Aug. 7
PAKISTAN:
Hanging people for a living; Rs500 a head
His job is to kill people - Rs500 a head - and he gets paid by the government.
After the moratorium on death penalty was lifted in December last year, Sabir
Masih has become a busy man. 1 of the only 2 hangmen in Punjab - he hops from
city to city performing his job.
For Masih hanging people to death is a family profession. His grandfather was a
hangmen when the British ruled Pakistan. "In those Dada would get paid only
Rs20."
There are 36 jails in Punjab with more than 5000 death row convicts. For
executions, the province has only 2 hangmen to carry out executions throughout
the province.
Masih sometimes travels miles to carry out his work. "Some jail officers don't
even pay the fee so it is pointless to expect they will cover your travel
expenses as well. Sometimes you have to do the government's work by using your
money from your own pockets," he said.
After the terrorist attack on Army Public School Peshawar the ban on the death
sentence executions was lifted. Since then 200 convicted criminals have been
hanged.
With 170 executions Punjab stands top with maximum number of executions most
number of executions is held in Punjab.
While talking to BBC, he said that he was called by Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's police
to train their local people. According to Sabir, he travels mile to carry out
his official duties for which he is given only 500 on one execution and if
there are more than one execution lined up then they will talk about the fee
accordingly.
Masih said that he had hanged high profile convicts including those involved in
the GHQ attack and the attack on Former Army chief Pervez Musharraf.
He remembers when convicts charged for these crimes including Dr. Usman were to
be hanged they didn't show a flicker of shame on their faces. Instead they
walked by themselves to the wooden stand.
Masih manages to make Rs15000 every month, and till now no terrorist group has
threatened him, but he is scared nevertheless. Hanging high profile criminals
in this country is risky business.
(source: aaj.tv)
IRAN----executions
7 more prisoners hanged in Iran
The mullahs' regime in Iran has hanged another 7 prisoners on the same day this
week.
4 prisoners were hanged on Tuesday in the central province of Yazd. Their names
were not given.
3 other prisoners were hanged on the same day in a prison in Rafsanjan, central
Iran. 1 of the prisoners was named as Hossein Seifi-Qoli. The other 2 were not
named.
At least 64 prisoners, including 2 women, have been executed in Iran, in some
cases in public squares, within a 3 week period.
A statement by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein on Wednesday said: "Iran has reportedly executed
more than 600 individuals so far this year. Last year, at least 753 people were
executed in the country."
(source: NCR-Iran)
*********************
Iranian Authorities Hang 2 Prisoners to Death for Moharebeh
2 prisoners, identified as R.K. and M.R. were hanged to death in Mashhad
Central Prison for Moharebeh (waging war against God), according to a report
published on Thursday by the website of the Judiciary in Razavi Khorasan.
R.K. was reportedly sentenced to death in Branch 2 of Mashhad's Revolutionary
Court and accused of participating in three counts of armed robbery, destroying
government property, and intentionally injuring a security agent.
M.R. was reportedly sentenced to death in Branch 2 of Mashhad's Revolutionary
Court, the accusations against him reportedly include: participating in 8
counts of armed robbery, destroying government property, blackmail, stealing a
motorcycle, intentionally injuring a security agent, drinking alcohol, using
illegal drugs, and illegally crossing over Iran's border.
(source: Iran Human Rights)
INDIA:
It's time death penalty is abolished: Aiyar----Prakash Karat: the question of
who hangs in India today is largely a politically determined decision.
Senior Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar on Thursday said his party had
forgotten its own stand on abolishing capital punishment which it had taken in
the historic Karachi session of 1931.
Speaking at the Indian Women's Press Corps here, Mr. Aiyar, who was one of
several prominent citizens who submitted a mercy plea to President Pranab
Mukherjee for commuting Yakub Memon's death sentence to life imprisonment, said
the only possible justification for taking someone's life was if it acted as a
deterrent to future crimes. "And there is no empirical evidence from anywhere
in the world to suggest that murdering a murderer will stop other murderers,"
he argued.
Mr. Aiyar, a Rajya Sabha MP, said the time had come for India to abolish the
death penalty and the place to do was is in Parliament. He cited a private
member's Bill moved in Parliament by the CPI???s D Raja last week as a possible
starting point. "Though it was introduced amidst a ruckus, the leader of my
party in the Rajya Sabha made sure to clarify with the Speaker that the Bills
introduced would carry over for discussion into the next session."
"Even if the government doesn't come up with a suggestion for abolishing the
death penalty, and I would be very surprised if they did, I hope it will give
us a chance to express our views on the matter," he said.
