
Q) Which way do you believe your agency would go faced with an identical set of
circumstances today?
A) Faced with an identical set of circumstances and the guideline that we have
now, I believe that our investigators would need to take into account a number
of different factors. They may well not choose to go down the same path they
did in 2005 but I can't get into the mind of every investigator and know
everything that they're thinking. - Andrew Colvin
Q) You think it's likely though the outcome would be different?
A) I believe it's likely but I cannot give you a firm answer one way or the
other because every circumstance is different. - Andrew Colvin
Q) If Australians today believe we have information about transnational crime
or drugs, why would they give that information to you if they're concerned
about it but are also concerned that giving information to the Australia
Federal Police could lead to an Australian being executed overseas?
A) Let's put this in context. This was 10 years ago. The AFP conducts thousands
of these investigations each and every day. Our job is to combat transnational
crime. We need the community to work with us. They do work very well with us.
Out there in the community there is a great deal of support for the AFP and its
work in this field. - Andrew Colvin
Q) Are you completely satisfied with the new guideline on AFP cooperation with
countries that have the death penalty?
A) Am I completely satisfied? Yes. I think the guideline is appropriate. I
think the guideline is good. The guideline was reformed and it should have
been. It took into account circumstances that needed to be taken to account. I
think the guideline is appropriate. In terms of should it be changed in
relation to the events of last week - as tragic as those events were, and they
were tragic - that doesn't change the facts from 10 years ago. The guideline
was reviewed. Justice Finn made some very strong comments quite appropriately
about what he believed the guidelines needed to include and that's been done.
There is no new circumstances as a result of the executions. Other than the
fact that the Indonesian government saw fit to go through with the executions.
- Andrew Colvin
Q) Since the new guidelines in 2009, have there have been specific instances
where the AFP has opted not to cooperate?
A) Yes, absolutely. Each and every day and we report these numbers to
Parliament, our investigations take us down paths where we deal with countries
that have the death penalty. - Andrew Colvin
In the last three years, we've had more than 250 requests in relation to
matters that may involve the death penalty guidelines. Of those, we've not
approved about 15 that haven't gone forward in terms of exchange of
information. - Leanne Close
Q) Can you take us into your state of mind further at the time on the issue of
the death penalty, how serious was this as an issue for you at the time? How
did you test it, weigh up the benefits and the cons?
A) These are difficult decisions. I agonised over it at the time. As a matter
of fact when the first decision was made to hand over information to the
Indonesians by lower level officers I stopped it because I wanted to have a
full briefing on everything that was happening at the time... to have as much
information as I could to authorise the activity. - Michael Phelan
Q) Are there cases out there that you haven't solved because of the concerns
about not passing on information that might lead to someone being executed
A) Absolutely. On instances where our investigators have appropriately made the
decision not to share information, we're obviously in the dark. Sharing that
information may have illuminated certain parts of a syndicate. That's the
reality of the situation. We have a strong objection to the death penalty. The
AFP takes it seriously.
(source: Sydney Morning Herald)
***************
Death penalty fears leave crims at large
Australian authorities have been stopped from pursuing a high-level criminal in
Asia over fears the foreign national will face the death penalty if information
is shared.
As the Commonwealth faces questioning over how it protects Australians overseas
from capital punishment, details of a case have emerged showing it also treads
cautiously when it comes to foreigners.
Sources have told AAP the Commonwealth in the past year knocked back an
extradition application from NSW Police to bring the suspected criminal to
Australia after he fled to Asia.
The man, who is not an Australian citizen, has continued his criminal exploits
overseas leaving authorities' hands tied and unable to intervene.
The extradition application was rejected because of fears the overseas
government couldn't guarantee the man wouldn't be arrested, prosecuted and in
turn face the death penalty, a source with knowledge of the case said.
In some countries, governments can prosecute citizens for offences committed
overseas.
"There is an absolute reticence for us to provide information to a foreign
country with the death penalty," the source said.
"They are not prepared to have that happen ever again."
Police say there are other criminals offshore in the same situation.
Investigators face the moral dilemma of bringing criminals to justice but not
at the expense of a person's life.
It is one example of the cases going unresolved because of concerns information
sharing could land someone in front of a firing squad.
"On instances where our investigators have appropriately made the decision not
to share information, we're obviously in the dark," Australian Federal Police
Commissioner Mark Colvin said on Monday.
