December 3
GAZA:
Gaza court sentences 6 people to hang for 'collaborating' with Israel
A military court in the Hamas-run Gaza Strip on Monday sentenced 6 people,
including a woman, to death by hanging for "collaborating" with Israel,
authorities said.
In total 14 people were sentenced for "collaborating with the occupation," with
6 sentenced to be hanged, the interior ministry in Gaza said.
The rulings come 3 weeks after 8 people were killed when an alleged Israeli
army cell in Gaza was uncovered, leading to a vicious fire fight.
Hamas fired hundreds of rockets at Israel in response, wit h the Jewish state
striking dozens of targets in Gaza before a ceasefire agreement.
The 6 sentenced to death Monday were not related to the November 11 flareup.
The woman, named only as Amal, was sentenced in absentia and is alleged to have
encouraged her nephew in Gaza to collaborate with Israeli intelligence.
Iyad al-Bozum, the spokesman of the interior ministry in Hamas-ruled Gaza,
hailed the rulings.
"Collaborators must realise the (Israeli) occupation will not be able to
protect them," he told a news conference.
Hamas and its allies have fought 3 wars with Israel since 2008.
(source: al-monitor.com)
IRAN----juvenile execution
Execution of the 6th Juvenile Offender in 2018
A juvenile offender who had been sentenced to death for committing an alleged
murder at the age of 16, was hanged at Rajai Shahr prison. Iran Human Rights
(IHR) had previously reported about the execution of 10 prisoners at Rajai
Shahr Prison on November 14, 2018. New documents obtained by IHR show that one
of the executed prisoners was a juvenile offender identifies as Omid Rostami.
Omid Rostami is the 6th juvenile offender executed by Iranian authorities in
2018.
IHR strongly condemns Omid Rostami's execution and calls for strong
international reactions. Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, the spokesperson of IHR said:
" The international community must not tolerate Iranian authorities' continuous
executions of juvenile offenders. We expect stronger reactions by the EU and
the Norwegian government which have ongoing dialogues with the Iranian
authorities and which are regarded as the world leaders in the fight against
the death penalty. Attempts to save the nuclear deal must not lead to closed
eyes on juvenile executions and other serious human rights violations by the
Iranian authorities ".
Omid Rostami's birth certificate shows that he was born on July 10, 1996. He
was sentenced to death for a murder committed on July 12, 2012, 2 days after
his 16th birthday.
Omid had been subjected to additional psychological torture by being taken to
the gallows 4 times earlier. Each time, the plaintiffs (victim's family) had
said that they wanted to rethink about carrying out the execution or forgiving
him.
According to the Iranian Islamic Penal Code (IPC) murder is punishable by qisas
which means “retribution in kind” or retaliation. In this way, the State
effectively puts the responsibility of the death sentence for murder on the
shoulders of the victim’s family. In many cases, the victim's family are
encouraged to put the rope is around the prisoner's neck and even carry out the
actual execution by pulling off the chair the prisoner is standing on.
“On September 4, 2018, the prosecutor told the plaintiffs that they have the
maximum of 1 month time to take their final decision to forgive Omid or carry
out his execution. Otherwise, Omid should be released on bail,” the juvenile
offender’s mother told IHR.
Finally, the plaintiffs went to the prison and carried out Omid's execution on
the early morning of November 14, 2018.
The Islamic Penal Code (IPC) puts the age of criminal responsibility for males
at 15 and 9 for females. In case of murder and other offenses punishable by
Hadd or qisas, article 91 of the amended IPC of 2013 allows judges to use their
discretion and not issue a death sentence against a child who was not able to
understand the nature and consequences of the crime at the time. The amended
law also allows the courts to rely on “the opinion of a forensic doctor or
other means it deems appropriate” to establish whether a defendant understood
the consequences of their actions.
However, according to Omid's family, he didn't have a lawyer, and the family's
request for a forensic examination of Omid was not accepted by the judge.
According to Omid’s mother, the juvenile had 2 previous records of robbery and
convictions, and the Court took that as a proof of his maturity and therefore,
didn't send Omid's case to forensic medicine.
Despite ratifying the United Nations' Convention on the Rights of the Child
which bans the death penalty for offenses committed at under 18 years of age,
Iran stays the world's top executioner of juvenile offenders. According to
reports by IHR, Iranian authorities have executed at least 40 juvenile
offenders since 2013.
(source: Iran Human Rights)
BANGLADESH:
Bangladesh tries 8 over deadly cafe attack
8 alleged Islamist extremists went on trial in Bangladesh on Monday (Dec 3)
over a savage 2016 attack claimed by Islamic State that killed 22 people
including 18 foreigners at a Dhaka cafe popular with Westerners.
Prosecutors say that the 8 members of a homegrown extremist outfit were
"associates" of the 5 attackers killed when police stormed the Holey Artisan
Bakery cafe.