In its 3-day Karachi session in March 1931, the Congress passed a series of
resolutions on Fundamental Rights and Duties, Labour, Taxation and Expenditure,
and Economic and Social Programme. One of the clauses of the resolution
declared: "There shall be no capital punishment." The resolution was moved soon
after the British government sent Bhagat Singh and his comrades Sukhdev and
Rajguru to the gallows. In later years, however, following the assassination of
Mahatma Gandhi in 1948, the party took a harder stand on the death penalty.
The Karachi Congress resolution was also brought up by former CPI(M) general
secretary Prakash Karat who was speaking alongside Mr. Aiyar at Thursday's
event. Mr. Karat argued that the question of who hangs in India today was
largely a politically determined decision. This was clear, he said, if one were
to look at the cases of prisoners who had been hanged over the past few years,
such as Ajmal Kasab and Afzal Guru, against those whose sentences had been
commuted.
He pointed out that clemency had been shown to the killers of Rajiv Gandhi and
former Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh, who enjoyed the backing of the Tamil
Nadu and Punjab governments respectively. In the case of the latter, Balwant
Singh Rajoana, Mr. Karat pointed out that his execution was stayed by the Home
Secretary even after his mercy petition had been rejected by the President,
only because of political pressure from Punjab.
"The whole of Kashmir said 'don't hang Afzal Guru', I know this because I was
there at the time, but their voices were never heard. In the case of Rajoana,
the Home Minister himself intervened to stop the hanging," he said.
Mr. Karat said Guru was hanged because the UPA government thought it expedient
to carry out the execution since the BJP was making an issue out of it. "In our
political circumstances the death penalty has become a political weapon and it
is high time we moved for its abolition," he said.
(source: The Hindu)
**********************
Seeking end to death penalty, DMK's Kanimozhi set to move private member's bill
In the coming week, Rajya Sabha MP Kanimozhi says she will introduce a private
member's bill for the abolition of death penalty in the Upper House of
Parliament. Her bill seeks to "abolish capital punishment" and substitute all
references of punishment by death with imprisonment for life in all laws passed
by the Parliament with retrospective effect. The bill, currently being refined
by Kanimozhi's team in consultation with lawyers, experts and civil society,
will be applicable to the entire country, including state governments, which
will have to pass legislations in abolishing death penalty in their respective
state Acts.
"I have been engaging with organizations which have worked towards abolishing
death penalty for many years," Kanimozhi said to ET. "We cannot look at it as
independent cases because the crime, the situation, the mood of the nation
changes from incident to incident. We should oppose death penalty in all cases
whatever the crime maybe."
The DMK is one of a handful of political parties - including CPI, CPM,
Shiromani Akali Dal and AIADMK - against the death penalty in principle. "It is
the inhumanness behind the whole act which made the DMK oppose it," said
Kanimozhi. The DMK resolved against the death penalty in its 2014 conference in
Tiruchi, and included its abolition in its Lok Sabha election manifesto that
year. "I see no reason why it [abolition] will not be a part of our 2016
Manifesto," Kanimozhi added.
Any legislator can present a private members bill acting not on behalf of the
executive, but in his or her own capacity. Private Members Bills are slated for
discussion on alternate Fridays when the house is in session, and go through
the same procedure of enactment as Bills introduced by the government.
The Indian parliament has passed 15 private members bills in all: 14 before the
1970s, and one after 45 years in April this year, a Bill on transgender rights
by DMK's Tiruchi Siva. More often than not, private member bills are not
passed, says Chakshu Roy, Head of Outreach at the Delhi-based PRS Legislative
Research.
Around Yakub Memon's hanging on July 29, politicians across party lines spoke
up against the death penalty on social media and to the press. Congress MP
Shashi Tharoor, AICC general secretary Digvijaya Singh and BJP's Varun Gandhi
asked for its abolition, but under pressure from their respective parties,
quickly called it their personal view. PMK founder S Ramadoss tweeted that to
hang a man on his birthday was a "cruel homage", and AIMIM's Asaduddin Owaisi
said Memon was hanged because he had "no political backing".
While the divisive debate rages, only a few MPs have made a move in Parliament.
On July 20, CPI's D. Raja submitted a private members resolution in the Rajya
Sabha demanding a moratorium on death penalty. Resolutions are different from
bills in that they flag issues for discussion in the House. They can form the
basis of a future bill on the subject, but not be a bill in itself. Raja's
resolution was to be discussed on 31 July, but since the house was adjourned,
he says it will be carried over to the next session two months from now.
Kanimozhi's move goes a step further, bringing a Bill to the Rajya Sabha. Under
its objectives, it calls capital punishment "unjust and inhuman", and
"irreversibile" in a justice system that will always remain susceptible to
human failure. It holds that there is no conclusive evidence for it having a
deterrent effect.
(source: The Economic Times)
*****************
If Bapu's convict spared, why not Rajiv's killers: TN to SC
If the person given life sentence for conspiring to kill Mahatma Gandhi got
remission of sentence and was released after 16 years in jail, why should
similar remission not be given to Rajiv Gandhi assassination conspirators, the
Tamil Nadu government asked the Supreme Court on Thursday.