"That's the reality of the situation. We have a strong objection to the death
penalty.
"The AFP takes it seriously. We have to make those judgments."
Mr Colvin broke the AFP's silence on Monday on how it handled the case of the
Bali 9.
It came days after Australians Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran were executed
in Indonesia for their roles in the heroin smuggling ring.
While Australia was in a region "surrounded by countries that have the death
penalty", Mr Colvin said there had been instances when the AFP didn't share
information since guidelines about the process were put in place in 2009.
In the past 3 years, the AFP had received more than 250 requests in relation to
matters that may involve the death penalty, of which 15 had not gone forward in
terms of exchange of information.
The federal attorney-general department has been contacted for comment.
(source: The Australian)
SOUTHEAST ASIA:
The death penalty is "cruel and unnecessary"
When it comes to the complex disputes surrounding capital punishment, it is
important to avoid moral fallacies.
It is a messy situation. After months of haggling, 8 inmates sentenced to death
over drug trafficking were executed by a firing squad in Indonesia on April 28.
As 2 of the convicts were Australian citizens, a global outcry ensued,
culminating in the Australian government's temporary withdrawal of its
ambassador from Indonesia.
In the months before, Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott had repeatedly and
publicly urged the Indonesian government to call off the executions. Some
commentators say this was counterproductive as it put pressure on the new
Indonesian administration, which had been accused of inconsistency in several
political areas, to stick to its decision and carry out the executions.
In Southeast Asia, the death penalty continues to be state-sanctioned in 4
countries: Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam. After a
10-year-moratorium that lasted until April 2013, the Indonesian government took
up capital punishment once again as a possible sentence for drug-related
crimes. By doing so, Indonesia moved against the 21st century tendency in the
region's jurisdiction to apply death penalties less frequently. The argument
went that Indonesia had become a "major drug trafficking hub," and therefore,
it needed this drastic sentence as a form of deterrence.
While the effectiveness of capital punishment in deterring people from
committing crimes is highly controversial, arguments raised against the measure
are manifold. The most often voiced objections include the possibility of
killing innocent people, while simultaneously punishing their families, the
penalty's high costs in relation to life-long prison and the violation of
international human rights law. In accordance, the Australian government called
the executions of the so-called Bali 9 inmates "cruel and unnecessary."
The proponents of capital punishment argue that the sentence does not violate
international law, as it is within the rights of a sovereign state to execute
its laws as it sees fit. For the above mentioned Southeast Asian countries,
which all see drugs as a major threat to their societies, adhering to the death
penalty in cases of drug trafficking is an adequate measure to balance the
scales, as they argue it is their whole society that suffers under the actions
of traffickers.
In the case of Indonesia, however, outside observers have highlighted the
contradictory stance the national administration has showed, as it underlines
its sovereign rights, while simultaneously pleading for the life of an
Indonesian citizen facing capital punishment in Saudi Arabia. Thus, on the one
hand, it is legitimate to criticize the Indonesian government for this obvious
double-standard, but on the other, the Bali 9 case received much more attention
precisely because it is part of the high number of cases where Australian
citizens are in danger of being executed at present.
Whatever the arguments are, empirical cases all over the world, including
places such as the United States and the Middle East, show that in the end,
being for or against capital punishment might not only be a matter of facts,
but primarily a matter of beliefs. It is hard to argue with official
representatives who might feel cornered about the sometimes-abstract problems
of state-sanctioned violence, and how the administration could be more
productive if it does not authorize its authorities to kill its citizens or
those of other countries.
Judging the existence of capital punishment in Southeast Asia is not an easy
matter. There are many complex considerations, and no particular commentary or
view can speak for everyone. For outside observers, it is necessary to look at
the respective cases in the most holistic and objective way possible to avoid
moral fallacies.
Ultimately, the death of humans by humans is never a good outcome. As UN
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon stated: "The death penalty has no place in the
21st century."
Nonetheless, arguing these cases emotionally from a purely ideological
standpoint, or even by insisting on available statistics, will not help.
Rather, it will only escalate tensions and, in the end, limit the solutions
available.
(source: Commentary, Jarno Lang; fairobserver.com)
CHINA:
China loves death penalty too much
According to international human rights organizations, China is a country with
the largest number of death sentences. However, the official statistics of
executions in the country is kept secret. Currently seven Russians are
sentenced to death in China, all of them are drug dealers. They still have a
chance to survive.
