Source: Free Malaysia Today (19 December 2020)
https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2020/12/19/end-death-penalty-quickly-bar-urges-govt/
PETALING JAYA: The Malaysian Bar wants the government to speed up the legislative process to abolish the death penalty and bring about certainty to those on Death Row.
Its president Salim Bashir said this group of prisoners had to undergo psychological torture from the time the capital punishment was imposed by the courts to the day it is carried out, which sometimes takes more than a decade.
It is estimated that more than 1,000 prisoners are now awaiting execution in Malaysia.
“Hopefully, the government will make its decision soon to bring closure to their long wait,” Salim said.
He said that there had been a moratorium on carrying out hangings since 2018, pending a decision on the abolition of the death penalty.
Salim said it also took time for such prisoners to exhaust their appeals before the courts and clemency applications.
“Previously, executions were carried out after a long wait when convicts were old and sick and this was considered to be ruthless,” he said.
Salim was speaking days after convicted drug trafficker Chu Tak Fai, who spent 27 years in jail, including 12 years on death row, was finally given his freedom.
The 50-year-old Hong Kong national left for home last week after the Sultan of Kedah gave him a final pardon.
Chu had his capital punishment commuted to natural life imprisonment in 2006 and later to life imprisonment for 20 years.
The jail term was to begin from 2016. In March this year, the sultan granted him his freedom.
The bill to abolish the mandatory death penalty for 11 serious offences was scheduled to have been tabled at the March parliamentary sitting this year. However, the change in government delayed the matter.
The bill had proposed that a jail term of up to 30 years be imposed once an accused is sentenced for offences like murder and drug trafficking.
Meanwhile, rights group, Eliminating Deaths and Abuse in Custody Together (EDICT), said many were not as lucky as Chu and no one could fathom the pain and agony that he went through while in isolation in Death Row.
“Chu would have remained unproductive during the prime years of his life in prison,” said its chairman M Visvanathan.
Visvanathan also said long term inmates should be allowed to assimilate with the local community like first working with prison staff and later taking up jobs outside.
“Our prison reform is long overdue and now is the opportune time to take progressive steps,” he added.
Sunday 20 December 2020
Thursday 26 November 2020
Explaining Southeast Asia’s Addiction to the Death Penalty
Source: The Diplomat (25 November 2020)
https://thediplomat.com/2020/11/explaining-southeast-asias-addiction-to-the-death-penalty/
On November 17, the United Nations General Assembly voted on a resolution calling for a moratorium on the use of capital punishment. It passed convincingly: a total of 120 nations voted for the resolution, which called for nations to restrict the use of the death penalty, with the aim of eventually eliminating it altogether.
One curious fact was that of the 10 nations of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, only three – Cambodia, Malaysia, and the Philippines – voted to support the resolution. Singapore and Brunei voted against it, while the remaining five nations – among them some of the region’s most eager users of the death penalty – abstained.
The U.N. vote indicates an increasingly widespread international consensus against the use of the death penalty. As the General Assembly stated in a December 2007 resolution, “there is no conclusive evidence of the death penalty’s deterrent value and that any miscarriage or failure of justice in the death penalty’s implementation is irreversible and irreparable.”
But the vote also highlighted Southeast Asia’s continuing use of – and defense of – capital punishment, despite the tireless efforts of the region’s death penalty abolitionists. To start with, it is no surprise to see Singapore sitting squarely in the “NO” column. Anyone who has descended into Singapore’s Changi Airport will be familiar with airlines’ chirpy reminder that Singapore imposes the death penalty for drug trafficking offenses. According to Amnesty International, Singapore is one of four countries known to have carried out executions for drug-related violations in recent years. The country reportedly has 50 people on death row who have exhausted all appeals.
Moreover, the city-state has been among the most forthright and confident defenders of the death penalty as a punishment for serious crimes. This was reflected in Singapore’s introduction of an amendment to the U.N. resolution that asserts the “sovereign right of all countries to develop their own legal systems, including determining appropriate legal penalties.” The amendment was adopted by a vote of failed to pass, but was also supported by 33 other countries, including by Brunei, Laos, and Vietnam.
Some of those nations that abstained from the vote also continue to hand down death sentences. Take Indonesia. While the country has not executed anyone since 2016, the organization Human Rights Watch (HRW) points out that it has approximately 274 people on death row, including 60 people who have been there for more than 10 years. In 2019, Indonesian courts handed down at least 80 death sentences in 2019, up from 48 in 2018.
Vietnam and Laos, two other nations that abstained on the U.N. vote, do not publicize statistics on the use of the death penalty. But according to HRW, Vietnam may have executed as many as 429 people between 2013 and 2016.
Even those Southeast Asian nations that supported the U.N. resolution are uncertain allies of abolition. One of them, Malaysia, holds approximately 1,324 people on death row. While the reformist government that was elected in 2018 pledged to ban capital punishment, this has since been watered down into a pledge that it will merely abolish the mandatory use of the death penalty – a step in the right direction, but a small one.
The Philippines banned the death penalty in 2006, but since taking office in 2016, President Rodrigo Duterte has on various occasions threatened to reintroduce it, particularly for drug-related crimes. Indeed, one could mount a case that Duterte has introduced a de facto form of capital punishment in his violent “war on drugs,” which by one estimate has killed more than 12,000 people – many innocent, all without trial – since 2016.
Curiously, the nation with possibly the best record on capital punishment is Cambodia, a country whose government is not otherwise known as a staunch defender of human rights. The country banned the death penalty prior to the arrival of a U.N. peacekeeping mission in 1992-93. Indeed, with Prime Minister Hun Sen having mostly subverted the democratic institutions introduced by the U.N. mission, the ban on the death penalty may well turn out to be its most lasting legacy.
What explains Southeast Asia’s addiction to the death penalty? On one level, the region’s governments continue to cling to an outmoded zero-tolerance mentality toward crime, despite the scant evidence that capital punishment is an effective deterrent to crime. As evidenced by the language of Singapore’s proposed amendment to the U.N. resolution, the issue has also teased out an anti-colonial reflex on the part of some Southeast Asian nations, for whom foreign criticism has caused them to dig in their heels.
Whatever the causes, the result of the latest U.N. vote suggests that it will be some time before Southeast Asian nations move toward full abolition of capital punishment.
On November 17, the United Nations General Assembly voted on a resolution calling for a moratorium on the use of capital punishment. It passed convincingly: a total of 120 nations voted for the resolution, which called for nations to restrict the use of the death penalty, with the aim of eventually eliminating it altogether.
One curious fact was that of the 10 nations of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, only three – Cambodia, Malaysia, and the Philippines – voted to support the resolution. Singapore and Brunei voted against it, while the remaining five nations – among them some of the region’s most eager users of the death penalty – abstained.
The U.N. vote indicates an increasingly widespread international consensus against the use of the death penalty. As the General Assembly stated in a December 2007 resolution, “there is no conclusive evidence of the death penalty’s deterrent value and that any miscarriage or failure of justice in the death penalty’s implementation is irreversible and irreparable.”
But the vote also highlighted Southeast Asia’s continuing use of – and defense of – capital punishment, despite the tireless efforts of the region’s death penalty abolitionists. To start with, it is no surprise to see Singapore sitting squarely in the “NO” column. Anyone who has descended into Singapore’s Changi Airport will be familiar with airlines’ chirpy reminder that Singapore imposes the death penalty for drug trafficking offenses. According to Amnesty International, Singapore is one of four countries known to have carried out executions for drug-related violations in recent years. The country reportedly has 50 people on death row who have exhausted all appeals.
Moreover, the city-state has been among the most forthright and confident defenders of the death penalty as a punishment for serious crimes. This was reflected in Singapore’s introduction of an amendment to the U.N. resolution that asserts the “sovereign right of all countries to develop their own legal systems, including determining appropriate legal penalties.” The amendment was adopted by a vote of failed to pass, but was also supported by 33 other countries, including by Brunei, Laos, and Vietnam.
Some of those nations that abstained from the vote also continue to hand down death sentences. Take Indonesia. While the country has not executed anyone since 2016, the organization Human Rights Watch (HRW) points out that it has approximately 274 people on death row, including 60 people who have been there for more than 10 years. In 2019, Indonesian courts handed down at least 80 death sentences in 2019, up from 48 in 2018.
Vietnam and Laos, two other nations that abstained on the U.N. vote, do not publicize statistics on the use of the death penalty. But according to HRW, Vietnam may have executed as many as 429 people between 2013 and 2016.
Even those Southeast Asian nations that supported the U.N. resolution are uncertain allies of abolition. One of them, Malaysia, holds approximately 1,324 people on death row. While the reformist government that was elected in 2018 pledged to ban capital punishment, this has since been watered down into a pledge that it will merely abolish the mandatory use of the death penalty – a step in the right direction, but a small one.
The Philippines banned the death penalty in 2006, but since taking office in 2016, President Rodrigo Duterte has on various occasions threatened to reintroduce it, particularly for drug-related crimes. Indeed, one could mount a case that Duterte has introduced a de facto form of capital punishment in his violent “war on drugs,” which by one estimate has killed more than 12,000 people – many innocent, all without trial – since 2016.
Curiously, the nation with possibly the best record on capital punishment is Cambodia, a country whose government is not otherwise known as a staunch defender of human rights. The country banned the death penalty prior to the arrival of a U.N. peacekeeping mission in 1992-93. Indeed, with Prime Minister Hun Sen having mostly subverted the democratic institutions introduced by the U.N. mission, the ban on the death penalty may well turn out to be its most lasting legacy.
What explains Southeast Asia’s addiction to the death penalty? On one level, the region’s governments continue to cling to an outmoded zero-tolerance mentality toward crime, despite the scant evidence that capital punishment is an effective deterrent to crime. As evidenced by the language of Singapore’s proposed amendment to the U.N. resolution, the issue has also teased out an anti-colonial reflex on the part of some Southeast Asian nations, for whom foreign criticism has caused them to dig in their heels.
Whatever the causes, the result of the latest U.N. vote suggests that it will be some time before Southeast Asian nations move toward full abolition of capital punishment.
Asian Nations Reject UN Vote Against Death Penalty
Source: Human Rights Watch (24 November 2020)
https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/11/25/asian-nations-reject-un-vote-against-death-penalty
(Bangkok) – Eleven countries from the Asia-Pacific region were among the small minority that voted against a United Nations resolution opposing the death penalty, Human Rights Watch said today. On November 17, 120 UN member states voted in favor of a resolution in the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly reiterating a call for a moratorium on the use of capital punishment. In December, the General Assembly plenary is expected to adopt the resolution, which shows the world’s rejection of this inherently cruel and irrevocable form of punishment.
Only 39 countries voted against the resolution. The 11 from the Asia-Pacific region were: Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, China, India, Japan, the Maldives, North Korea, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Singapore, and Tonga.
“It’s no surprise the governments that voted against a death penalty moratorium include some of the most serious rights violators in the world,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The fact that 11 Asian and Pacific governments voted against the UN resolution, including many that still carry out executions, shows how far the region needs to go to develop justice systems that respect human rights.”
The countries voting in favor of the moratorium should urgently take necessary steps towards abolition of the death penalty, and should press the 39 countries that voted against the measure to place a moratorium on executions. Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances because of its inherent cruelty.
The UN member states’ call for a moratorium effectively neutralizes an amendment to the resolution that Singapore introduced on behalf of 33 countries – including many in Asia – that asserts the “sovereign right of all countries to develop their own legal systems, including determining appropriate legal penalties.”
The resolution went further than previous versions. For the first time, women were acknowledged as a group who are subject to the discriminatory application of the death penalty. Disadvantaged and minority groups were again recognized as disproportionately represented among death row inmates. The resolution raised concerns about the use of the death penalty against children, in particular the need to restrict the death penalty’s use when an individuals’ age cannot be determined.
Previous resolutions called for governments to be transparent about the death penalty by publishing information about the age, race, sex, and nationality of people on death row, including the numbers of people sentenced, awaiting executions, and those whose sentences were commuted on appeal. Asian governments that still use capital punishment have shown little transparency regarding death penalty statistics, Human Rights Watch said.
The seven General Assembly resolutions calling for a moratorium on executions adopted since 2007 demonstrate a growing global consensus against the death penalty. However, many people in Asia are still being put to death. At the end of 2019, at least 26,604 people were languishing on death row around the world. By the end of 2019, Pakistan had one of the world’s largest known death row populations. Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Sri Lanka also have swelling numbers of inmates on death row, while in Singapore there are reportedly 50 people on death row who have exhausted all appeals. In many of these countries, the death penalty is mandatory for a range of offenses, including non-violent drug offenses, despite calls from the UN special rapporteurs on summary executions and on torture that “executions for drug crimes amount to a violation of international law and are unlawful killings.”
