---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: John Ashworth <[email protected]> Date: Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:22 PM Subject: [sudan-john-ashworth] Sudanese doctors’ role in judicial amputation “breaks medical ethics” To: Group <[email protected]>
1. Sudan: Doctors Perform Amputations for Courts Human Rights Watch: End Corporal Punishment, Reform Laws (Nairobi, February 27, 2013) – Credible sources in Sudan have reported that government doctors amputated a man’s right hand and left foot by court order in Khartoum on February 14, 2013, in violation of the absolute prohibition on torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishments, four human rights groups said today. The African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies (ACJPS), Human Rights Watch, REDRESS and Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) called on Sudanese leaders and international actors to condemn the practice immediately, and to urge swift reform of Sudanese laws in conformity with Sudan’s international human rights commitments. According to reliable sources, medical doctors at the Sudanese Ministry of Interior’sAl Rebat Hospital carried out what is called cross-amputation on 30-year-old Adam Al-Muthna, carrying out a sentence for an armed robbery conviction. “Cross amputation is a form of state-sponsored torture,” said Dr. Vincent Iacopino, senior medical advisor at Physicians for Human Rights. “The complicity of medical personnel in such practices represents a gross contravention of the UN Principles of Medical Ethics for health personnel, particularly medical doctors who engage, actively or passively, in acts of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Physicians and other health professionals must hold themselves to the highest professional standards of commitment to the human rights and dignity of the people whose lives they have the privilege of serving, even under threat of harm. Muthna was convicted of armed robbery (Haraba) under article 167 of the 1991 Sudanese Penal Code in relation to an armed attack on a truck carrying passengers between North Kordofan and East Darfur in March 2006. “Amputations violate the absolute prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment under international law and have no place in any criminal justice system,” said Osman Hummaida, executive director of the African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies (ACJPS). Article 168(b) of the Sudanese Penal Code provides cross amputation as a penalty for armed robbery when it results in grievous injury or involves the robbery of property equivalent to an amount decreed by the judiciary, currently set at 1500 Sudanese Pounds (approximately US$ 340). Amputation as a form of corporal punishment was incorporated into Sudanese law in 1983 when then-President Gaffar Nimeiry introduced Islamic reforms known as the “September laws.” Although sentences imposing amputations have been handed down under those laws, there are no known cases since 2001 in which such sentences have been carried out. Human rights groups had hoped this signaled a de factomoratorium on the practice. “Authorities should immediately stop imposing such cruel and inhuman punishments, and bring laws in line with Sudan’s human rights obligations,” said Daniel Bekele, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “They should stop ordering amputations, stoning, flogging and all other forms of corporal punishment that violate basic human rights.” Sudanese authorities have imposed stoning sentences and routinely order flogging penalties. Both penalties are forms of corporal punishment justified as Sharia (Islamic law). In 2012, two sentences of death by stoning for adultery were imposed on women but were overturned following an international outcry. As a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Sudan has made a commitment to an absolute ban on torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In 1997, the UN Human Rights Committee called for Sudan to abolish flogging, amputation, and stoning because they are incompatible with Sudan’s obligations under that treaty, but the government of Sudan did not comply. Sudan is also a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. In the case of Doebbler v Sudan, concerning the use of flogging as a punishment in Sudan, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights ruled that: “there is no right for the government of a country to apply physical violence to individuals for offences. Such a right would be tantamount to sanctioning State sponsored torture,” contrary to article 5 of the African Charter. Sudan also signed, but has yet to ratify, the UN Convention Against Torture. “The practice of corporal punishment in Sudan is frequently used as an instrument of repression against those who do not conform to the State’s conception of moral order”, said Dr. Lutz Oette, Counsel at REDRESS. “The Government of Sudan needs to abide by its international obligations and put an end to any form of corporal punishment in line with the ruling of the African Commission.” http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/02/27/sudan-doctors-perform-amputations-courts END1 2. Sudanese doctors’ role in judicial amputation “breaks medical ethics” BMJ 2013; 346 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f1253 (Published 26 February 2013) Cite this as: BMJ 2013;346:f1253 Peter Moszynski Allegations that doctors in Khartoum’s Al-Ribat University Hospital helped with the cross amputation of a man convicted of armed robbery have led to widespread concern among medical bodies and human rights groups. This was the first time in 30 years that this particular punishment, which involves the amputation of the right hand and the left foot, had been done in Sudan. The Sudan Social Development Organisation said that the sentence was carried out on Adam Mohammed Muthna on 14 February. The claim that doctors were involved appeared in the local Al Sudani newspaper, the organisation said; and the charity Amnesty International told the BMJ that it had confirmed the story with local sources. The organisation is appealing to all doctors to refuse to carry out amputations, in line with the United Nations’ Principles of Medical Ethics,1 which forbid healthcare personnel from being in any relation with detainees “the purpose of which is not solely to evaluate, protect, or improve their physical and mental health.” Amnesty International told the BMJ, “This represents the first documented amputation in many years in Sudan. We call on Sudan to amend its national legislation and to abolish punishments that are cruel, inhumane, or degrading or, as in the case of amputation, that amount to torture, so as to bring its Penal Code into line with international standards.” Brian Fine, senior examining physician for Freedom from Torture (The Medical Foundation for the Care of Victims of Torture), told the BMJ, “The participation of doctors in any form of torture or ill treatment, such as penal amputations, is ethically unacceptable and shocking. Doctors must always aim to protect and improve people’s health. To be complicit in torture is fundamentally against the ethos of the medical profession.” A spokesperson for the World Medical Association said that doctors’ involvement in judicial amputations was “in direct violation” of the association’s Guidelines for Physicians Concerning Torture.2 These state that doctors “shall not countenance, condone or participate in” such procedures, “whatever the offence of which the victim of such procedures is suspected, accused or guilty, and whatever the victim’s beliefs or motives, and in all situations, including armed conflict and civil strife.” Nor should they “provide any premises, instruments, substances or knowledge to facilitate the punishments” or “diminish the ability of the victim to resist such treatment.” A BMA spokesperson told the BMJ that “doctors should not abuse medical skills for non-clinical purposes, including participating in judicial punishments.” The BMA’s recommendations on human rights, published in 2001,3 state, “Punishments such as amputation are not only cruel but seriously and permanently hinder individuals’ ability to provide for themselves and for dependent relatives and so contribute to an under-class of destitute and marginalised people. The medical profession should not only oppose such punishments but exercise an educative influence over such policies which affect the health of society.” http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f1253 END2 ______________________ John Ashworth Sudan, South Sudan Advisor [email protected] +254 725 926 297 (Kenya mobile) +211 919 695 362 (South Sudan mobile) +27 82 050 1235 (South Africa mobile) +44 750 304 1790 (UK/international) +88 216 4334 0735 (Thuraya satphone) PO Box 52002 - 00200, Nairobi, Kenya This is a personal e-mail address and the contents do not necessarily reflect the views of any organisation -- -- The content of this message does not necessarily reflect John Ashworth's views. Unless explicitly stated otherwise, John Ashworth is not the author of the content and the source is always cited. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sudan-john-ashworth" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.co.za/group/sudan-john-ashworth --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sudan-john-ashworth" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "South Sudan Info - The Kob" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