The 8, who face the death penalty if convicted, "helped mastermind the attack
and supplied arms and ammunition," prosecutor Jahangir Alam Chowdhury told AFP.
6 defendants were present with 2 having absconded. More than 200 witnesses have
been called in a special anti-terrorism court in the old part of the capital
Dhaka under tight security.
The brazen assault in July 2016 saw young men armed with assault rifles and
machetes lay siege to the cafe in Dhaka's well-heeled Gulshan neighbourhood.
In addition to 22 civilians, 2 policemen were killed. Military commandos took
over the cafe after a 10-hour standoff and freed more than two dozen hostages.
The attack claimed by the Islamic State group fuelled tensions over Islamist
extremism in the Muslim-majority nation of 165 million people in South Asia.
Police have said the aim of the attack was to destabilise the country and turn
it into a militant state.
8 others - including the attack's mastermind Tamim Ahmed Chowdhury, a Canadian
of Bangladesh descent - were killed during raids in Dhaka and its suburbs
months after the incident.
They included commanders of a new faction of the homegrown extremist group
Jamayetul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) that police blamed for the attack.
The government has repeatedly denied that international jihadist networks have
a presence in Bangladesh.
The IS-linked news agency Amaq however published extensive details of the
attack, including gory images from inside the cafe.
The hostage crisis marked an escalation from a spate of murders claimed by IS
and Al-Qaeda of atheist writers, rights activists, gays, foreigners and
religious minorities since 2013.
It was seen as a major blow to the country's image as a moderate Muslim nation.
(source: channelnewsasia.com)
CHINA:
Nation moves to limit use of capital punishment
Amendments to the laws related to criminal affairs have gradually reduced the
number of offenses punishable by death.
Editor's note: This is the 2nd in a series of stories reflecting China's
achievements in fields such as science, law enforcement, education and
transportation resulting from 40 years of the reform and opening-up policy.
More stories will follow in the coming weeks.
In the 40 years since China adopted the reform and opening-up policy, the
country has moved to gradually limit the use of the death penalty, a punishment
that was once seen as a cornerstone in the fight to deter offenders and
maintain public order.
Experts say the move away from capital punishment is partly a result of the
nation's growing economic strength, but is also motivated by a desire to
prevent irreversible miscarriages of justice.
Zhou Guangquan, a professor of criminal law at Tsinghua University in Beijing,
often uses the case of Nie Shubin as an example.
In 1995, Nie was executed at the age of 21 after being convicted of raping and
killing a woman in Hebei province. In 2016, however, the Supreme People's
Court, China's top court, quashed Nie's conviction and pronounced him not
guilty posthumously after ruling that the evidence presented at his trial had
been obtained illegally and could not guarantee a flawless conviction.
Moreover, in 2013, during a trial at Handan Intermediate People's Court in
Hebei, a man named Wang Shujin confessed to the crimes that led to Nie's
execution.
Cases such as Nie's demonstrate that the death penalty must be used in a
prudent and controlled fashion, according to Zhou, who was pleased to see
greater restrictions on its use written into a report issued at the Third
Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China
in 2013.
"It was a signal that capital punishment would be used less frequently in
China," he said, adding that the loss of a young life and the anguish suffered
by Nie's family "was too devastating to be erased by simply overturning the
conviction".
Mo Hongxian, a professor of law at Wuhan University, Hubei province, who has
focused on the use of the death penalty since 1997, said the report was
probably the 1st time the prudent application of capital punishment had been
mentioned in a national-level document.
"It can be regarded as a display of firm support for the drive to limit the use
of the death penalty in the past 2 decades," she said.
A key move in 2007 saw the Supreme People's Court being given the power of
final arbitration over the use of capital punishment, meaning it has to approve
all death sentences passed by lower-level courts. Meanwhile, "innocent until
proven guilty" and "punishment stipulated by law" were enshrined as basic
principles in the Criminal Law.
In 2011, the death penalty was abolished for dozens of nonviolent crimes, such
as fraud of financial documents and theft.
"These measures illustrate the country's determination to protect human rights"
said Mo, who was born in 1954 and has witnessed all 40 years of reform and
opening-up.
She added that the changes were a direct result of China's rapid economic
development, stronger management of public security and the public's growing
legal awareness, and noted that the abolition of the death penalty for a
growing number of crimes is in line with global trends.
Although the number of people sentenced to death every year is never disclosed,
both Mo and Zhou are optimistic about further reductions in the use of capital
punishment for a wide range of nonviolent crimes.
(source: ecns.cn)
INDIA:
Why we should rethink the death penalty----We execute the poor. The rich get
off.
Justice Kurian Joseph’s judgment of November 28 in Chhannulal; 2 days before he
retired asks us whether a rethink on death penalty is called for.
