OPEN LETTER ON DEATH PENALTY IN TAIWAN
18 March 2010
President of the Republic of China (Taiwan)
Ma Ying-jeou
Office of the President
No. 122, Sec. 1, Chongqing S. Rd
Zhongzheng District
Taipei City 100
Taiwan (R.O.C)
18 March 2010
Your Excellency
OPEN LETTER ON DEATH PENALTY IN TAIWAN
Amnesty International has noted the recent debate on the death penalty sparked by former Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng's open support for a moratorium on executions and her subsequent resignation. We write to ask you to ensure that Taiwan remains firm in reaching for its stated goal of abolition of the death penalty.
We welcomed the assurances you gave us and other groups at our meeting on 18 June 2008, that Taiwan's de facto moratorium would remain in place. We urge you not to waiver from this stance. The lives of the 44 inmates on death row must not be compromised because of the current political controversy.
We look to Taiwan as a leader in the region on progress toward abolition. We hope that Taiwan's support for a moratorium, along with Mongolia's, where President Elbegdorj formally announced a moratorium in January 2010, will influence the governments of Japan and the People's Republic of China to take similar steps themselves.
As you stated during your meeting with the Prosecutors' Association on 15 March 2010, Taiwan must increase the public debate and education about the death penalty. We see the public attention surrounding the nomination of a new Minister of Justice as an opportunity to highlight the death penalty as the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, one that runs the risk of irrevocable error, fails to provide restorative justice to victims' families, and has not been proven to have any special deterrent effect. The current public debate presents an opportunity to promote the global trend towards abolition, as now more than two-thirds of the countries of the world have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice, and to urge public support to this trend ahead of the United Nations General Assembly vote on a global moratorium scheduled for December 2010.
In a time of heightened political debate, we urge you to demonstrate leadership and continue on the path toward abolition.
Yours sincerely
Claudio Cordone
Secretary General (ad interim)
Friday, 19 March 2010
Friday, 12 March 2010
Interview with Australian Attorney-General
ATTORNEY-GENERAL
ROBERT McCLELLAND MP
INTERVIEW
ABC NEWS RADIO DRIVE WITH JOHN BARRON
FRIDAY, 12 MARCH 2010
[....]
BARRON: Now, on a separate issue while we have you Attorney-General, the Federal Parliament late yesterday, passed a law which - the way it's being reported is saying that it's kind of outlawed the death penalty for all time, stopping it being reintroduced. What actual change came about yesterday on that?
McCLELLAND: Well, we have introduced legislation at a Federal level that will prevent the death penalty from being introduced in a State or Territory. And certainly unless or until a Federal Parliament subsequently overturned the law that was passed yesterday, there will be a prohibition on the death penalty being introduced in Australia.
So it was an historic day in many ways, if only to declare to the rest of the world as a nation, indeed each and every member of Parliament who spoke from both sides spoke in favour of prohibiting the death penalty. So that was a significant thing and a reflection of the views of modern Australian representatives.
BARRON: Has there been any suggestion or pressure to bring it back, particularly with the possibility of maybe terrorist trials, that kind of thing?
McCLELLAND: No, I think the bipartisan attitude around Australia has been that we don't want the death penalty to be part of our criminal justice system, and that's been reflected in the views which have been very constructive.
[....]
BARRON: Good to talk to you. Thanks very much.
McCLELLAND: That's my pleasure.
[Ends]
ROBERT McCLELLAND MP
INTERVIEW
ABC NEWS RADIO DRIVE WITH JOHN BARRON
FRIDAY, 12 MARCH 2010
[....]
BARRON: Now, on a separate issue while we have you Attorney-General, the Federal Parliament late yesterday, passed a law which - the way it's being reported is saying that it's kind of outlawed the death penalty for all time, stopping it being reintroduced. What actual change came about yesterday on that?
McCLELLAND: Well, we have introduced legislation at a Federal level that will prevent the death penalty from being introduced in a State or Territory. And certainly unless or until a Federal Parliament subsequently overturned the law that was passed yesterday, there will be a prohibition on the death penalty being introduced in Australia.
So it was an historic day in many ways, if only to declare to the rest of the world as a nation, indeed each and every member of Parliament who spoke from both sides spoke in favour of prohibiting the death penalty. So that was a significant thing and a reflection of the views of modern Australian representatives.
BARRON: Has there been any suggestion or pressure to bring it back, particularly with the possibility of maybe terrorist trials, that kind of thing?