It is largely accepted that China is the world’s largest executioner followed by Iran. Dui Hua, a nongovernmental organization that tracks China’s death penalty statistics, estimates that 84,000 executions occurred in China between 2002 to 2018, though the numbers appear to be declining significantly since a 2007 decision allowing the Supreme People’s Court to review all death sentences. The exact numbers of death sentences carried out in China are unknown and remain a state secret. It has not been possible to get accurate figures from North Korea, Vietnam, and Laos. Human Rights Watch has documented public executions in North Korea, especially in political prison camps (kwanliso). Despite executions being considered a state secret in Vietnam, the Ministry of Public Security reported in early 2017 that authorities executed 429 persons between 2013 and 2016.
Malaysia, which voted in favor of the moratorium, holds approximately 1,324 people on death row. In October 2018, the Malaysian government imposed a moratorium on executions and announced its intention to abolish the death penalty. In March 2019, however, it backtracked, announcing that it would maintain the death penalty but would merely end the mandatory application of the punishment. While the moratorium on executions appears to remain in place, the Malaysian government has yet to take steps to end the use of the mandatory death penalty.
Indonesia, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam were among the 24 countries that abstained from voting. Indonesia, which has not executed anyone since 2016, has approximately 274 people awaiting execution, including 60 people who have been on death row for 10 years. At least 80 death sentences were handed down in 2019, a significant increase from the 48 handed down in 2018.
More than 15 Asia-Pacific countries voted in favor of the resolution. These included Sri Lanka and the Philippines, despite their moving in the opposite direction. Last year, the Sri Lankan government threatened to end its 43-year de facto moratorium, which the courts rejected. Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has repeatedly threatened to reinstate the death penalty.
In its December 2007 resolution calling for a worldwide moratorium on the death penalty, the UN General Assembly stated that “there is no conclusive evidence of the death penalty’s deterrent value and that any miscarriage or failure of justice in the death penalty’s implementation is irreversible and irreparable.”
“The shocking number of people sitting on death row in Asia make the region an aberration in the global move towards abolition of the death penalty,” Robertson said. “UN member states that supported the moratorium should band together to put concerted pressure on countries to get rid of the death penalty and commute all death sentences.”
https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/11/25/asian-nations-reject-un-vote-against-death-penalty
(Bangkok) – Eleven countries from the Asia-Pacific region were among the small minority that voted against a United Nations resolution opposing the death penalty, Human Rights Watch said today. On November 17, 120 UN member states voted in favor of a resolution in the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly reiterating a call for a moratorium on the use of capital punishment. In December, the General Assembly plenary is expected to adopt the resolution, which shows the world’s rejection of this inherently cruel and irrevocable form of punishment.
Only 39 countries voted against the resolution. The 11 from the Asia-Pacific region were: Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, China, India, Japan, the Maldives, North Korea, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Singapore, and Tonga.
“It’s no surprise the governments that voted against a death penalty moratorium include some of the most serious rights violators in the world,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The fact that 11 Asian and Pacific governments voted against the UN resolution, including many that still carry out executions, shows how far the region needs to go to develop justice systems that respect human rights.”
The countries voting in favor of the moratorium should urgently take necessary steps towards abolition of the death penalty, and should press the 39 countries that voted against the measure to place a moratorium on executions. Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances because of its inherent cruelty.
The UN member states’ call for a moratorium effectively neutralizes an amendment to the resolution that Singapore introduced on behalf of 33 countries – including many in Asia – that asserts the “sovereign right of all countries to develop their own legal systems, including determining appropriate legal penalties.”
The resolution went further than previous versions. For the first time, women were acknowledged as a group who are subject to the discriminatory application of the death penalty. Disadvantaged and minority groups were again recognized as disproportionately represented among death row inmates. The resolution raised concerns about the use of the death penalty against children, in particular the need to restrict the death penalty’s use when an individuals’ age cannot be determined.
Previous resolutions called for governments to be transparent about the death penalty by publishing information about the age, race, sex, and nationality of people on death row, including the numbers of people sentenced, awaiting executions, and those whose sentences were commuted on appeal. Asian governments that still use capital punishment have shown little transparency regarding death penalty statistics, Human Rights Watch said.
The seven General Assembly resolutions calling for a moratorium on executions adopted since 2007 demonstrate a growing global consensus against the death penalty. However, many people in Asia are still being put to death. At the end of 2019, at least 26,604 people were languishing on death row around the world. By the end of 2019, Pakistan had one of the world’s largest known death row populations. Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Sri Lanka also have swelling numbers of inmates on death row, while in Singapore there are reportedly 50 people on death row who have exhausted all appeals. In many of these countries, the death penalty is mandatory for a range of offenses, including non-violent drug offenses, despite calls from the UN special rapporteurs on summary executions and on torture that “executions for drug crimes amount to a violation of international law and are unlawful killings.”
It is largely accepted that China is the world’s largest executioner followed by Iran. Dui Hua, a nongovernmental organization that tracks China’s death penalty statistics, estimates that 84,000 executions occurred in China between 2002 to 2018, though the numbers appear to be declining significantly since a 2007 decision allowing the Supreme People’s Court to review all death sentences. The exact numbers of death sentences carried out in China are unknown and remain a state secret. It has not been possible to get accurate figures from North Korea, Vietnam, and Laos. Human Rights Watch has documented public executions in North Korea, especially in political prison camps (kwanliso). Despite executions being considered a state secret in Vietnam, the Ministry of Public Security reported in early 2017 that authorities executed 429 persons between 2013 and 2016.
Malaysia, which voted in favor of the moratorium, holds approximately 1,324 people on death row. In October 2018, the Malaysian government imposed a moratorium on executions and announced its intention to abolish the death penalty. In March 2019, however, it backtracked, announcing that it would maintain the death penalty but would merely end the mandatory application of the punishment. While the moratorium on executions appears to remain in place, the Malaysian government has yet to take steps to end the use of the mandatory death penalty.
Indonesia, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam were among the 24 countries that abstained from voting. Indonesia, which has not executed anyone since 2016, has approximately 274 people awaiting execution, including 60 people who have been on death row for 10 years. At least 80 death sentences were handed down in 2019, a significant increase from the 48 handed down in 2018.
More than 15 Asia-Pacific countries voted in favor of the resolution. These included Sri Lanka and the Philippines, despite their moving in the opposite direction. Last year, the Sri Lankan government threatened to end its 43-year de facto moratorium, which the courts rejected. Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has repeatedly threatened to reinstate the death penalty.
In its December 2007 resolution calling for a worldwide moratorium on the death penalty, the UN General Assembly stated that “there is no conclusive evidence of the death penalty’s deterrent value and that any miscarriage or failure of justice in the death penalty’s implementation is irreversible and irreparable.”
“The shocking number of people sitting on death row in Asia make the region an aberration in the global move towards abolition of the death penalty,” Robertson said. “UN member states that supported the moratorium should band together to put concerted pressure on countries to get rid of the death penalty and commute all death sentences.”
Monday 2 November 2020
Saudi justice reform falls short as the death penalty is still inflicted on minors
Source: Asia News.it (30 October 2020)
http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Saudi-justice-reform-falls-short-as-the-death-penalty-is-still-inflicted-on-minors-51453.html
Riyadh (AsiaNews) – Saudi prosecutors continue to seek the death penalty in cases involving minors even though the practice was cancelled for crimes committed before the age of 18, Human Rights Watch (HRW) reports.
According to the human rights advocacy group, Saudi prosecutors recently called for the execution of eight people, accused of offences of opinion and protest-related crimes. In one case the accused was only nine at the time of the alleged crime.
Last April, King Salman issued a royal decree ending death sentences for crimes committed by minors, imposing instead a maximum sentence of 10 years in a juvenile detention facility. However, the decree has not yet taken effect, and rights groups warn that the death penalty is still in place.
Under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Saudi Arabia has signed, the death penalty is outlawed for crimes committed by minors.
Overall, the Wahhabi kingdom has one of the worst human rights records in the world with violations committed mainly by its police and security forces.
Human Rights Watch recently obtained and analysed the charge sheets for two group trials that included the eight men in 2019.
Some of the crimes listed were allegedly committed when the defendants were aged 14 to 17. One of them, now 18, is charged for a nonviolent crime he allegedly committed when he was 9. All eight men have been in pretrial detention for up to two years.
“Saudi spin doctors are marketing judicial reforms as progress,” said Michael Page, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. But the reality is very different since “prosecutors appear to blatantly ignore them and carry on as usual”.
For Page, “If Saudi Arabia is serious about reforming its criminal justice system, it should start by banning the death penalty against alleged child offenders in all cases.”
In the case of the eight on trial, the prosecutor, who responds directly to the monarch, has levelled charges that do not resemble recognisable crimes, such as “seeking to destabilise the social fabric by participating in protests and funeral processions,” “chanting slogans hostile to the regime,” and “seeking to incite discord and division.”
All of the accused are from Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province, where most of the country’s persecuted Shia minority live.
What is more, the new decree does not apply to qisas (retributive justice offences, usually for murder) or hudud crimes, serious crimes defined under the country’s interpretation of Islamic law that carry specific penalties.
Sources told HRW that two of the defendants, al-Nimr and al-Faraj, were denied legal counsel and tortured during questioning at the start of their detention.
Last year, Saudi Arabia executed 37 people in a mass execution. One of them was a minor at the time.
http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Saudi-justice-reform-falls-short-as-the-death-penalty-is-still-inflicted-on-minors-51453.html
Riyadh (AsiaNews) – Saudi prosecutors continue to seek the death penalty in cases involving minors even though the practice was cancelled for crimes committed before the age of 18, Human Rights Watch (HRW) reports.
According to the human rights advocacy group, Saudi prosecutors recently called for the execution of eight people, accused of offences of opinion and protest-related crimes. In one case the accused was only nine at the time of the alleged crime.
Last April, King Salman issued a royal decree ending death sentences for crimes committed by minors, imposing instead a maximum sentence of 10 years in a juvenile detention facility. However, the decree has not yet taken effect, and rights groups warn that the death penalty is still in place.
Under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Saudi Arabia has signed, the death penalty is outlawed for crimes committed by minors.
Overall, the Wahhabi kingdom has one of the worst human rights records in the world with violations committed mainly by its police and security forces.
Human Rights Watch recently obtained and analysed the charge sheets for two group trials that included the eight men in 2019.
Some of the crimes listed were allegedly committed when the defendants were aged 14 to 17. One of them, now 18, is charged for a nonviolent crime he allegedly committed when he was 9. All eight men have been in pretrial detention for up to two years.
“Saudi spin doctors are marketing judicial reforms as progress,” said Michael Page, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. But the reality is very different since “prosecutors appear to blatantly ignore them and carry on as usual”.
For Page, “If Saudi Arabia is serious about reforming its criminal justice system, it should start by banning the death penalty against alleged child offenders in all cases.”
In the case of the eight on trial, the prosecutor, who responds directly to the monarch, has levelled charges that do not resemble recognisable crimes, such as “seeking to destabilise the social fabric by participating in protests and funeral processions,” “chanting slogans hostile to the regime,” and “seeking to incite discord and division.”
All of the accused are from Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province, where most of the country’s persecuted Shia minority live.
What is more, the new decree does not apply to qisas (retributive justice offences, usually for murder) or hudud crimes, serious crimes defined under the country’s interpretation of Islamic law that carry specific penalties.
Sources told HRW that two of the defendants, al-Nimr and al-Faraj, were denied legal counsel and tortured during questioning at the start of their detention.
Last year, Saudi Arabia executed 37 people in a mass execution. One of them was a minor at the time.
Wednesday 30 September 2020
Kazakhstan takes important step towards abolishing death penalty
Source: Amnesty International (24 September 2020)
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/09/kazakhstan-takes-important-step-towards-abolishing-death-penalty/
Reacting to news that Kazakhstan has signed the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, committing it to abolish the death penalty, Marie Struthers, Amnesty International’s Director for Eastern Europe and Central Asia, said:
“This news encourages us as Kazakhstan gets closer to join the ever-growing family of nations that have left this shameful punishment behind. Kazakhstan must now take the final step by abolishing the death penalty in law for all crimes and ratifying the Optional Protocol without reservations.”
Russia, Tajikistan and Belarus are now the only three countries in Europe and Central Asia which haven’t yet signed or ratified the Second Optional Protocol. Belarus is the only country in the region still to carry out executions.
“Abolition of this type of punishment globally remains a priority for Amnesty International.”
Background
Kazakhstani President Kassym-Zhomart Tokayev announced that his country would join the protocol on the abolition of the death penalty in his speech at the 74th session of the UN General Assembly in December 2019.
Kazakhstan retains the death penalty for terrorism-related offences and has had an indefinite moratorium on the use of the death penalty since 2003. Courts stopped imposing the death penalty in 2004, but an exception was made in 2016, when the death penalty was imposed on a man who was convicted of a mass shooting in Almaty. He remains the only person on death row in Kazakhstan.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/09/kazakhstan-takes-important-step-towards-abolishing-death-penalty/
Reacting to news that Kazakhstan has signed the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, committing it to abolish the death penalty, Marie Struthers, Amnesty International’s Director for Eastern Europe and Central Asia, said:
“This news encourages us as Kazakhstan gets closer to join the ever-growing family of nations that have left this shameful punishment behind. Kazakhstan must now take the final step by abolishing the death penalty in law for all crimes and ratifying the Optional Protocol without reservations.”