Appearing for Tamil Nadu, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi took a bench of Chief
Justice H L Dattu and Justices F M I Kalifulla, P C Ghose, A M Sapre and U U
Lalit by surprise by drawing a comparison between the treatment meted out to
the conspirators in the two assassinations.
He said, "Gopal Narayan Godse was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1949 after
being convicted as a conspirator in the Mahatma Gandhi assassination case.
Mahatma Gandhi was and is regarded as the Father of the Nation. Even in that
case, the life convict was given the benefit of remission of sentence after 16
years and was released from prison."
Dwivedi said assassinations of Rajiv Gandhi and his mother Indira Gandhi were
bad. "But these cases cannot be on the same footing as that of assassination of
Mahatma Gandhi. So, can the conspirators sentenced to life imprisonment in
Rajiv assassination case not be granted remission? They have already spent 23
years in prison," he said.
"Times have changed. I am not saying all those convicted for conspiracy in an
assassination case should be released after 16 years in jail. But will it be
correct to close the door of remission on a convict, which is his fundamental
right?" Dwivedi asked.
Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated at an election rally at Sriperumbudur in Tamil
Nadu on May 21, 1991 by human bomb Dhanu after a conspiracy by LTTE and its
Indian associates. The trial court convicted all 26 accused and awarded death
sentence to all. The Supreme Court upheld death penalty to only 4 - Murugan,
Perarivalan, Santhan and Nalini.
Nalini's death sentence was commuted to life by the Tamil Nadu governor. The SC
last year commuted the death sentences of the other 3 to life, prompting the
Tamil Nadu government to order remission of their sentence. The Centre
challenged this decision in the SC, which stayed their release.
Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated on January 30, 1948 in Delhi. The assassin,
Nathuram Godse, his brother Gopal Narayan Godse and 7 others were tried on
charges of murder and conspiracy to commit murder.
Nathuram, who pleaded guilty to the charge of murder, was sentenced to death
along with another accused, Narayan Apte. V D Savarkar, 1 of the co-accused,
was acquitted by the trial court, while Gopal Godse and 4 others were sentenced
to life imprisonment.
On appeal, the Punjab high court acquitted 2 more - Dr Parchure and Shankar
Kistayya. The conviction and sentence of the others was confirmed. Nathuram
appealed against his conviction on the charge of conspiracy only. He neither
challenged his conviction for murder nor the death sentence.
Nathuram and Apte were executed in Ambala Jail on November 15, 1949. Gopal
Godse and another accused, Karkare, were transferred from Ambala Jail to Nasik
Road central prison in Maharashtra on May 19, 1950. Gopal was later transferred
to Aurangabad central prison.
Gopal Godse was released from jail on October 13, 1964. He was arrested again
on November 25, 1964 under the Defence of India Act but was released on
November 30, 1965.
(source: The Times of India)
*****************
Death penalty fails the test of humanity
The recent execution of Yakub Memon after his conviction in the Mumbai blasts
case of 1993 has brought the debate regarding death penalty in India into a
sharper focus. It's clear that the discourse on the legality, constitutionality
and human rights implications of death penalty as a form of punishment requires
a rigorous, balanced and nuanced analysis.
The current Indian law provides for death penalty as a form of punishment. But
this is limited and can only be imposed in the "rarest of rare" cases. The
existing legal and constitutional framework for imposing death penalty as a
form of punishment draws its foundation from the judgment of the Supreme Court
of India in Bachan Singh vs State of Punjab decided 35 years ago. In this case,
the court upheld the constitutional validity of death penalty, but also
observed, " ... A real and abiding concern for the dignity of human life
postulates resistance to taking a life through law's instrumentality. That
ought not to be done save in the rarest of rare cases when the alternative
option is unquestionably foreclosed ..."
It is a rather long time since the "rarest of rare" doctrine evolved. And the
death penalty jurisprudence developed by our courts is, unfortunately, limited.
The death penalty cases adjudicated by our courts have hardly been able to
discuss the sociological, penological and criminological objectives of
punishment. Instead, there has been far too much emphasis on deterrence as
opposed to seeking reformation and rehabilitation of offenders. The focus has
always been on the brutality of the crime and criminal and the vulnerability of
the victim. Viewing the death penalty as a form of punishment carries the
state's disapproval of the "rarest of rare" crime.
The decision to determine as to which crimes deserve the death penalty is
filled with the possibility of arbitrariness, though it is not enough to argue
that just because there is a risk of judges deciding cases arbitrarily, we
cannot give them the powers to decide certain cases. But the irreversibility of
death penalty makes it very different from other decisions made by judges.
Also, plethora of empirical evidence from around the world, including India,
about arbitrariness in the judicial decision-making processes in imposing death
penalty should help us understand the need for removing the death penalty from
our statute.