McCLELLAND: No, I think the bipartisan attitude around Australia has been that we don't want the death penalty to be part of our criminal justice system, and that's been reflected in the views which have been very constructive.
[....]
BARRON: Good to talk to you. Thanks very much.
McCLELLAND: That's my pleasure.
[Ends]
Thursday, 11 March 2010
Australia: Laws passed to outlaw death penalty, torture
ATTORNEY-GENERAL
ROBERT McCLELLAND MP
11 March 2010
PASSAGE OF LEGISLATION TO PROHIBIT TORTURE AND THE DEATH PENALTY
Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, today welcomed the passage of legislation through Parliament which prohibits the use of torture and ensures that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future.
The Crimes Legislation Amendment (Torture Prohibition and Death Penalty Abolition) Bill 2009 implements a specific Commonwealth offence of torture into the Commonwealth Criminal Code which will operate concurrently with existing State and Territory offences.
"Introducing a specific Commonwealth offence of torture will fulfil Australia's obligations under the United Nations Convention Against Torture to ban all acts of torture, wherever they occur," Mr McClelland said.
The Bill also amends the Commonwealth Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973 to extend the application of the current Commonwealth prohibition on the death penalty to State laws.
This amendment will safeguard Australia's ongoing compliance with the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which requires all necessary measures be taken to ensure that no one is subject to the death penalty.
"Successive Australian Governments have maintained a long-standing policy of opposition to the death penalty. The passage of this Bill will ensure that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future."
These reforms demonstrate the Australian Parliament's fundamental opposition to acts that are contrary to basic human values and underline the Rudd Government’s ongoing commitment to meeting our international human rights obligations.
Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, today welcomed the passage of legislation through Parliament which prohibits the use of torture and ensures that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future.
The Crimes Legislation Amendment (Torture Prohibition and Death Penalty Abolition) Bill 2009 implements a specific Commonwealth offence of torture into the Commonwealth Criminal Code which will operate concurrently with existing State and Territory offences.
"Introducing a specific Commonwealth offence of torture will fulfil Australia's obligations under the United Nations Convention Against Torture to ban all acts of torture, wherever they occur," Mr McClelland said.
The Bill also amends the Commonwealth Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973 to extend the application of the current Commonwealth prohibition on the death penalty to State laws.
This amendment will safeguard Australia's ongoing compliance with the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which requires all necessary measures be taken to ensure that no one is subject to the death penalty.
"Successive Australian Governments have maintained a long-standing policy of opposition to the death penalty. The passage of this Bill will ensure that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future."
These reforms demonstrate the Australian Parliament's fundamental opposition to acts that are contrary to basic human values and underline the Rudd Government's ongoing commitment to meeting our international human rights obligations.
ROBERT McCLELLAND MP
11 March 2010
PASSAGE OF LEGISLATION TO PROHIBIT TORTURE AND THE DEATH PENALTY
Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, today welcomed the passage of legislation through Parliament which prohibits the use of torture and ensures that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future.
The Crimes Legislation Amendment (Torture Prohibition and Death Penalty Abolition) Bill 2009 implements a specific Commonwealth offence of torture into the Commonwealth Criminal Code which will operate concurrently with existing State and Territory offences.
"Introducing a specific Commonwealth offence of torture will fulfil Australia's obligations under the United Nations Convention Against Torture to ban all acts of torture, wherever they occur," Mr McClelland said.
The Bill also amends the Commonwealth Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973 to extend the application of the current Commonwealth prohibition on the death penalty to State laws.
This amendment will safeguard Australia's ongoing compliance with the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which requires all necessary measures be taken to ensure that no one is subject to the death penalty.
"Successive Australian Governments have maintained a long-standing policy of opposition to the death penalty. The passage of this Bill will ensure that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future."
These reforms demonstrate the Australian Parliament's fundamental opposition to acts that are contrary to basic human values and underline the Rudd Government’s ongoing commitment to meeting our international human rights obligations.
Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, today welcomed the passage of legislation through Parliament which prohibits the use of torture and ensures that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future.
The Crimes Legislation Amendment (Torture Prohibition and Death Penalty Abolition) Bill 2009 implements a specific Commonwealth offence of torture into the Commonwealth Criminal Code which will operate concurrently with existing State and Territory offences.
"Introducing a specific Commonwealth offence of torture will fulfil Australia's obligations under the United Nations Convention Against Torture to ban all acts of torture, wherever they occur," Mr McClelland said.
The Bill also amends the Commonwealth Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973 to extend the application of the current Commonwealth prohibition on the death penalty to State laws.