Russia, Tajikistan and Belarus are now the only three countries in Europe and Central Asia which haven’t yet signed or ratified the Second Optional Protocol. Belarus is the only country in the region still to carry out executions.
“Abolition of this type of punishment globally remains a priority for Amnesty International.”
Background
Kazakhstani President Kassym-Zhomart Tokayev announced that his country would join the protocol on the abolition of the death penalty in his speech at the 74th session of the UN General Assembly in December 2019.
Kazakhstan retains the death penalty for terrorism-related offences and has had an indefinite moratorium on the use of the death penalty since 2003. Courts stopped imposing the death penalty in 2004, but an exception was made in 2016, when the death penalty was imposed on a man who was convicted of a mass shooting in Almaty. He remains the only person on death row in Kazakhstan.
Saturday 19 September 2020
Singaporean Earns Temporary Reprieve in Capital Drug Case
Source: The Diplomat (17 September 2020)
https://thediplomat.com/2020/09/singaporean-earns-temporary-reprieve-in-capital-drug-case/
Thanks to a last minute judicial intervention, a Singaporean national has narrowly avoided the sentence imposed on him by the country’s High Court in 2016. At dawn on September 18, the 44-year-old Syed Suhail Bin Syed Zin was scheduled to be executed by hanging at Singapore’s Changi Prison for drug trafficking offenses.
The reprieve was announced on Facebook today by the human rights lawyer M Ravi, who wrote that judges had agreed to an interim stay of execution. The decision will delay the sentence pending an appeal to the High Court’s earlier dismissal of Ravi’s request for a judicial review into Syed’s case.
Before the last minute stay, Syed’s case had attracted considerable attention from death penalty abolitionists and human rights groups, who described it as another instance of the inhumanity of the death penalty in general, and the cruelties of Singapore’s system in particular.
According to High Court documents, Syed was arrested in August 2011 and charged with possession of 38.84 grams of heroin. In January 2016, the court found Syed guilty of drug trafficking under Singapore’s draconian Misuse of Drugs Act. The law carries a mandatory death sentence for offenses involving more than 15 grams of heroin.
Singapore’s use of the death penalty is intimately associated with the city-state’s zero tolerance policy toward illicit drugs. Over the years it has resulted in dozens of hangings, including of many foreigners. In May, Punithan Genasan, a 37-year-old Malaysian national, was sentenced to death via Zoom on a heroin trafficking charge dating back to 2011.
Singapore is one of four countries known to have carried out executions for drug-related offenses in recent years, according to Amnesty International.
Since Syed’s execution date was announced on September 14, death penalty abolitionists have highlighted the callous way that his case was handled. According to Think Center, a local non-governmental organization, Syed’s family was informed barely a week ahead of the set execution, and told to make funeral arrangements. No allowance had been made for them to travel from Malaysia before the execution of the sentence, given the ongoing COVID-19 restrictions. The organization described the forty-something Syed’s sentence as “a grim reminder that Singapore’s factory of death has never ceased.”
Then there is the question of whether the death penalty even serves its intended function. In a recent article on Medium, Singaporean journalist and anti-death penalty campaigner Kirsten Han argued that the Singaporean government’s view of the death penalty – that it deterred drug use, and therefore saved more lives in the long run – failed to address the complex root causes of drug use and dependency. According to the organization Human Rights Watch, Syed began using heroin in 1999, and spent two extended stints in a drug rehabilitation center trying to recover from his addiction before his arrest on trafficking charges.
“At the end of the day, the capital punishment regime is a lazy way to ‘solve’ a problem,” Han wrote. “It allows us to take the ‘easy’ way out and not talk about things like the intersection of class and race when it comes to crime and policing, or about more holistic and restorative ways of dealing with drug use and abuse.”
Shortly after the announcement of the reprieve, Han welcomed the news, but said that similar stays had been granted in the past and still ended in execution. “This development gives us hope and time,” she told The Diplomat, “but I don’t think we can say it’s any indication that the Singaporean judiciary is softening on capital punishment.” Singaporean courts have the power to grant clemency, but have not done this for a death row inmate since 1998.
On the same day, however, Singapore’s Court of Appeal also reversed its own decision to convict a Nigerian national of a capital drug trafficking charge, nearly a decade after his arrest. This news casts at least a glimmer of hope that lawyers working on Syed’s behalf will manage to overturn his sentence, if not his conviction.
“I dream of better days because hope is my only possession,” Syed wrote in a handwritten letter that he sent to his lawyer M Ravi a few days before his scheduled hanging. He added: “I love Singapore. Everything I love is here. Being Singaporean, though, has expedited my execution.”
Thanks to the lawyers and activists toiling on his behalf, that execution has been delayed – at least for now.
https://thediplomat.com/2020/09/singaporean-earns-temporary-reprieve-in-capital-drug-case/
Thanks to a last minute judicial intervention, a Singaporean national has narrowly avoided the sentence imposed on him by the country’s High Court in 2016. At dawn on September 18, the 44-year-old Syed Suhail Bin Syed Zin was scheduled to be executed by hanging at Singapore’s Changi Prison for drug trafficking offenses.
The reprieve was announced on Facebook today by the human rights lawyer M Ravi, who wrote that judges had agreed to an interim stay of execution. The decision will delay the sentence pending an appeal to the High Court’s earlier dismissal of Ravi’s request for a judicial review into Syed’s case.
Before the last minute stay, Syed’s case had attracted considerable attention from death penalty abolitionists and human rights groups, who described it as another instance of the inhumanity of the death penalty in general, and the cruelties of Singapore’s system in particular.
According to High Court documents, Syed was arrested in August 2011 and charged with possession of 38.84 grams of heroin. In January 2016, the court found Syed guilty of drug trafficking under Singapore’s draconian Misuse of Drugs Act. The law carries a mandatory death sentence for offenses involving more than 15 grams of heroin.
Singapore’s use of the death penalty is intimately associated with the city-state’s zero tolerance policy toward illicit drugs. Over the years it has resulted in dozens of hangings, including of many foreigners. In May, Punithan Genasan, a 37-year-old Malaysian national, was sentenced to death via Zoom on a heroin trafficking charge dating back to 2011.
Singapore is one of four countries known to have carried out executions for drug-related offenses in recent years, according to Amnesty International.
Since Syed’s execution date was announced on September 14, death penalty abolitionists have highlighted the callous way that his case was handled. According to Think Center, a local non-governmental organization, Syed’s family was informed barely a week ahead of the set execution, and told to make funeral arrangements. No allowance had been made for them to travel from Malaysia before the execution of the sentence, given the ongoing COVID-19 restrictions. The organization described the forty-something Syed’s sentence as “a grim reminder that Singapore’s factory of death has never ceased.”
Then there is the question of whether the death penalty even serves its intended function. In a recent article on Medium, Singaporean journalist and anti-death penalty campaigner Kirsten Han argued that the Singaporean government’s view of the death penalty – that it deterred drug use, and therefore saved more lives in the long run – failed to address the complex root causes of drug use and dependency. According to the organization Human Rights Watch, Syed began using heroin in 1999, and spent two extended stints in a drug rehabilitation center trying to recover from his addiction before his arrest on trafficking charges.
“At the end of the day, the capital punishment regime is a lazy way to ‘solve’ a problem,” Han wrote. “It allows us to take the ‘easy’ way out and not talk about things like the intersection of class and race when it comes to crime and policing, or about more holistic and restorative ways of dealing with drug use and abuse.”
Shortly after the announcement of the reprieve, Han welcomed the news, but said that similar stays had been granted in the past and still ended in execution. “This development gives us hope and time,” she told The Diplomat, “but I don’t think we can say it’s any indication that the Singaporean judiciary is softening on capital punishment.” Singaporean courts have the power to grant clemency, but have not done this for a death row inmate since 1998.
On the same day, however, Singapore’s Court of Appeal also reversed its own decision to convict a Nigerian national of a capital drug trafficking charge, nearly a decade after his arrest. This news casts at least a glimmer of hope that lawyers working on Syed’s behalf will manage to overturn his sentence, if not his conviction.
“I dream of better days because hope is my only possession,” Syed wrote in a handwritten letter that he sent to his lawyer M Ravi a few days before his scheduled hanging. He added: “I love Singapore. Everything I love is here. Being Singaporean, though, has expedited my execution.”
Thanks to the lawyers and activists toiling on his behalf, that execution has been delayed – at least for now.
Sunday 30 August 2020
Saudi Arabia, a world leader in executions, weighs ending capital punishment for drug crimes
Source: Washington Post (27 August 2020)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/saudi-arabia-executions-mbs/2020/08/26/b6488bb4-e314-11ea-82d8-5e55d47e90ca_story.html
Saudi Arabia is considering ending the use of the death penalty for drug-related offenses, a change that could spare the lives of dozens of prisoners in the kingdom every year, according to a Saudi official and human rights groups that monitor capital punishment in the country.
The initiative appeared aimed at countering outrage over the kingdom’s human rights record, including its mass executions. The consequences of removing drug offenses from the list of capital crimes could be significant: Nearly 40 percent of the roughly 800 executions carried out in Saudi Arabia over the past five years were for offenses such as narcotics trafficking, according to Reprieve, a human rights group that tracks the use of the death penalty in the kingdom.
A Saudi official said that the kingdom was in the process of revising penalties for drug-related crimes and that a decision to “abolish” capital punishment for drug offenses was “expected very soon.” The official spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal government discussions.
Executions have long been at the heart of global criticism of Saudi Arabia, highlighting an opaque justice system that puts large numbers of people to death every year, generally by beheading. Until recently, many executions were carried out in public squares.
In the last few years, Saudi Arabia, an absolute monarchy, has lagged behind only Iran and China in annual executions, according to data published by the Death Penalty Information Center.
Human rights advocates said they would welcome any reduction in executions but said the government had yet to produce evidence of a policy change. The government, for instance, has not issued a revised law or informed death row inmates that sentences would be commuted.
So far this year, executions appear to have fallen dramatically: Since January, at least 16 people have been put to death, compared with 140 in the same period in 2019 and 88 in 2018, according to tallies by the European Saudi Organization for Human Rights, or ESOHR. The group and other organizations said it was unclear whether the decrease was due to the coronavirus pandemic or part of a government-imposed moratorium.
“We hope. Always, we are praying,” said Zeinab Abo al-Kheir, whose brother, Hussein Abo al-Kheir, a Jordanian national, was convicted in 2015 of drug-trafficking charges and could be executed at any time, according to Reprieve, which has advocated on his behalf.
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the kingdom’s de facto ruler, spoke of abolishing the death penalty for some crimes two years ago. In an interview with Time magazine, Mohammed said there were a “few areas” where it would be possible to reduce death sentences to life in prison, without specifying what crimes would be affected.
Saudi authorities do not appear to be contemplating ending capital punishment for murder and several other crimes for which penalties are prescribed by Islamic law. But drug offenses and other nonviolent crimes generally belong to a category of offenses known as “tazir,” in which punishments are left to the discretion of a judge.
Judges rely on a 1987 ruling by religious scholars that prescribes the death penalty for people who bring drugs into the country, as well as a 2005 law that calls for capital punishment in drug-trafficking cases, according to a 2018 report by Human Rights Watch on drug-related executions.
Hussein Abo al-Kheir, the death row inmate, was arrested after crossing the border from Jordan into Saudi Arabia in May 2014 and was charged with possessing narcotics after the authorities said they found a large quantity of amphetamines in the car, according to a summary of his case by ESOHR.
He confessed after he was tortured for nearly two weeks, the group said. He later recanted, but a court found him guilty of drug trafficking and sentenced him to death, largely based on his confession, according to ESOHR. His sister, Zeinab, who lives in Canada, said Hussein has eight children and had been working as a driver for a Saudi family at the time of his arrest.
Saudi Arabia’s leaders have searched for ways to repair the country’s global image since Saudi government agents killed and dismembered journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul in October 2018. The kingdom has also faced criticism for twice in recent years carrying out mass executions of people convicted of “terrorism” charges, many in trials that were criticized as unfair by human rights groups.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/saudi-arabia-executions-mbs/2020/08/26/b6488bb4-e314-11ea-82d8-5e55d47e90ca_story.html
Saudi Arabia is considering ending the use of the death penalty for drug-related offenses, a change that could spare the lives of dozens of prisoners in the kingdom every year, according to a Saudi official and human rights groups that monitor capital punishment in the country.