An important study of the Supreme Court of India's death penalty judgments
during 1950-2006 conducted by Amnesty International India and People's Union
for Civil Liberties, entitled "Lethal Lottery: The Death Penalty in India",
observed: "...Cases of judicial error in capital trials illustrate starkly the
human failings of the criminal justice system and reiterate the lethal judicial
lottery that is the death penalty in India ..."
The protection of human rights in India has evolved through judicial
recognition of constitutionally protected rights. It is important for India to
recognise that death penalty has moved from being a national criminal justice
policy issue to an international human rights issue. And that's why expanding
the provision of the "right to life" in Article 21 of the Constitution of India
is necessary with a view to recognising that this right cannot be taken away by
the state even through a procedure that is 'fair, just and reasonable". In that
sense, capital punishment ought to be declared unconstitutional because death
penalty is not in consonance with our constitutional values.
The arbitrariness that is deeply embedded in the decision-making process of the
courts to determine whether a particular case falls under the category of
"rarest of rare" undermines the judicial process. In the absence of sentencing
guidelines, it becomes entirely the discretion of the judges to determine
whether a particular case is fit for imposing capital punishment.
The South African Constitutional Court in a landmark decision in 1995 (State vs
Makwanyane), while declaring that death penalty is unconstitutional observed: "
... It cannot be gainsaid that poverty, race and chance play roles in the
outcome of capital cases and in the final decision as to who should live and
who should die ... At its core, constitutionalism is about the protection and
development of rights, not their extinction ... Every person shall have the
right to life. If not, the killer unwittingly achieves a final and perverse
moral victory by making the state a killer too, thus reducing social abhorrence
at the conscious extinction of human beings ..."
National and international norms relating to human rights have evolved faster
in the last few decades. 99 countries in the world have completely abolished
the death penalty.
The international human rights regime has established conventions and protocols
with a view to protecting human rights. The UN Human Rights Committee in a
landmark decision in 2003 (Roger Judge vs Canada, August 13, 2003) observed: "
... there has been a broadening international consensus in favour of abolition
of the death penalty, and in states which have retained the death penalty, a
broadening consensus not to carry it out ..."
India needs to evolve social and political consensus to completely abolish
death penalty for all crimes, including acts of terrorism. No civilised
society, especially constitutional democracies, can allow state and its
instrumentalities to take away anybody's life. There are significant studies
that have demonstrated that all the reasons for which death penalty as a form
of punishment could be imposed are not supported by empirical evidence. The
most persuasive argument - that of deterrence - has also been proved
ineffective. Professors Roger Hood and Carolyn Hoyle of the University of
Oxford in their recent book, The Death Penalty: A worldwide Perspective, have
observed, " ... the case for retaining the death penalty - and thus resisting
the movement to make its abolition an international norm - cannot rest solely
on moral, cultural or religious arguments. It would also have to be shown that
it is useful and that it can be applied fairly, without mistakes, and without
any degree of arbitrariness or cruelty unacceptable to contemporary social and
legal values. There is ... sufficient evidence to indict capital punishment for
failing the test of humanity on all these grounds."
(source: C. Raj Kumar; The writer is the founding vice-chancellor of O.P.
Jindal Global University and dean of Jindal Global Law School----The Asian Age)
****************
Tripura assembly passes resolution against death penalty
Congress MLA Jitendra Sarkar moved a motion in the assembly in its opening day
on Friday against death penalty and asked to replace it with life sentence unto
death.
Tripura Assembly has passed a resolution to request the Union Government to
amend Section 302 of the IPC to abolish capital punishment. The resolution is
apparently fallout of recent hanging of Yakub Memon, prime accused in Mumbai
serial blasts.
Congress MLA Jitendra Sarkar moved a motion in the assembly in its opening day
on Friday against death penalty and asked to replace it with life sentence unto
death. Speaker opened the motion for a brief discussion before adoption of a
resolution.
Chief Minister Manik Sarkar rose to strongly oppose capital punishment terming
it a murder of somebody for committing a murder. Leader of opposition Sudip Roy
Burman quoted Mahatma Gandhi to raise his objection to death sentence.
Exception was Ratan Lal Nath of Congress who spoke on a different tone to
favour continuation of capital punishment to deal with terrorists and heinous
crimes. "Mumbai blasts victims had also right to live," he argued.
Mr Nath however did not oppose when Speaker put the motion to vote to seek
assent of the members. Speaker declared that the motion was passed unanimously.
The adopted resolution would be sent to union government and the Law Commission
for consideration. It requested for necessary amendment in IPC Section 302 for
commuting death sentence.
(source: The Hindu)
_______________________________________________
A service courtesy of Washburn University School of Law www.washburnlaw.edu
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Unsubscribe: http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/options/deathpenalty