This amendment will safeguard Australia's ongoing compliance with the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which requires all necessary measures be taken to ensure that no one is subject to the death penalty.
"Successive Australian Governments have maintained a long-standing policy of opposition to the death penalty. The passage of this Bill will ensure that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future."
These reforms demonstrate the Australian Parliament's fundamental opposition to acts that are contrary to basic human values and underline the Rudd Government's ongoing commitment to meeting our international human rights obligations.
Wednesday, 10 March 2010
Japan: UK MP condemns death row tragedy
UK MP says 'world's longest-serving' death row prisoner is scar on Japan's conscience
From: Amnesty International UK
9 March 2010
The Lib Dem MP Alistair Carmichael has spoken out over the plight of a prisoner on death row in Japan, dubbing the case of Hakamada Iwao “a tragedy and a scar on the conscience of Japan”.
Mr Hakamada, a former professional boxer sentenced to death in 1968, is believed by Amnesty International to be the world’s longest-serving death row prisoner. In 1968 he was arrested and questioned for 20 days without a lawyer and later found guilty of murder based partly on confessions allegedly coerced from him by police interrogators.
Alistair Carmichael, MP for Orkney and Shetland, has taken up Hakamada’s case in his role as Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for the Abolition of the Death Penalty, and last year he visited Japan to lobby for his release. Tomorrow (Wednesday 10 March) Hakamada will be 74 and Mr Carmichael will accompany Amnesty delegates to the Japanese embassy in London to press for a retrial or full release of Hakamada.
There are longstanding doubts about the fairness of Hakamada’s trial and one of the original trial judges has himself said he firmly believes Hakamada is innocent. Meanwhile, Amnesty is stressing that conditions on death row in Japan are extremely harsh and, along with numerous other death row inmates, Hakamada now suffers from a mental illness, not least after spending 28 years in solitary confinement.
Alistair Carmichael said:
"No-one should be sentenced to death in this day and age and it's mind-boggling to think that Hakamada Iwao has been on death row since the time of the Beatles or the first moon landing.
"It's a personal tragedy for Mr Hakamada and a scar on the conscience of Japan.
"I campaigned for years on the Kenny Richey case so I'm well aware of just how appalling life on death row really is. But this case is in a category all of its own. It's truly shocking.
"Just going to the Japanese embassy in London isn’t going to get Hakamada Iwao off death row overnight, but it's part of a process to secure him a fair retrial or ensure he's released."
Amnesty International UK Director Kate Allen said:
"Most people's idea of Japan does not include the fact that the country even has the death penalty, still less the fact that a prisoner has been on death row there for over four decades.
"But the reality is actually worse still. Japan's condemned prisoners are kept in inhuman conditions for decades and then taken out of their cells and hanged without warning.
"With Mr Hakamada about to become 74 we desperately need to see movement on his case. The unfairness of Hakamada’s original trial and mounting concerns about his mental illness must mean that the Japanese authorities either grant him a retrial or release him as soon as possible."
Conditions on death row in Japan are extremely harsh. As Amnesty showed in a lengthy report last year, death row prisoners in Japan are largely confined to isolation cells. They are not allowed to move around in their cells, but must remain seated at all times. They are prohibited from talking to other inmates or even making eye contact with guards. Televisions are forbidden, visits are limited and often denied, and very little contact with the outside world is permitted. Amnesty’s research shows that numerous prisoners have been driven into mental illness, yet few safeguards exist to prevent them being executed.
Later this month Amnesty will publish a global survey on the use of the death penalty and this is expected to show that Japan is one of the world’s biggest users of the punishment.
From: Amnesty International UK
9 March 2010
The Lib Dem MP Alistair Carmichael has spoken out over the plight of a prisoner on death row in Japan, dubbing the case of Hakamada Iwao “a tragedy and a scar on the conscience of Japan”.
Mr Hakamada, a former professional boxer sentenced to death in 1968, is believed by Amnesty International to be the world’s longest-serving death row prisoner. In 1968 he was arrested and questioned for 20 days without a lawyer and later found guilty of murder based partly on confessions allegedly coerced from him by police interrogators.
Alistair Carmichael, MP for Orkney and Shetland, has taken up Hakamada’s case in his role as Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for the Abolition of the Death Penalty, and last year he visited Japan to lobby for his release. Tomorrow (Wednesday 10 March) Hakamada will be 74 and Mr Carmichael will accompany Amnesty delegates to the Japanese embassy in London to press for a retrial or full release of Hakamada.