The initiative appeared aimed at countering outrage over the kingdom’s human rights record, including its mass executions. The consequences of removing drug offenses from the list of capital crimes could be significant: Nearly 40 percent of the roughly 800 executions carried out in Saudi Arabia over the past five years were for offenses such as narcotics trafficking, according to Reprieve, a human rights group that tracks the use of the death penalty in the kingdom.
A Saudi official said that the kingdom was in the process of revising penalties for drug-related crimes and that a decision to “abolish” capital punishment for drug offenses was “expected very soon.” The official spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal government discussions.
Executions have long been at the heart of global criticism of Saudi Arabia, highlighting an opaque justice system that puts large numbers of people to death every year, generally by beheading. Until recently, many executions were carried out in public squares.
In the last few years, Saudi Arabia, an absolute monarchy, has lagged behind only Iran and China in annual executions, according to data published by the Death Penalty Information Center.
Human rights advocates said they would welcome any reduction in executions but said the government had yet to produce evidence of a policy change. The government, for instance, has not issued a revised law or informed death row inmates that sentences would be commuted.
So far this year, executions appear to have fallen dramatically: Since January, at least 16 people have been put to death, compared with 140 in the same period in 2019 and 88 in 2018, according to tallies by the European Saudi Organization for Human Rights, or ESOHR. The group and other organizations said it was unclear whether the decrease was due to the coronavirus pandemic or part of a government-imposed moratorium.
“We hope. Always, we are praying,” said Zeinab Abo al-Kheir, whose brother, Hussein Abo al-Kheir, a Jordanian national, was convicted in 2015 of drug-trafficking charges and could be executed at any time, according to Reprieve, which has advocated on his behalf.
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the kingdom’s de facto ruler, spoke of abolishing the death penalty for some crimes two years ago. In an interview with Time magazine, Mohammed said there were a “few areas” where it would be possible to reduce death sentences to life in prison, without specifying what crimes would be affected.
Saudi authorities do not appear to be contemplating ending capital punishment for murder and several other crimes for which penalties are prescribed by Islamic law. But drug offenses and other nonviolent crimes generally belong to a category of offenses known as “tazir,” in which punishments are left to the discretion of a judge.
Judges rely on a 1987 ruling by religious scholars that prescribes the death penalty for people who bring drugs into the country, as well as a 2005 law that calls for capital punishment in drug-trafficking cases, according to a 2018 report by Human Rights Watch on drug-related executions.
Hussein Abo al-Kheir, the death row inmate, was arrested after crossing the border from Jordan into Saudi Arabia in May 2014 and was charged with possessing narcotics after the authorities said they found a large quantity of amphetamines in the car, according to a summary of his case by ESOHR.
He confessed after he was tortured for nearly two weeks, the group said. He later recanted, but a court found him guilty of drug trafficking and sentenced him to death, largely based on his confession, according to ESOHR. His sister, Zeinab, who lives in Canada, said Hussein has eight children and had been working as a driver for a Saudi family at the time of his arrest.
Saudi Arabia’s leaders have searched for ways to repair the country’s global image since Saudi government agents killed and dismembered journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul in October 2018. The kingdom has also faced criticism for twice in recent years carrying out mass executions of people convicted of “terrorism” charges, many in trials that were criticized as unfair by human rights groups.
In one of the mass executions, in April 2019, 37 people were put to death, including at least two who were minors at the time of their alleged crimes.
“Certainly, the authorities have been looking for ways they can implement reforms on some of the issues they find embarrassing, and which have given Saudi Arabia a really bad reputation,” said Adam Coogle, a researcher at Human Rights Watch who follows Saudi Arabia, referring to changes that have granted women more rights and abolished punishments like flogging.
Whatever the motivations, though, “these are important steps forward. If they follow through with this, there are a lot of people who won’t die,” he said.
Saudi Arabia’s advisory Shura Council has over the past year discussed ending the death penalty for the category of crimes left to a judge’s discretion, according to local media reports. And in April, the government announced that minors would no longer be put to death for such crimes.
“Basically, they stopped executing people for nonviolent offenses in February,” said James Suzano, the director of legal affairs for ESOHR. It was impossible to know whether the moratorium was deliberate or a consequence of the pandemic, which had slowed the work of state institutions, but there was “a lot of circumstantial evidence pointing to Saudi Arabia taking this idea seriously,” Suzano said, referring to a partial execution ban.
But, he added, “we have not seen any implementing legislation.”
An article in July in the Times of London quoted unnamed sources as saying a law on ending the death penalty for nonviolent tazir crimes had not yet been finalized.
A spokesman for the Saudi Embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to questions about whether the country’s policy on the death penalty had changed.
Abdullah Alaoudh, a visiting assistant professor at George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs and a critic of the Saudi government, said the kingdom’s approach to revising the death penalty, if confirmed, reminds him of a quote from Malcolm X: “If you stick a knife in my back nine inches and then pull it out six inches, there’s no progress, is there?”
The Saudi efforts were “better than the whole knife,” said Alaoudh, whose father, Salman al-Awda, a popular Saudi cleric, is imprisoned and facing the death penalty in the kingdom after criticizing the monarchy.
“I think it is good that they are thinking this way,” he said, adding that it was not just Saudi executions that needed to be scrutinized, but “the whole criminal procedure system.”
“Certainly, the authorities have been looking for ways they can implement reforms on some of the issues they find embarrassing, and which have given Saudi Arabia a really bad reputation,” said Adam Coogle, a researcher at Human Rights Watch who follows Saudi Arabia, referring to changes that have granted women more rights and abolished punishments like flogging.
Whatever the motivations, though, “these are important steps forward. If they follow through with this, there are a lot of people who won’t die,” he said.
Saudi Arabia’s advisory Shura Council has over the past year discussed ending the death penalty for the category of crimes left to a judge’s discretion, according to local media reports. And in April, the government announced that minors would no longer be put to death for such crimes.
“Basically, they stopped executing people for nonviolent offenses in February,” said James Suzano, the director of legal affairs for ESOHR. It was impossible to know whether the moratorium was deliberate or a consequence of the pandemic, which had slowed the work of state institutions, but there was “a lot of circumstantial evidence pointing to Saudi Arabia taking this idea seriously,” Suzano said, referring to a partial execution ban.
But, he added, “we have not seen any implementing legislation.”
An article in July in the Times of London quoted unnamed sources as saying a law on ending the death penalty for nonviolent tazir crimes had not yet been finalized.
A spokesman for the Saudi Embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to questions about whether the country’s policy on the death penalty had changed.
Abdullah Alaoudh, a visiting assistant professor at George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs and a critic of the Saudi government, said the kingdom’s approach to revising the death penalty, if confirmed, reminds him of a quote from Malcolm X: “If you stick a knife in my back nine inches and then pull it out six inches, there’s no progress, is there?”
The Saudi efforts were “better than the whole knife,” said Alaoudh, whose father, Salman al-Awda, a popular Saudi cleric, is imprisoned and facing the death penalty in the kingdom after criticizing the monarchy.
“I think it is good that they are thinking this way,” he said, adding that it was not just Saudi executions that needed to be scrutinized, but “the whole criminal procedure system.”
Thursday 27 August 2020
Cabinet to mull scrapping death penalty for drug offences
Source: The Malaysian Reserve (27 August 2020)
https://themalaysianreserve.com/2020/08/14/cabinet-to-mull-scrapping-death-penalty-for-drug-offences/
THE Cabinet will review options to abolish capital punishment for drug trafficking offences, de facto Law Minister Datuk Takiyuddin Hassan said.
Following the final report by the special committee to review alternative sentences to the mandatory death penalty, which was submitted to the government on July 17, the minister said discussions will be held before a decision is made on the matter.
“The final report contains recommendations on alternative punishments for 11 offences that carry the mandatory death sentence, offences under the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (Act 234), and 21 offences that carry the discretionary death sentence,” he told the August house yesterday.
He was responding to Ramkarpal Singh (Pakatan Harapan [PH]-Bukit Gelugor) who asked the prime minister whether the government would abolish the death sentence for drug trafficking.
Takiyuddin added that the committee had also made recommendations for long-term improvements to the country’s justice system.
“The report is expected to be presented at a Cabinet meeting for consideration and approval.
“The findings are expected to answer the debate on whether the government will propose amending the punishment for drug trafficking to a minimum jail sentence so that punishments will be given based on the facts of each case,” he said.
According to the law minister, as of Aug 11, a total 918 prisoners have been sentenced to death under Section 39B of which 472 are Malaysians and 446 are non-citizens.
Under section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act, those in possession of 15g or more heroin and morphine; 1,000g or more opium (raw or prepared); 200g or more cannabis; and 40g or more cocaine will receive the mandatory death sentence.
Last year, a special committee was established to carry out the Compensation Penalty Study on Mandatory Death Penalty within four months from Sept 20, 2019, to Jan 31, 2020.
“The special committee submitted the study on July 17 instead of January as they needed more time.
“Regardless, it is the government’s intention for the changes to be implemented as soon as possible. Malaysia continues to engage in smart partnerships with countries that use their laws to curb drug abuse in addition to other measures used to address drug trafficking,” Takiyuddin said.
He emphasised that the government also takes international conventions into consideration.
“My predecessor has initiated this matter, for the national interest. We have conducted the study and I will evaluate as best as possible which stems from the previous government’s intent to make sure that justice is served.
“I give my assurance that we will fully consider the recommendations that have been set out by the committee,” he added.
The special committee members comprise former Federal Court judges, former Attorney General’s Chambers officers, former Prisons Department senior officers, the Bar Council, Human Rights Commission of Malaysia, academics, criminologists and civil society organisations.
https://themalaysianreserve.com/2020/08/14/cabinet-to-mull-scrapping-death-penalty-for-drug-offences/
THE Cabinet will review options to abolish capital punishment for drug trafficking offences, de facto Law Minister Datuk Takiyuddin Hassan said.
Following the final report by the special committee to review alternative sentences to the mandatory death penalty, which was submitted to the government on July 17, the minister said discussions will be held before a decision is made on the matter.
“The final report contains recommendations on alternative punishments for 11 offences that carry the mandatory death sentence, offences under the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (Act 234), and 21 offences that carry the discretionary death sentence,” he told the August house yesterday.
He was responding to Ramkarpal Singh (Pakatan Harapan [PH]-Bukit Gelugor) who asked the prime minister whether the government would abolish the death sentence for drug trafficking.
Takiyuddin added that the committee had also made recommendations for long-term improvements to the country’s justice system.
“The report is expected to be presented at a Cabinet meeting for consideration and approval.
“The findings are expected to answer the debate on whether the government will propose amending the punishment for drug trafficking to a minimum jail sentence so that punishments will be given based on the facts of each case,” he said.
According to the law minister, as of Aug 11, a total 918 prisoners have been sentenced to death under Section 39B of which 472 are Malaysians and 446 are non-citizens.
Under section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act, those in possession of 15g or more heroin and morphine; 1,000g or more opium (raw or prepared); 200g or more cannabis; and 40g or more cocaine will receive the mandatory death sentence.
Last year, a special committee was established to carry out the Compensation Penalty Study on Mandatory Death Penalty within four months from Sept 20, 2019, to Jan 31, 2020.
“The special committee submitted the study on July 17 instead of January as they needed more time.
“Regardless, it is the government’s intention for the changes to be implemented as soon as possible. Malaysia continues to engage in smart partnerships with countries that use their laws to curb drug abuse in addition to other measures used to address drug trafficking,” Takiyuddin said.
He emphasised that the government also takes international conventions into consideration.
“My predecessor has initiated this matter, for the national interest. We have conducted the study and I will evaluate as best as possible which stems from the previous government’s intent to make sure that justice is served.
“I give my assurance that we will fully consider the recommendations that have been set out by the committee,” he added.
The special committee members comprise former Federal Court judges, former Attorney General’s Chambers officers, former Prisons Department senior officers, the Bar Council, Human Rights Commission of Malaysia, academics, criminologists and civil society organisations.
Wednesday 19 August 2020
Philippines death penalty: A fight to stop the return of capital punishment
Source: BBC News (16 August 2020)
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-53762570
Capital punishment opponents expect a steep battle to prevent President Rodrigo Duterte from reimposing the death penalty, as he renews calls for the law as part of a "drug war" that has already killed thousands of Filipinos.
Few were surprised when Mr Duterte last month pushed, once again, to reintroduce the death penalty for drug offenders.
Since coming to power in 2016 he has waged a brutal crackdown on suspected drug users and dealers, issuing police with shoot-to-kill orders while encouraging citizens to kill drug users too.
Officially the police say they shoot only in self-defence and data shows more than 8,000 people have been killed in anti-drug operations. The nation's human rights commission estimates a toll as high as 27,000.
The piling bodies have been documented by photojournalists whose images of dead suspects face-down in pools of blood after a police raid, or strewn on streets in suspected vigilante murders, have shocked the world.
"The death penalty would give the state another weapon in its ongoing war against drugs," said Carlos Conde, Philippines researcher for Human Rights Watch.