Before we proceed, we must note Justice Joseph’s approach that the law is both
severity and kindness. This has been characteristic of his approach in all
matters in his career as a judge in Kerala, as Chief Justice of the Himachal
Pradesh High Court and Judge in the Supreme Court.
It is reminiscent of Brecht famous phrase that “we who fight for kindness must
ourselves be kind”.
This does not mean that the severity of the law would be compromised where
necessary. But, the image of the law as blindfolded or angry must yield to a
balance both as a matter of form and substance. The “law” and “judges” are not
angels of death.
Blood-thirsty
The death penalty is not a stranger to India. Those in favour of the harshness
of the law also espouse a thirst for retribution and public vengeance.
The contrary view is espoused not just on the ground that death penalty is
irreversible and mistakes cannot be rectified. But that state executions are
also a form of state sanctioned murder and inconsistent with principles of
sentencing and penology.
Throughout the ages, the “public” have always not just made blood-thirsty
demands for death by hanging, guillotine, electric shock, injections or
otherwise. Many have also enjoyed the gruesome spectacle. The annals of life
and literature are full of this.
Of course, now there are no public executions except in some countries which
show beheading after supposed finding of guilt. People watch this both in
horror and awe on the spot and television amidst conflicting deep psychological
factors of approval and sense of inhumanity.
Usually, the death penalty is for murder and forms of treason.
Asia Bibi in Pakistan was tried for blasphemy. Would it be enough if we follow
one Indian Law Commission’s view for more humane methods of execution (i.e.
chemically)?
India has not signed the Convention on Torture of 1984-87 and voted in favour
of the Death Penalty in the UN General Assembly in 2007 and 2012.
In India, politically private Bill for abolition was supported by the Hindu
Mahasabha, NC Chatterjee pointed to innocents being hung.
In 1958, actor Prithvi Raj Kapoor wanted a Committee to examine abolition.
In 1961 and 1962 there was further support for abolition. The 1973 Criminal
Code demanded reasons for imposing death penalty. The Verma Committee (2013)
following the Nirbhaya rape-murder did not favour death penalty.
While the Law Commission had earlier argued for retaining death penalty in its
35th Report, the AP Shah headed Law Commission in 2015 argued against it.
Delhi’s National Law School Study that death penalty is imposed on the poor and
Blackshield 1976 analysis showed inconsistency in Supreme Court impositions.
Recent judgments of the Supreme Court ordained special hearing in death cases.
Populist demands
Earlier, the Supreme Court wavered but eventually Bachan Singh (1980) emerged
with the formula of death penalty of the rarest of rare case to which Machhi
Singh (1983) elaborated that this meant in cases of gravest culpability with
guidelines on aggravating circumstances. But many disturbing comments also come
from judgments as in Surja Ram (1994) that punishment must respond “to
society’s cry for justice against the criminal”.
This puts a premium on populist demands.
There are problems of delay in execution and the pardoning power.
We have to examine death penalties in the Calcutta rape case (2004), Auto
Shankar (1995) Nirbhaya (2015) as also executions of Kasab (2012), Afzal Guru
(2013), Yakub Memon (2015) to set a balance on atrocity and terror cases even
though in some cases (such as Afzal) great doubt exists.
In the Justice Kurian judgment (2018), Chhannulal used a knife to kill 3
members of the Sahu family and caused grievous injury to another. Earlier, in
another case, the accused had been acquitted of rape. The trial court and High
Court denied mitigating circumstances.
The Supreme Court tellingly asked whether the accused had attempted to
positively reform himself and genuinely regretted his act as indicated by
Bachan Singh. On this, all 3 judges (Kurien Joseph, Deepak Gupta and Hemant
Gupta) felt that death be commuted to life. Thus, the ‘reform’ and rarest of
rare tests were applied.
Arbitrarily imposed
But, 2 judges (Gupta and Gupta JJ) without reasons disagreed with Justice
Joseph’s view that the time had come to review where death penalty be
abolished, relying on the Law Commission’s report that death penalty was
“arbitrarily and freakishly imposed” and had not served useful deterrent
effects.
But even in this case of intentional and bloody murder, all 3 judges felt that
death sentence be commuted to life.
Are we now saying the death penalty be reserved for rape, murders and
terrorism?
But all 3 judges agreed that though the law presently permitted death penalty,
the element of reformist potential cannot be ignored. The case for abolition of
death penalty is supported not just by the Law Commission, but also by the
Amnesty and Delhi National Law School reports.
We execute the poor. The rich get off.
The throw-away sentence of the Supreme Court that populist demands must be
accepted defeats the rule of law as for Asia in Pakistan.
The lack of deterring effect undermines continuing death penalty. The reformist
perspective is significant. We need to take the final step towards abolition
amidst the horrifying pathological drumbeat demanding death.
Justice Joseph was the conscience of the court. He shall be missed.
(source: dailyo.in)
_______________________________________________
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