There are longstanding doubts about the fairness of Hakamada’s trial and one of the original trial judges has himself said he firmly believes Hakamada is innocent. Meanwhile, Amnesty is stressing that conditions on death row in Japan are extremely harsh and, along with numerous other death row inmates, Hakamada now suffers from a mental illness, not least after spending 28 years in solitary confinement.
Alistair Carmichael said:
"No-one should be sentenced to death in this day and age and it's mind-boggling to think that Hakamada Iwao has been on death row since the time of the Beatles or the first moon landing.
"It's a personal tragedy for Mr Hakamada and a scar on the conscience of Japan.
"I campaigned for years on the Kenny Richey case so I'm well aware of just how appalling life on death row really is. But this case is in a category all of its own. It's truly shocking.
"Just going to the Japanese embassy in London isn’t going to get Hakamada Iwao off death row overnight, but it's part of a process to secure him a fair retrial or ensure he's released."
Amnesty International UK Director Kate Allen said:
"Most people's idea of Japan does not include the fact that the country even has the death penalty, still less the fact that a prisoner has been on death row there for over four decades.
"But the reality is actually worse still. Japan's condemned prisoners are kept in inhuman conditions for decades and then taken out of their cells and hanged without warning.
"With Mr Hakamada about to become 74 we desperately need to see movement on his case. The unfairness of Hakamada’s original trial and mounting concerns about his mental illness must mean that the Japanese authorities either grant him a retrial or release him as soon as possible."
Conditions on death row in Japan are extremely harsh. As Amnesty showed in a lengthy report last year, death row prisoners in Japan are largely confined to isolation cells. They are not allowed to move around in their cells, but must remain seated at all times. They are prohibited from talking to other inmates or even making eye contact with guards. Televisions are forbidden, visits are limited and often denied, and very little contact with the outside world is permitted. Amnesty’s research shows that numerous prisoners have been driven into mental illness, yet few safeguards exist to prevent them being executed.
Later this month Amnesty will publish a global survey on the use of the death penalty and this is expected to show that Japan is one of the world’s biggest users of the punishment.
Wednesday, 3 March 2010
Australia: No death penalty, no shades of grey
By Professor George Williams
From The Sydney Morning Herald, 2 March 2010
The Death Penalty Abolition Bill debated in Federal Parliament last week is the most important initiative on the death penalty for decades. If passed, it will block any state attempt to bring back capital punishment. If it did, the law would be a clear and principled statement that Australia renounces the death penalty now and into the future.
Although the death penalty has been absent from the statute book for 25 years - NSW was the last to eradicate it in 1985 - the new law is needed. The silence in federal law on capital punishment means the death penalty could be reintroduced by any state at any time. This is not only a legal but a political possibility due to statements made over many years by our leaders.
The Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, is the latest to try to have it both ways. He said recently he had ''always been against the death penalty'', but went on to say that, in the case of someone ''who cold-bloodedly brought about the deaths of hundreds or thousands of innocent people'', you ''start to think that maybe the only appropriate punishment is death''.
Abbott is not alone in attempting to combine a principled stand with an inconsistent appeal to raw emotion. Politicians from both sides have taken the same course. The attraction is obvious as it is an appeal to populism.
A 2005 Bulletin poll showed that most Australians supported capital punishment. The Australian National University's 2007 Electoral Survey found that 44 per cent of people thought the death penalty should be reintroduced - 38 per cent disagreed. Australia may not have the death penalty, but a sizeable part of the population supports its return.
This leaves Australian law in an unsatisfactory state and our citizens facing the death penalty overseas in an even worse situation. Equivocation on the death penalty by our leaders, such as by recognising it as appropriate for someone like Saddam Hussein, makes it harder to oppose the execution of Australians overseas.
Regarding the Bali bombers, John Howard, as prime minister, said that if the death penalty ''is what the law of Indonesia provides, that is how things should proceed''. Such statements undermine Australian arguments against the death penalty for Australians tried in Indonesia and elsewhere.
This has been pointed out by Scott Rush, one of the Bali Nine, who is facing death. He wrote to the government: ''I don't want to be in any way political but, from a practical point of view of someone inside on death row, it makes practical and good sense to have a consistent position of opposing the death penalty without discrimination.''
Ambiguous statements by our politicians, combined with the silence in our law on the reintroduction of the death penalty, leave the door ajar for its return in a state. A political leader seeking high office could take the law and order debate to a new low by arguing for the reintroduction of the death penalty in response to a particularly heinous crime.