Mr Duterte was restrained, at first, by the upper house of parliament. But last year's mid-term elections saw his allies win control of the senate and many fear the law could now be passed.
Twenty-three bills have been filed across both houses to reinstate the death penalty for drug crimes, including possession and sales. Committee deliberations began last week.
Nuanced views
Mr Conde says he would like to be proved wrong but senses the law "is as good as passed". He points to the swift recent passing of the controversial anti-terrorism law, and the speed at which ABS-CBN, a broadcaster critical of the president, was forced off air.
The move would be a breach of international human rights law.
But this is unlikely to faze Mr Duterte, who frequently expresses his disdain for human rights checks. Last year the Philippines left the International Criminal Court as it was probing accusations of crimes linked to his drugs campaign.
Surveys by the Social Weather Stations, a pollster, have shown the war on drugs remains popular among Filipinos despite experts saying the signature policy has failed to curb drug use or supply. A majority are also in favour of reinstating capital punishment.
But a closer look at the results shows an alternative picture, says Maria Socorro Diokno, secretary-general of the Free Legal Assistance Group, a network of human rights lawyers.
When presented with alternatives to capital punishment for crimes linked to illegal drugs, for instance, most favoured other options.
"They begin to think that death is not always the answer," said Ms Diokno.
Ms Diokno, who leads her group's anti-death penalty task force, has been braced for a battle with Mr Duterte ever since he vowed to bring back the death penalty as part of his election campaign.
She knows that minds can be changed because she was part of the movement that succeeded last time.
The death penalty has been abolished twice before - first in 1987 and then again in 2006 after being reinstated in 1993.
The last push for abolition was led by the Catholic church, which holds considerable influence over Filipinos in the largely Catholic country while Mr Duterte is an open critic.
Last week the Clergy of the Archdiocese of Manila condemned the "lack of independence and imprudence" of some lawmakers in supporting the president on the issue.
"We see such acts as betrayal of the people's interests and an implicit support to the creeping authoritarian tendencies exuded by this administration," it said.
Mistaken convictions
In his annual address to the nation last month Mr Duterte claimed reinstating the death penalty by lethal injection would "deter criminality".
But there is little evidence to prove that the death penalty can be a deterrent. Instead research has shown the punishment frequently affects the most disadvantaged.
In the Philippines alone the Supreme Court said in 2004 that 71.77% of death penalty verdicts handed by lower courts were wrong.
By imposing the death penalty for drug offences, the Philippines would also be moving away from what Harm Reduction International has identified as a downward global trend in using the penalty for such crimes.
It says 35 countries and territories retain capital punishment for drug offenders but only a few carry out executions regularly. Five of the eight "high application states" are in South East Asia.
Raymund Narag, an assistant professor of criminology at Southern Illinois University, knows firsthand the problems of a flawed criminal justice system.
He spent nearly seven years jailed in the Philippines as a pre-trial detainee before he was acquitted of a campus murder that took place at his university when he was 20.
The death penalty was still intact at the time and prosecutors had sought it for the 10 men charged.
Worse than his overcrowded cell and frequent prison riots, he says, was the "agony of waiting" for hearings.
"It was traumatic thinking that you can be put to death for a crime you did not commit," said Dr Narag, speaking from the US.
Now 46, he was one of five men eventually acquitted, while the others were sentenced to life imprisonment.
The experience has shaped his career. He now researches prolonged trial detention in the Philippines, while advocating for criminal justice reform.
Dr Narag says that if he hadn't managed to track down a key witness, an overseas worker, to return home and testify, proving he wasn't at the crime scene, he may have been convicted.
Through his advocacy he wants Filipinos to know the consequences of mistaken convictions, which could become mistaken executions if the law changes, in an already struggling justice system.
The scope of and timeline for the eventual death penalty bill put to vote in parliament is uncertain, especially during the Covid-19 pandemic. Some have argued the bill should not be a priority.
Gloria Lai, Asia director of the International Drug Policy Consortium, says the death penalty has not solved the drug-related problems of any country.
"It is the poor and vulnerable who bear the harsh punishment of criminal justice systems in grossly unjust ways," she says.
Capital punishment opponents expect a steep battle to prevent President Rodrigo Duterte from reimposing the death penalty, as he renews calls for the law as part of a "drug war" that has already killed thousands of Filipinos.
Few were surprised when Mr Duterte last month pushed, once again, to reintroduce the death penalty for drug offenders.
Since coming to power in 2016 he has waged a brutal crackdown on suspected drug users and dealers, issuing police with shoot-to-kill orders while encouraging citizens to kill drug users too.
Officially the police say they shoot only in self-defence and data shows more than 8,000 people have been killed in anti-drug operations. The nation's human rights commission estimates a toll as high as 27,000.
The piling bodies have been documented by photojournalists whose images of dead suspects face-down in pools of blood after a police raid, or strewn on streets in suspected vigilante murders, have shocked the world.
"The death penalty would give the state another weapon in its ongoing war against drugs," said Carlos Conde, Philippines researcher for Human Rights Watch.
Mr Duterte was restrained, at first, by the upper house of parliament. But last year's mid-term elections saw his allies win control of the senate and many fear the law could now be passed.
Twenty-three bills have been filed across both houses to reinstate the death penalty for drug crimes, including possession and sales. Committee deliberations began last week.
Nuanced views
Mr Conde says he would like to be proved wrong but senses the law "is as good as passed". He points to the swift recent passing of the controversial anti-terrorism law, and the speed at which ABS-CBN, a broadcaster critical of the president, was forced off air.
The move would be a breach of international human rights law.
But this is unlikely to faze Mr Duterte, who frequently expresses his disdain for human rights checks. Last year the Philippines left the International Criminal Court as it was probing accusations of crimes linked to his drugs campaign.
Surveys by the Social Weather Stations, a pollster, have shown the war on drugs remains popular among Filipinos despite experts saying the signature policy has failed to curb drug use or supply. A majority are also in favour of reinstating capital punishment.
But a closer look at the results shows an alternative picture, says Maria Socorro Diokno, secretary-general of the Free Legal Assistance Group, a network of human rights lawyers.
When presented with alternatives to capital punishment for crimes linked to illegal drugs, for instance, most favoured other options.
"They begin to think that death is not always the answer," said Ms Diokno.
Ms Diokno, who leads her group's anti-death penalty task force, has been braced for a battle with Mr Duterte ever since he vowed to bring back the death penalty as part of his election campaign.
She knows that minds can be changed because she was part of the movement that succeeded last time.
The death penalty has been abolished twice before - first in 1987 and then again in 2006 after being reinstated in 1993.
The last push for abolition was led by the Catholic church, which holds considerable influence over Filipinos in the largely Catholic country while Mr Duterte is an open critic.
Last week the Clergy of the Archdiocese of Manila condemned the "lack of independence and imprudence" of some lawmakers in supporting the president on the issue.
"We see such acts as betrayal of the people's interests and an implicit support to the creeping authoritarian tendencies exuded by this administration," it said.
Mistaken convictions
In his annual address to the nation last month Mr Duterte claimed reinstating the death penalty by lethal injection would "deter criminality".
But there is little evidence to prove that the death penalty can be a deterrent. Instead research has shown the punishment frequently affects the most disadvantaged.
In the Philippines alone the Supreme Court said in 2004 that 71.77% of death penalty verdicts handed by lower courts were wrong.
By imposing the death penalty for drug offences, the Philippines would also be moving away from what Harm Reduction International has identified as a downward global trend in using the penalty for such crimes.
It says 35 countries and territories retain capital punishment for drug offenders but only a few carry out executions regularly. Five of the eight "high application states" are in South East Asia.
Raymund Narag, an assistant professor of criminology at Southern Illinois University, knows firsthand the problems of a flawed criminal justice system.
He spent nearly seven years jailed in the Philippines as a pre-trial detainee before he was acquitted of a campus murder that took place at his university when he was 20.
The death penalty was still intact at the time and prosecutors had sought it for the 10 men charged.
Worse than his overcrowded cell and frequent prison riots, he says, was the "agony of waiting" for hearings.
"It was traumatic thinking that you can be put to death for a crime you did not commit," said Dr Narag, speaking from the US.
Now 46, he was one of five men eventually acquitted, while the others were sentenced to life imprisonment.
The experience has shaped his career. He now researches prolonged trial detention in the Philippines, while advocating for criminal justice reform.
Dr Narag says that if he hadn't managed to track down a key witness, an overseas worker, to return home and testify, proving he wasn't at the crime scene, he may have been convicted.
Through his advocacy he wants Filipinos to know the consequences of mistaken convictions, which could become mistaken executions if the law changes, in an already struggling justice system.
The scope of and timeline for the eventual death penalty bill put to vote in parliament is uncertain, especially during the Covid-19 pandemic. Some have argued the bill should not be a priority.
Gloria Lai, Asia director of the International Drug Policy Consortium, says the death penalty has not solved the drug-related problems of any country.
"It is the poor and vulnerable who bear the harsh punishment of criminal justice systems in grossly unjust ways," she says.
Sunday 9 August 2020
‘Do Not Execute’ campaign rocks Iran judiciary
Source: Asia Times (7 August 2020)
https://asiatimes.com/2020/08/do-not-execute-campaign-rocks-iran-judiciary/
November 2019 marked one of the gloomiest junctures of the
21st century for Iranians, when in a timespan of less than two weeks, angry
protests by large groups of people against the overnight spike in the price of
fuel triggered a violent response by the government and some 230 people were
killed, according to the official statistics, while a report by Reuters put the
number of casualties at 1,500.
The protests, which first erupted in oil-rich Khuzestan province and quickly mushroomed across the country, were initially an expression of outrage over the 300% rise in the price of gasoline, in a country gripped by international sanctions and deep-seated economic disparities.
However, they soon evolved into a venue for disgruntled Iranians to voice their dismay at an array of other challenges facing them, including the dearth of civil liberties, entrenched corruption in government institutions, state unaccountability, unbridled hyperinflation and spiraling inequities.
The government of President Hassan Rouhani, in a rush to quell the revolt and restore calm, shut down Internet connectivity for a total of 10 harrowing days, allegedly to prevent the “rioters” from organizing on social media, and armed forces opted for violent clampdowns, the details of which have been elaborately documented by advocacy organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and by global media.
The United Nations reported one month after the national fury subsided that at least 7,000 people had been arrested at the height of the tensions.
The protests and the ensuing response unmasked the social rifts in a highly divided Iran and testified to a new level of confrontation between the government and the people.
Although there were extremists who exploited the civil movement to sow mayhem and destruction in some cities, including by damaging public property, the government’s botched handling of the episode and its resort to harsh measures to stifle dissent laid bare the deficiency of transparent procedures for the expression of grievances by the public, bringing to the fore the letdowns of the state’s relationship with civil society.
Now, many observers of Iran contend that four decades after the 1979 revolution, almost no protest movement has cropped up in the country that the authorities have not attributed to foreign “enemies,” and while the leadership asserts it recognizes peaceful dissent, there have been few instances of such campaigns that were not crushed with the disproportionate use of force.
‘Do Not Execute’
On February 21 this year, it was announced that three protesters of the November 2019 uprising, Amirhossein Moradi, 26, Saeed Tamjidi, 28, and Mohammad Rajabi, 26, had been sentenced to death on charges of “taking part in destruction and burning, aimed at countering the Islamic Republic system.” The spokesman to Iran’s judiciary also accused them of “armed robbery, kidnapping and harassment of the public.”
On July 10, one of the defendants’ lawyers revealed that the Supreme Court of Iran had upheld the verdict for the three young men, giving rise to speculations that they would be executed shortly.
The announcement was inflammatory enough to stir up massive protest activity, this time online, with people confined to their homes in the taxing days of the Covid-19 pandemic finding Twitter an appropriate platform to voice their communal rage at the ruling.
Regardless of what the three young men had perpetrated, the course of their legal proceedings, which involved their lawyers not having access to their files and a trial that many activists claimed was not fair, spawned a gigantic sympathy movement on Twitter with people posting tweets carrying the hashtag “Do Not Execute” in Persian.
Launched on July 14, the Twitter storm soon ended up trending internationally, and over the course of five days, more than 11 million tweets were posted decrying the confirmed death sentence for Moradi, Tamjidi and Rajabi.
The explosive online thrust was not merely an objection to the execution of the three men, about whose background and role in the November events few details are available; rather, it was a denunciation of the frequent use of capital punishment in Iran, which had cast its dark shadow this time over the doomed fate of three men in their 20s.
Iranians from all walks of life – artists, actors and actresses, journalists, university professors, politicians, lawyers, athletes, teachers, students and activists – as well as members of the Iranian diaspora weighed in on the online campaign and exhibited exceptional unity at a time when they continue to have polarizing differences on a number of issues, including the future of the country’s contentious nuclear program.