Russian national Maria Lopatina who was sentenced to death by the court of a
Southern China city of Zhuhai for drug smuggling with a 2-year postponement of
the execution can expect a reduced sentence. In the case of good conduct
according to the Chinese law in 2 years her sentence could be mitigated to life
imprisonment or a prison term of 15 to 20 years. The same situation is with
other convicted Russians.
In theory, Lopatina may very well be transferred to Russia and serve her term
at home. This is provided by the Russian-Chinese treaty of mutual transfer of
sentenced individuals. However, this measure is used very rarely. In the
disciplined China prisoners from all countries are treated the same.
In 2007, a resident of Glasgow Akmal Shaikh was arrested in the Chinese city of
Urumqi. He was charged with possession of as many as four kilos of heroin. The
British denied the charges until his last day. In 2007 he was sentenced to
death with a two-year sentence suspension. No one believed that the man would
be executed. Nearly the entire world rose to defend the British.
China's statement that the sentence will be executed at all costs led to sharp
criticism of the UK and the entire world community. Yet, the Chinese side was
affected neither by the addresses of his relatives, nor the Western human
rights activists, nor an official letter from the British government. The
British Foreign Office alone sent at least 10 requests for revision of the
sentence to Beijing. However, despite all the efforts, on December 29 of 2009,
the 53-year-old man was put to death by a lethal injection.
Last year four Japanese nationals charged with drug dealing were executed in
China. The Japanese authorities had been addressing the Chinese Themis with
numerous petitions for years. However, the Japanese drug traffickers have been
executed.
A member of the International Bar Association, Igor V. Schmidt, Ph.D.,
commented on the situation for Pravda.Ru:
"It is true that criminals in China are treated with all severity. At some
point I was an intern for three months at Peking University law school. I got
to learn about law enforcement practice of the country and even visited Chinese
prisons. I will say this: the highest level of discipline that exists in their
prison system is striking. Criminals are well schooled and drilled. It is clear
that daring and freedom-loving Russian people have hard time in those prisons.
Death sentence is provided by over 60 articles of the Chinese criminal law. For
example, the death penalty can be given for financial fraud, pimping, violent
crime, bribery, sale of counterfeit drugs, damage to electrical wires,
unauthorized excavation of ancient tombs and a whole bunch of crimes for which
in Russia one cat get no more than probation. I am not talking about corrupt
officials or drug dealers.
However, in April of 2011, the agency "Xinhua" reported a reduction in the
number of crimes for which capital punishment is provided. In particular, this
applies to certain economic crimes. Adolescents and pregnant women are not
subject to death penalty in China and now this amendment is true for people
over 75 years of age. However, they still can be subject to death penalty if
the crime was committed with extreme cruelty.
Interestingly, the official statistics of executions in China has never been
published. But, according to observers, thousands of criminals are executed in
the country every year. Previously offenders were shot, but now, as far as I
know, more often lethal injections are used.
And here is a purely "local" flavor. The Chinese justice has never divided
criminals into ordinary mortals and high-ranking criminals. That is, the
Chinese Themis is virtually incorruptible, and it does not care about high
positions or military rank. During my internship in Beijing in July of 2007,
Zheng Xiaoyu was executed (I am not sure about exact spelling of his name), who
served as the chairman of the state Management of China for Supervision of the
Food and Drug Administration. This is a very high position.
Zheng Xiaoyu was convicted of accepting bribes totaling over 800 thousand
dollars. The high-ranking official was also charged with death of 10 people who
died from the use of poor-quality medicines for which he has issued licenses to
companies producing drugs.
Another peculiarity of the Chinese justice is the speed of execution of death
sentences. In Russia a trial can drag on for years. In developed countries,
death sentence is always preceded by a long-term trial on different levels, and
the convicted shall have an opportunity for an appeal. This often leads to the
fact that years or even decades pass between the sentence and its execution.
For example, in the U.S. Jack Alderman was sentenced to death for the murder of
his wife on June 14, 1975 at the age of 24, and executed only on September 16,
2008 at the age of 57, or in more than 33 years.
So far there are 130 countries in the world that abolished death sentence, and
68 countries that retained and continue to use this measure."
(source: Andrei Mikhailov, Pravda)
_______________________________________________
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