Such a course has even had federal support. In 2003, Howard called for a national debate on the reintroduction of capital punishment as part of new anti-terrorism laws. While he said that he did not personally support this, he nonetheless suggested the death penalty could be raised by state opposition parties as an election issue.
It is time that Australian law and our leaders spoke against capital punishment wherever it is applied and without reservation. The notion that it is acceptable to execute terrorists but not other criminals, or to execute foreign nationals but not Australians, is morally and logically unsustainable. The value of a life is not contingent on a person's nationality or the nature of their crime. Opposition to the death penalty does not permit such shades of grey. Its removal from the law in Australia and elsewhere must be an unequivocal demand.
Unfortunately, no federal law can prevent the reintroduction of the death penalty by a future federal parliament. Prohibiting its reintroduction at the state level is as far as we can go without changing the constitution.
The death penalty was abolished in Australia decades ago but the battle against capital punishment was left incomplete. The possibility remains that it may return under state law. The Federal Parliament must pass the Death Penalty Abolition Bill to ensure this cannot happen.
George Williams is the Anthony Mason Professor of Law at the University of NSW
From The Sydney Morning Herald, 2 March 2010
The Death Penalty Abolition Bill debated in Federal Parliament last week is the most important initiative on the death penalty for decades. If passed, it will block any state attempt to bring back capital punishment. If it did, the law would be a clear and principled statement that Australia renounces the death penalty now and into the future.
Although the death penalty has been absent from the statute book for 25 years - NSW was the last to eradicate it in 1985 - the new law is needed. The silence in federal law on capital punishment means the death penalty could be reintroduced by any state at any time. This is not only a legal but a political possibility due to statements made over many years by our leaders.
The Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, is the latest to try to have it both ways. He said recently he had ''always been against the death penalty'', but went on to say that, in the case of someone ''who cold-bloodedly brought about the deaths of hundreds or thousands of innocent people'', you ''start to think that maybe the only appropriate punishment is death''.
Abbott is not alone in attempting to combine a principled stand with an inconsistent appeal to raw emotion. Politicians from both sides have taken the same course. The attraction is obvious as it is an appeal to populism.
A 2005 Bulletin poll showed that most Australians supported capital punishment. The Australian National University's 2007 Electoral Survey found that 44 per cent of people thought the death penalty should be reintroduced - 38 per cent disagreed. Australia may not have the death penalty, but a sizeable part of the population supports its return.
This leaves Australian law in an unsatisfactory state and our citizens facing the death penalty overseas in an even worse situation. Equivocation on the death penalty by our leaders, such as by recognising it as appropriate for someone like Saddam Hussein, makes it harder to oppose the execution of Australians overseas.
Regarding the Bali bombers, John Howard, as prime minister, said that if the death penalty ''is what the law of Indonesia provides, that is how things should proceed''. Such statements undermine Australian arguments against the death penalty for Australians tried in Indonesia and elsewhere.
This has been pointed out by Scott Rush, one of the Bali Nine, who is facing death. He wrote to the government: ''I don't want to be in any way political but, from a practical point of view of someone inside on death row, it makes practical and good sense to have a consistent position of opposing the death penalty without discrimination.''
Ambiguous statements by our politicians, combined with the silence in our law on the reintroduction of the death penalty, leave the door ajar for its return in a state. A political leader seeking high office could take the law and order debate to a new low by arguing for the reintroduction of the death penalty in response to a particularly heinous crime.
Such a course has even had federal support. In 2003, Howard called for a national debate on the reintroduction of capital punishment as part of new anti-terrorism laws. While he said that he did not personally support this, he nonetheless suggested the death penalty could be raised by state opposition parties as an election issue.
It is time that Australian law and our leaders spoke against capital punishment wherever it is applied and without reservation. The notion that it is acceptable to execute terrorists but not other criminals, or to execute foreign nationals but not Australians, is morally and logically unsustainable. The value of a life is not contingent on a person's nationality or the nature of their crime. Opposition to the death penalty does not permit such shades of grey. Its removal from the law in Australia and elsewhere must be an unequivocal demand.
Unfortunately, no federal law can prevent the reintroduction of the death penalty by a future federal parliament. Prohibiting its reintroduction at the state level is as far as we can go without changing the constitution.
The death penalty was abolished in Australia decades ago but the battle against capital punishment was left incomplete. The possibility remains that it may return under state law. The Federal Parliament must pass the Death Penalty Abolition Bill to ensure this cannot happen.
George Williams is the Anthony Mason Professor of Law at the University of NSW
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