In a rare decision that was perceptibly a reaction to the wave of online protest, Iran’s judiciary announced on July 19 that it had suspended the planned executions, and as said by Babak Paknia, the lawyer of Amirhossein Moradi, the Supreme Court accepted the lawyers’ request for a retrial, reviving hopes that the verdict could be overturned.
The judiciary’s announcement represented the acknowledgement of a civil demand that was expressed in the most peaceful, refined manner by millions of Iranians at home and abroad. It was an endorsement of the conviction that even a fractured society like Iran can emerge successful in delivering shared objectives in difficult times.
Implications for the future
Iran is a country where the highest number of executions in the Middle East takes place. After China, Iran recorded the most executions in 2019. According to Amnesty International, 251 people were condemned to death in Iran last year, slightly down from 253 people in 2018.
Things have significantly improved since the turn of the century. The World Coalition against the Death Penalty reported that at least 317 people were executed in 2007, and in 2008, as many as 346 executions were documented.
Although the majority of those executed are criminals involved in drug trafficking or individuals who have committed rape and murder, there are still people who wind up on death row for political activism or opposition to the government.
The global momentum to abolish the death penalty might not soon head into Iran, as the country strictly enforces sharia laws, which prescribe capital punishment for major offenses. However, to expect Iran’s judicial processes to be reformed so that the country’s blemished image can be brushed up and gaps between the government and the public are bridged is not a tall order.
Lengthy prison terms or execution decrees for citizens who have differences of opinion with the Islamic Republic leadership or are charged with vague crimes such as acting against national security, espionage for foreign governments or disturbing the public opinion that in many cases remain legally unsubstantiated serve no good cause, rather than portraying Iran as an ultra-conservative nation-state with an intolerant Islamist government.
This is neither helpful to the global standing of Iran nor conducive to praise for the religion it officially promotes.
Saudi Arabia, also a conservative Middle East kingdom, has in recent years reformed and revised many of its judicial processes, and is treading on the path of imparting a more nuanced impression of itself.
It should not be difficult for Iran to replicate Saudi Arabia’s reforms in its local context and come up with improvements in its definitions of crime and transgression, join international pacts such as the United Nations Convention against Torture, to which it is not currently a party, and particularly restructure its approach to what it calls “security crimes,” which is a thinly veiled rewording of “political crimes,” and embrace more moderation and clemency in legal judgments.
A melting pot of subcultures, ethnic groups, religious minorities and lingual communities, blessed with a young, dynamic and educated population, Iran enjoys all the features of a thriving society. Judicial reforms in pursuit of making contemporary Iran a more inclusive, pluralist and tolerant entity are the prerequisite to ensuring this society can unleash all its potentials.
Of course, a new engagement with the international community is the seminal and urgent need of Iran in the realm of foreign policy, about which much has been said in the media and academia.
Saturday 1 August 2020
US says man gunned down in Pakistani court was American
Source: WTOP News (31 July 2020)
https://wtop.com/asia/2020/07/us-says-man-gunned-down-in-pakistani-court-was-american/
ISLAMABAD (AP) — A man gunned down this week in a Pakistani courtroom while standing trial on a charge of blasphemy was a U.S. citizen, according to a U.S. State Department statement.
Tahir Naseem was “lured to Pakistan” from his home in Illinois and entrapped by the country’s blasphemy laws, which international rights groups have sought to have repealed, the statement issued late Thursday said. It did not elaborate on the circumstances in which Naseem came to be in the South Asian country.
Pakistan’s controversial blasphemy law calls for the death penalty for anyone found guilty of insulting Islam but in Pakistan the mere allegation of blasphemy can cause mobs to riot and vigilantes to commit murder.
“We are shocked, saddened, and outraged that American citizen Tahir Naseem was killed yesterday inside a Pakistani courtroom,” the State Department statement read.
Pakistani officials said Naseem was charged with blasphemy after he declared himself a prophet. Police in northwest Peshawar province originally identified him as Tahir Shameem Ahmed, but later corrected themselves.
There was no immediate comment from Pakistani authorities and the assailant, identified as Khalid Khan, was arrested. It wasn’t clear how he entered the courtroom and managed to get past security with a weapon. Naseem died before he could be transported to a hospital.
“We urge Pakistan to immediately reform its often abused blasphemy laws and its court system, which allow such abuses to occur, and to ensure that the suspect is prosecuted to the full extent of the law,” said the statement issued by Cale Brown, the State Department’s principal deputy spokesperson.
Although Pakistani authorities have yet to carry out a death sentence for blasphemy, there are scores of accused on death row. Most are Muslims and many belong to the Ahmadyya sect of Islam, reviled by mainstream Muslims as heretics.
Besides the State Department, the U.S. Commission on International Freedom condemned the killing.
“Pakistan’s blasphemy laws are indefensible to begin with, but it is outrageous beyond belief that the Pakistani government was incapable of keeping an individual from being murdered within a court of law for his faith, and a U.S. citizen, nonetheless,” Commissioner Johnnie Moore said in a statement.
“Pakistan must protect religious minorities, including individuals accused of blasphemy, in order to prevent such unimaginable tragedies,” Moore said in the statement.
The Commission declared Pakistan a “country of particular concern” in its 2020 report released last month because of its treatment of minorities.
Religious minorities in Pakistan are increasingly under attack even as Prime Minister Imran Khan preaches a “tolerant” Pakistan. Observers warn of even tougher times ahead as Khan vacillates between trying to forge a pluralistic nation and his conservative Islamic beliefs.
A Punjab governor was killed by his own guard in 2011 after he defended a Christian woman, Asia Bibi, who was accused of blasphemy. She was acquitted after spending eight years on death row in a case that drew international media attention. Faced with death threats from Islamic extremists upon her release, she flew to Canada to join her daughters last year.
https://wtop.com/asia/2020/07/us-says-man-gunned-down-in-pakistani-court-was-american/
ISLAMABAD (AP) — A man gunned down this week in a Pakistani courtroom while standing trial on a charge of blasphemy was a U.S. citizen, according to a U.S. State Department statement.
Tahir Naseem was “lured to Pakistan” from his home in Illinois and entrapped by the country’s blasphemy laws, which international rights groups have sought to have repealed, the statement issued late Thursday said. It did not elaborate on the circumstances in which Naseem came to be in the South Asian country.
Pakistan’s controversial blasphemy law calls for the death penalty for anyone found guilty of insulting Islam but in Pakistan the mere allegation of blasphemy can cause mobs to riot and vigilantes to commit murder.
“We are shocked, saddened, and outraged that American citizen Tahir Naseem was killed yesterday inside a Pakistani courtroom,” the State Department statement read.
Pakistani officials said Naseem was charged with blasphemy after he declared himself a prophet. Police in northwest Peshawar province originally identified him as Tahir Shameem Ahmed, but later corrected themselves.
There was no immediate comment from Pakistani authorities and the assailant, identified as Khalid Khan, was arrested. It wasn’t clear how he entered the courtroom and managed to get past security with a weapon. Naseem died before he could be transported to a hospital.
“We urge Pakistan to immediately reform its often abused blasphemy laws and its court system, which allow such abuses to occur, and to ensure that the suspect is prosecuted to the full extent of the law,” said the statement issued by Cale Brown, the State Department’s principal deputy spokesperson.
Although Pakistani authorities have yet to carry out a death sentence for blasphemy, there are scores of accused on death row. Most are Muslims and many belong to the Ahmadyya sect of Islam, reviled by mainstream Muslims as heretics.
Besides the State Department, the U.S. Commission on International Freedom condemned the killing.
“Pakistan’s blasphemy laws are indefensible to begin with, but it is outrageous beyond belief that the Pakistani government was incapable of keeping an individual from being murdered within a court of law for his faith, and a U.S. citizen, nonetheless,” Commissioner Johnnie Moore said in a statement.
“Pakistan must protect religious minorities, including individuals accused of blasphemy, in order to prevent such unimaginable tragedies,” Moore said in the statement.
The Commission declared Pakistan a “country of particular concern” in its 2020 report released last month because of its treatment of minorities.
Religious minorities in Pakistan are increasingly under attack even as Prime Minister Imran Khan preaches a “tolerant” Pakistan. Observers warn of even tougher times ahead as Khan vacillates between trying to forge a pluralistic nation and his conservative Islamic beliefs.
A Punjab governor was killed by his own guard in 2011 after he defended a Christian woman, Asia Bibi, who was accused of blasphemy. She was acquitted after spending eight years on death row in a case that drew international media attention. Faced with death threats from Islamic extremists upon her release, she flew to Canada to join her daughters last year.
Thursday 30 July 2020
Bringing back death penalty will breach international law – CHR
Source: Manila Bulletin (29 July 2020)
https://mb.com.ph/2020/07/29/bringing-back-death-penalty-will-breach-international-law-chr/
President Duterte has long pushed for the return of the death penalty in order to bolster the government’s fight against illegal drugs, and he repeated this call during his 5th State of the Nation Address (SONA) on Monday.
“I reiterate the swift passage of a law reviving the death penalty by lethal injection for crimes specified under the Comprehensive Dangerous [Drugs] Act of 2002,” he said.
President Duterte’s statement alarmed the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), and Spokesperson Atty. Jacqueline Ann de Guia said that bringing back the capital punishment in the country “will be a breach of international law.”
In particular, the reinstatement of the death penalty will conflict the tenets of the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the Philippines ratified in 2007.
De Guia added that it even goes against two affirmations made by the government during the 2020 SONA, which is to put human lives above all and to uphold its obligation for human rights.
“Time and again, CHR has invited the government to engage in a frank and factual discussion on the ineffectiveness of death penalty in curbing crimes,” she said. “We, too, believe that crimes must be punished. But the call for justice should not result [in] further violations of human rights, especially the right to life.”
The CHR said that a “comprehensive approach” is needed to address the threat of illegal drug trade and use, as well as other crimes. Instead of imposing punishments with little or no regard for human life and rights, de Guia said the government should focus on “restorative justice.”
The death penalty in the country was abolished back in 2006 during the term of former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. Since then, several organizations such as Amnesty International have voiced out against bringing back the death penalty in the Philippines – even if it means that it will help against the war on drugs.
“The idea that the death penalty will rid the country of drugs is simply wrong. The resumption of executions will not rid the Philippines of problems associated with drugs or deter crime. It is an inhumane, ineffective punishment and is never the solution. The Philippines’ attempts to reintroduce it are clearly unlawful. This will just earn the country notoriety as one of the few countries to revive its horrific use,” said Champa Patel, Amnesty International’s Director for Southeast Asia and the Pacific.
https://mb.com.ph/2020/07/29/bringing-back-death-penalty-will-breach-international-law-chr/
President Duterte has long pushed for the return of the death penalty in order to bolster the government’s fight against illegal drugs, and he repeated this call during his 5th State of the Nation Address (SONA) on Monday.
“I reiterate the swift passage of a law reviving the death penalty by lethal injection for crimes specified under the Comprehensive Dangerous [Drugs] Act of 2002,” he said.
President Duterte’s statement alarmed the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), and Spokesperson Atty. Jacqueline Ann de Guia said that bringing back the capital punishment in the country “will be a breach of international law.”
In particular, the reinstatement of the death penalty will conflict the tenets of the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the Philippines ratified in 2007.
De Guia added that it even goes against two affirmations made by the government during the 2020 SONA, which is to put human lives above all and to uphold its obligation for human rights.
“Time and again, CHR has invited the government to engage in a frank and factual discussion on the ineffectiveness of death penalty in curbing crimes,” she said. “We, too, believe that crimes must be punished. But the call for justice should not result [in] further violations of human rights, especially the right to life.”
The CHR said that a “comprehensive approach” is needed to address the threat of illegal drug trade and use, as well as other crimes. Instead of imposing punishments with little or no regard for human life and rights, de Guia said the government should focus on “restorative justice.”
The death penalty in the country was abolished back in 2006 during the term of former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. Since then, several organizations such as Amnesty International have voiced out against bringing back the death penalty in the Philippines – even if it means that it will help against the war on drugs.
“The idea that the death penalty will rid the country of drugs is simply wrong. The resumption of executions will not rid the Philippines of problems associated with drugs or deter crime. It is an inhumane, ineffective punishment and is never the solution. The Philippines’ attempts to reintroduce it are clearly unlawful. This will just earn the country notoriety as one of the few countries to revive its horrific use,” said Champa Patel, Amnesty International’s Director for Southeast Asia and the Pacific.
Friday 5 June 2020
Report finds concerns with access to fair trials in Malaysian death penalty cases
Source: Mirage News (28 May 2020)
https://www.miragenews.com/report-finds-concerns-with-access-to-fair-trials-in-malaysian-death-penalty-cases/
A new report launched by Monash University, in partnership with Harm Reduction International (HRI) and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN), has questioned the fair trial standards afforded to more than 1,000 people currently sentenced to the death penalty in Malaysia.
Key findings
Monash University’s research shows that the death penalty in Malaysia has been imposed following proceedings that did not meet fair trial standards either in accordance with international, domestic or cognate common law standards.
There are 1,280 people awaiting the death penalty in Malaysia, who have not experienced fair trial standards either in accordance with international, domestic or cognate common law standards.
In certain drug trafficking trials, the presumption of innocence is undermined because as a result of the double presumptions an accused is presumed to be guilty.
Many of those accused face socio- economic, nationality and language barriers that prohibit their access to the requisite level of legal assistance.
The report, titled ‘Ensuring a Fair Trial: Fair Trial Guarantees & the Death Penalty in Malaysia’, was today launched by Malaysia’s former Chief Justice, Judge Tan Sri Richard Malanjum.
Written by Monash University and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) with support from Harm Reduction International, the report also makes a number of recommendations, including that the Malaysian Government ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Second Optional Protocol.
“Our case analysis in the Report revealed that the death penalty in Malaysia has been imposed following proceedings that did not meet fair trial standards either in accordance with international, domestic or cognate common law standards,” said report co-author Dr Natalia Antolak-Saper, from the Monash University Faculty of Law.
“Evident throughout this report is that a significant population of those sentenced to death in Malaysia is comprised of individuals convicted of drug offending, many of whom face socio- economic, nationality and language barriers that prohibit their access to the requisite level of legal assistance needed to properly test the prosecution case,” said co-author Ms Sara Kowal, Monash University Capital Punishment Impact Initiative Manager (Partnerships & Clinics).
As at December 2019, 1,280 people were on death row in Malaysia, 89 per cent of these people weremale and more than two-thirds of all persons on death row had been convicted of drug trafficking offences, according to figures from Amnesty International.
“Our research draws on interviews with lawyers who identify some common fair trial challenges including the lack of sufficient funding for legal representation at all stages of the death penalty trial, appeals and clemency stages,” Dr Antolak-Saper said.
“Our analysis of the Malaysian drug trafficking legislation identifies four key challenges to fair trial rights, one of which is that the presumption of innocence is undermined because as a result of the double presumptions an accused is presumed to be guilty.”
Ms Kowal said they found the clemency process to appear at times arbitrary.
“The lack of a legal framework means the process lacks transparency and review, both essential to fair trial rights. Given the stakes are so high in death penalty matters this is particularly problematic,” she said..
Malaysia is one of 35 countries in the world that imposes the death penalty for drug offences and in 2019, was one of 13 countries to actually sentence the accused to death for drug trafficking.
“Capital punishment ends lives, destroys families, and operates in discriminatory and arbitrary ways throughout the world. It has no proven deterrence value or other demonstrated public benefits,” said Ms Kowal.
https://www.miragenews.com/report-finds-concerns-with-access-to-fair-trials-in-malaysian-death-penalty-cases/
A new report launched by Monash University, in partnership with Harm Reduction International (HRI) and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN), has questioned the fair trial standards afforded to more than 1,000 people currently sentenced to the death penalty in Malaysia.
Key findings
Monash University’s research shows that the death penalty in Malaysia has been imposed following proceedings that did not meet fair trial standards either in accordance with international, domestic or cognate common law standards.
There are 1,280 people awaiting the death penalty in Malaysia, who have not experienced fair trial standards either in accordance with international, domestic or cognate common law standards.
In certain drug trafficking trials, the presumption of innocence is undermined because as a result of the double presumptions an accused is presumed to be guilty.
Many of those accused face socio- economic, nationality and language barriers that prohibit their access to the requisite level of legal assistance.
The report, titled ‘Ensuring a Fair Trial: Fair Trial Guarantees & the Death Penalty in Malaysia’, was today launched by Malaysia’s former Chief Justice, Judge Tan Sri Richard Malanjum.
Written by Monash University and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) with support from Harm Reduction International, the report also makes a number of recommendations, including that the Malaysian Government ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Second Optional Protocol.
“Our case analysis in the Report revealed that the death penalty in Malaysia has been imposed following proceedings that did not meet fair trial standards either in accordance with international, domestic or cognate common law standards,” said report co-author Dr Natalia Antolak-Saper, from the Monash University Faculty of Law.
“Evident throughout this report is that a significant population of those sentenced to death in Malaysia is comprised of individuals convicted of drug offending, many of whom face socio- economic, nationality and language barriers that prohibit their access to the requisite level of legal assistance needed to properly test the prosecution case,” said co-author Ms Sara Kowal, Monash University Capital Punishment Impact Initiative Manager (Partnerships & Clinics).
As at December 2019, 1,280 people were on death row in Malaysia, 89 per cent of these people weremale and more than two-thirds of all persons on death row had been convicted of drug trafficking offences, according to figures from Amnesty International.
“Our research draws on interviews with lawyers who identify some common fair trial challenges including the lack of sufficient funding for legal representation at all stages of the death penalty trial, appeals and clemency stages,” Dr Antolak-Saper said.
“Our analysis of the Malaysian drug trafficking legislation identifies four key challenges to fair trial rights, one of which is that the presumption of innocence is undermined because as a result of the double presumptions an accused is presumed to be guilty.”
Ms Kowal said they found the clemency process to appear at times arbitrary.
“The lack of a legal framework means the process lacks transparency and review, both essential to fair trial rights. Given the stakes are so high in death penalty matters this is particularly problematic,” she said..
Malaysia is one of 35 countries in the world that imposes the death penalty for drug offences and in 2019, was one of 13 countries to actually sentence the accused to death for drug trafficking.
“Capital punishment ends lives, destroys families, and operates in discriminatory and arbitrary ways throughout the world. It has no proven deterrence value or other demonstrated public benefits,” said Ms Kowal.
Singapore sentences man to death via Zoom call
Source: The Guardian (20 May 2020)
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/20/singapore-sentences-man-to-death-via-zoom-call
A man convicted of drug-trafficking offences has been sentenced to death in Singapore via a Zoom video-call, the city-state’s first case where capital punishment has been delivered remotely.
Rights groups condemned the sentencing of Punithan Genasan, a 37-year-old Malaysian, as inhumane, and a reminder of the country’s continued use of the death penalty for drug-related offences.
Genasan was found to have been complicit in trafficking at least 28.5g of heroin by coordinating two couriers in 2011. He denied any connection to the pair, but his defence was rejected on Friday.
A spokesperson for Singapore’s supreme court told Reuters the case involving Genasan was conducted online “for the safety of all involved in the proceedings”.
The country has been under quarantine measures since early April, following a surge in the number of coronavirus cases linked to migrant worker dormitories. Court cases considered essential have been held remotely, though many others have been adjourned.
Genasan’s lawyer, Peter Fernando, said his client received the judge’s verdict on a Zoom call and is considering an appeal. He said he did not object to the use of video-conferencing since it was only to receive the judge’s verdict, which could be heard clearly, and no other legal arguments were presented.
Rights experts described the decision to hold the case remotely as callous. “The absolute finality of the sentence, and the reality that wrongful convictions do occur around the world in death sentence cases, raise serious concerns about why Singapore is rushing to conclude this case via Zoom,” said Phil Robertson, the deputy director of Human Rights Watch’s Asia division.
Singapore, which has a zero-tolerance policy for illegal drugs, is one of only four countries known to still execute people for drug-related offences, according to Amnesty International.
“This case is another reminder that Singapore continues to defy international law and standards by imposing the death penalty for drug trafficking, and as a mandatory punishment,” said the group’s death penalty adviser, Chiara Sangiorgio.
Four people were executed in the city-state last year, compared with 13 in 2018.
Zoom did not immediately respond to a request for comment made via its representatives in Singapore.
A similar case in Nigeria, where a man was sentenced to death via Zoom for murdering his employer’s mother, has also been criticised by rights groups.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/20/singapore-sentences-man-to-death-via-zoom-call
A man convicted of drug-trafficking offences has been sentenced to death in Singapore via a Zoom video-call, the city-state’s first case where capital punishment has been delivered remotely.
Rights groups condemned the sentencing of Punithan Genasan, a 37-year-old Malaysian, as inhumane, and a reminder of the country’s continued use of the death penalty for drug-related offences.
Genasan was found to have been complicit in trafficking at least 28.5g of heroin by coordinating two couriers in 2011. He denied any connection to the pair, but his defence was rejected on Friday.
A spokesperson for Singapore’s supreme court told Reuters the case involving Genasan was conducted online “for the safety of all involved in the proceedings”.
The country has been under quarantine measures since early April, following a surge in the number of coronavirus cases linked to migrant worker dormitories. Court cases considered essential have been held remotely, though many others have been adjourned.
Genasan’s lawyer, Peter Fernando, said his client received the judge’s verdict on a Zoom call and is considering an appeal. He said he did not object to the use of video-conferencing since it was only to receive the judge’s verdict, which could be heard clearly, and no other legal arguments were presented.
Rights experts described the decision to hold the case remotely as callous. “The absolute finality of the sentence, and the reality that wrongful convictions do occur around the world in death sentence cases, raise serious concerns about why Singapore is rushing to conclude this case via Zoom,” said Phil Robertson, the deputy director of Human Rights Watch’s Asia division.
Singapore, which has a zero-tolerance policy for illegal drugs, is one of only four countries known to still execute people for drug-related offences, according to Amnesty International.
“This case is another reminder that Singapore continues to defy international law and standards by imposing the death penalty for drug trafficking, and as a mandatory punishment,” said the group’s death penalty adviser, Chiara Sangiorgio.
Four people were executed in the city-state last year, compared with 13 in 2018.
Zoom did not immediately respond to a request for comment made via its representatives in Singapore.
A similar case in Nigeria, where a man was sentenced to death via Zoom for murdering his employer’s mother, has also been criticised by rights groups.
Thursday 30 April 2020
Saudi Arabia eliminates death penalty for minors
Source: Channel News Asia (27 April 2020)
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/saudi-arabia-eliminates-death-penalty-for-minors-12679054
RIYADH: Saudi Arabia on Sunday (Apr 26) ended the death penalty for crimes committed by minors after effectively abolishing floggings as the kingdom seeks to blunt criticism over its human rights record.
The reforms underscore a push by de facto ruler Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to modernise the ultra-conservative kingdom long associated with a fundamentalist strain of Wahhabi Islam.
The death penalty has been eliminated for those convicted of crimes committed while they were minors, Human Rights Commission president Awwad Alawwad said in a statement, citing a royal decree.
"Instead, the individual will receive a prison sentence of no longer than 10 years in a juvenile detention facility," the statement said.
The decree is expected to spare the lives of at least six men from the minority Shiite community who are on death row.
The were accused of taking part in anti-government protests during the Arab Spring uprisings while they were under the age of 18.
United Nations human rights experts made an urgent appeal to Saudi Arabia last year to halt plans to execute them.
"This is an important day for Saudi Arabia," said Awwad Alawwad.
"The decree helps us in establishing a more modern penal code."
The kingdom has one of the world's highest rates of execution, with suspects convicted of terrorism, homicide, rape, armed robbery and drug trafficking facing the death penalty.
Saudi Arabia executed at least 187 people in 2019, according to a tally based on official data, the highest since 1995 when 195 people were put to death.
Since January, 12 people were executed, according to official data.
Human rights groups have repeatedly raised concerns about the fairness of trials in the kingdom, an absolute monarchy governed under a strict form of Islamic law.
On Saturday, the HRC announced Saudi Arabia had effectively abolished flogging as a punishment, which have long drawn condemnation from human rights groups.
The most high-profile instance of flogging in recent years was the case of Saudi blogger Raif Badawi who was sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes in 2014 on charges of "insulting" Islam.
But "hudud" or harsher punishment under Islamic law such as floggings are still applicable for serious offences, a Saudi official said.
Hudud, which means "boundaries" in Arabic, is meted out for such sins as rape, murder or theft.
But "hudud" punishments are rarely meted out as many offences must be proved by a confession or be verified by several adult Muslim witnesses, the official added.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/saudi-arabia-eliminates-death-penalty-for-minors-12679054
RIYADH: Saudi Arabia on Sunday (Apr 26) ended the death penalty for crimes committed by minors after effectively abolishing floggings as the kingdom seeks to blunt criticism over its human rights record.
The reforms underscore a push by de facto ruler Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to modernise the ultra-conservative kingdom long associated with a fundamentalist strain of Wahhabi Islam.
The death penalty has been eliminated for those convicted of crimes committed while they were minors, Human Rights Commission president Awwad Alawwad said in a statement, citing a royal decree.
"Instead, the individual will receive a prison sentence of no longer than 10 years in a juvenile detention facility," the statement said.
The decree is expected to spare the lives of at least six men from the minority Shiite community who are on death row.
The were accused of taking part in anti-government protests during the Arab Spring uprisings while they were under the age of 18.
United Nations human rights experts made an urgent appeal to Saudi Arabia last year to halt plans to execute them.
"This is an important day for Saudi Arabia," said Awwad Alawwad.
"The decree helps us in establishing a more modern penal code."
The kingdom has one of the world's highest rates of execution, with suspects convicted of terrorism, homicide, rape, armed robbery and drug trafficking facing the death penalty.
Saudi Arabia executed at least 187 people in 2019, according to a tally based on official data, the highest since 1995 when 195 people were put to death.
Since January, 12 people were executed, according to official data.
Human rights groups have repeatedly raised concerns about the fairness of trials in the kingdom, an absolute monarchy governed under a strict form of Islamic law.
On Saturday, the HRC announced Saudi Arabia had effectively abolished flogging as a punishment, which have long drawn condemnation from human rights groups.
The most high-profile instance of flogging in recent years was the case of Saudi blogger Raif Badawi who was sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes in 2014 on charges of "insulting" Islam.
But "hudud" or harsher punishment under Islamic law such as floggings are still applicable for serious offences, a Saudi official said.
Hudud, which means "boundaries" in Arabic, is meted out for such sins as rape, murder or theft.
But "hudud" punishments are rarely meted out as many offences must be proved by a confession or be verified by several adult Muslim witnesses, the official added.
Wednesday 22 April 2020
Death penalty in 2019: Facts and figures
Source: Amnesty International (21 April 2020)
Amnesty International recorded 657 executions in 20 countries in 2019, a decrease of 5% compared to 2018 (at least 690). This is the lowest number of executions that Amnesty International has recorded in at least a decade.
Most executions took place in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Egypt – in that order.
China remained the world’s leading executioner – but the true extent of the use of the death penalty in China is unknown as this data is classified as a state secret; the global figure of at least 657 excludes the thousands of executions believed to have been carried out in China.
Excluding China, 86% of all reported executions took place in just four countries – Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Egypt.
Bangladesh and Bahrain resumed executions last year, after a hiatus in 2018. Amnesty International did not report any executions in Afghanistan, Taiwan and Thailand, despite having done so in 2018.
Executions in Iran fell slightly from at least 253 in 2018 to at least 251 in 2019. Executions in Iraq almost doubled from at least 52 in 2018 to at least 100 in 2019, while Saudi Arabia executed a record number of people from 149 in 2018 to 184 in 2019.
Central African Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Kazakhstan, Kenya and Zimbabwe either took positive steps or made pronouncements in 2019 which may lead to the abolition of the death penalty.
Barbados also removed the mandatory death penalty from its Constitution. In the United States, the Governor of California established an official moratorium on executions in the US state with biggest death row population, and New Hampshire became the 21st US state to abolish the death penalty for all crimes.
Gambia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, the Russian Federation and Tajikistan continued to observe official moratoriums on executions.
At the end of 2019, 106 countries (a majority of the world’s states) had abolished the death penalty in law for all crimes, and 142 countries (more than two-thirds) had abolished the death penalty in law or practice.
Amnesty International recorded commutations or pardons of death sentences in 24 countries: Bangladesh, China, Egypt, Gambia, Ghana, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Kuwait, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco/Western Sahara, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Singapore, Sudan, Thailand, UAE, USA, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
At least 11 exonerations of prisoners under sentence of death were recorded in two countries: USA and Zambia.
Amnesty International recorded at least 2,307 death sentences in 56 countries compared to the total of 2,531 reported in 54 countries in 2018. However, Amnesty did not receive information on official figures for death sentences imposed in Malaysia, Nigeria and Sri Lanka, countries that reported high official numbers of death sentences in previous years.
At least 26,604 people were known to be under sentence of death globally at the end of 2019.
The following methods of execution were used across the world in 2019: beheading, electrocution, hanging, lethal injection and shooting.
At least 13 public executions were recorded in Iran. At least six people – four in Iran, one in Saudi Arabia and one in South Sudan – were executed for crimes that occurred when they were below 18 years of age. People with mental or intellectual disabilities were under sentence of death in several countries, including Japan, Maldives, Pakistan and USA.
Death sentences were known to have been imposed after proceedings that did not meet international fair trial standards in countries including Bahrain, Bangladesh, China, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Viet Nam and Yemen.
Regional death penalty analysis
Americas
For the 11th consecutive year, the USA remained the only country to carry out executions in the region. Trinidad and Tobago was the only country to retain the mandatory death penalty for murder.
The number of executions (from 25 to 22) and death sentences (from 45 to 35) recorded in the US decreased compared to 2018.
More than 40% of all recorded executions were carried out in Texas, which remained the leading executing state in the country (from 13 to nine). Missouri carried out one execution in 2019 after none in the previous year. Conversely, Nebraska and Ohio did not put anyone to death in 2019 after carrying out executions in 2018 (one in each state).
Outside the USA, the progress towards ending the use of the death penalty continued. Barbados removed the mandatory death penalty from its constitution while Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Belize, Cuba, Dominica, Guatemala, Jamaica, Saint Kitts and Nevis and Saint Lucia did not have anyone on death row and no reports of new death sentences.
Asia-Pacific
For the first time in almost a decade, the Asia-Pacific region saw a decrease in the number of executing countries, with seven countries carrying out executions during the year.
Without a figure for Viet Nam, the number of recorded executions (29) showed a slight decrease due to drops in Japan (from 15 to three) and Singapore (from 13 to four). This regional total, as in previous years, does not include the thousands of executions that were believed to have been carried out in China and is affected by ongoing secrecy in this country as well as in North Korea and Viet Nam.
Although Bangladesh resumed executions (two), hiatuses were reported in Afghanistan, Taiwan and Thailand, which all executed people in 2018. Malaysia continued to observe its official moratorium on executions established in July 2018.
Recorded executions in Pakistan in 2019 represented the same total as in the previous year with at least 14 men hanged in the country. Death sentences in the country increased significantly to at least 632, after additional courts became operational to deal with a backlog of cases.
The number of executions in Japan was down from 15 in 2018, when the country reported its highest yearly figure since 2008, to three in 2019. Two Japanese men were executed on 2 August and a Chinese national was executed on 26 December. All men had been convicted of murder.
Singapore reported 4 executions in 2019, from a record-high of 13 in 2018.
The Philippines attempted to reintroduce the death penalty for “heinous crimes related to illegal drugs and plunder”.
At least 1,227 new death sentences across 17 countries were known to have been imposed, a 12% increase compared to 2018.
Europe and Central Asia
At least two executions were recorded in Belarus in 2019, compared to at least four in 2018. The last time another country in the region carried out executions was in 2005.
Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation and Tajikistan continued to observe official moratoriums on executions. Kazakhstan also announced measures to start the process of joining the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which commits states to abolishing the death penalty.
Middle East and North Africa
The Middle East and North Africa region reported a 16% increase in the number of executions, from 501 in 2018 to 579 in 2019, bucking the trend that has seen a decline in the region’s recorded use of the death penalty since 2015.
This was mainly due to a sharp increase in the use of the death penalty in Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Iraq almost doubled the number of executions from at least 52 in 2018 to at least 100 in 2019, while Saudi Arabia executed a record number of people – 184 -- in 2019 compared to 149 people in 2018. Together with Iran, they accounted for 92% of the total number of recorded executions in the region.
Seven countries – Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yemen – were known to have carried out executions last year.
There were 707 recorded death sentences in 2019, a 40% drop compared to 2018, when 1,170 death sentences were recorded in the region.
Egypt again imposed the most confirmed death sentences in the region, but the 2019 number (at least 435) was dramatically lower from at least 717 people sentenced to death in 2018. The number of death sentences the Iraqi authorities imposed during the course of the year was also significantly lower -- at least 87 in 2019 compared to at least 271 in 2018.
Sub-Saharan Africa
Four countries – Botswana, Somalia, South Sudan and Sudan – carried out 25 executions in 2019. Overall recorded executions in the region increased by one compared to 2018.
For a second year in a row, South Sudan saw an alarming increase in executions, putting to death at least 11 people in 2019; the highest recorded number in any year since the country’s independence in 2011. Of the people executed, three were from the same family, one was a child at the time of the crime and was about 17 when he was sentenced to death.
Recorded death sentences rose by 53% from at least 212 in 2018 to 325 in 2019.
The number of countries that imposed death sentences increased to 18 from 17 recorded in 2018.
OPINION: Recent Death Penalty Execution Undermines Taiwan's International Reputation
Source: The News Lens (13 April 2020)
https://international.thenewslens.com/article/133720
At the center of Taiwan’s efforts to ameliorate its diplomatic isolation has been an effort to promote itself as one of Asia’s most progressive democracies, especially during President Tsai Ing-wen’s term. Following the legalization of same-sex marriage, the "Taiwan Can Help" and "Taiwan is Helping" campaigns of sending medical aid abroad have been the latest successes in winning international plaudits.
A recent execution and an ambiguous stance on death penalty abolition threaten to derail these efforts.
Weng Jen-hsien (翁仁賢) was executed by order of the Ministry of Justice on April 1. It had been a year and seven months since the last execution in Taiwan. Weng was convicted last year of setting a fire that killed his parents and four relatives during the Lunar New Year’s Eve holiday in 2016.
Taiwan's anti-death penalty community immediately expressed righteous indignation at the execution. The Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP) announced in a press release on April 3 its decision to quit the Gradual Death Penalty Abolition Research and Promotion Team of the Ministry of Justice, citing their abrogation of the rule of law.
The TAEDP said the Ministry of Justice paradoxically continues to carry out capital punishment based on a law that it regards as flawed. "This is not implementing the rule of law. This is disregarding the rule of law and is an illegal execution," the TAEDP wrote.
Minister of Justice Tsai Ching Hsiang (蔡清祥) responded that he only did what he had to do. He said he would continue promoting death penalty abolition, but would implement the death penalty judiciously while it is still legal.
When Premier Su Tseng Chang (蘇貞昌) said, "Confirmed death sentences should be carried out," during a legislative inquiry on October 25 last year, the TAEDP criticized his remark relentlessly. At that time, Premier Su cited Weng as an example of a criminal whose act was “heinous from heaven to earth.”
The execution has also aroused disapproval internationally. The European External Action Service (EEAS), the official diplomatic arm of the European Union, released a statement on April 3 condemning Weng’s crime and sympathizing with the families of the victims, while clarifying that the EU opposes the use of capital punishment under any circumstance.
"The death penalty is a cruel and inhumane punishment, which fails to act as a deterrent to crime and represents an unacceptable denial of human dignity and integrity," the EEAS statement read. It thereupon called on Taiwan to "refrain from any future executions" and to "pursue a consistent policy towards the abolition of the death penalty."
Taiwan is not the only country in which capital punishment is carried out. Many East Asian countries such as Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Singapore, and China are still executing prisoners and have received criticism from international human rights organizations.
However, it seems more morally inconsistent for Taiwan to keep the death penalty on the books. Taiwan has sought to brand itself as one of Asia’s most progressive democracies.
Weng was the second inmate executed under the Tsai administration. The first execution was carried out in August 2018 when a 41-year-old man was put to death for killing his ex-wife and five-year-old daughter. There are currently 39 prisoners on death row.
Since the outbreak of Covid-19, Taiwan's strong response to the crisis has helped raise its international profile, with media reports saluting its response appearing by the dozen. It has also successfully scored a public relations victory by donating over 10 million face masks to countries in need.
It seems that Taiwan has mitigated its international isolation with its "Taiwan Can Help" and "Taiwan is Helping" campaign. But while expressions of gratitude abound for Taiwan, the recent execution and ambiguous stance on gradual death penalty abolition may quickly reverse any diplomatic gains.
At the center of Taiwan’s efforts to ameliorate its diplomatic isolation has been an effort to promote itself as one of Asia’s most progressive democracies, especially during President Tsai Ing-wen’s term. Following the legalization of same-sex marriage, the "Taiwan Can Help" and "Taiwan is Helping" campaigns of sending medical aid abroad have been the latest successes in winning international plaudits.
A recent execution and an ambiguous stance on death penalty abolition threaten to derail these efforts.
Weng Jen-hsien (翁仁賢) was executed by order of the Ministry of Justice on April 1. It had been a year and seven months since the last execution in Taiwan. Weng was convicted last year of setting a fire that killed his parents and four relatives during the Lunar New Year’s Eve holiday in 2016.
Taiwan's anti-death penalty community immediately expressed righteous indignation at the execution. The Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP) announced in a press release on April 3 its decision to quit the Gradual Death Penalty Abolition Research and Promotion Team of the Ministry of Justice, citing their abrogation of the rule of law.
The TAEDP said the Ministry of Justice paradoxically continues to carry out capital punishment based on a law that it regards as flawed. "This is not implementing the rule of law. This is disregarding the rule of law and is an illegal execution," the TAEDP wrote.
Minister of Justice Tsai Ching Hsiang (蔡清祥) responded that he only did what he had to do. He said he would continue promoting death penalty abolition, but would implement the death penalty judiciously while it is still legal.
When Premier Su Tseng Chang (蘇貞昌) said, "Confirmed death sentences should be carried out," during a legislative inquiry on October 25 last year, the TAEDP criticized his remark relentlessly. At that time, Premier Su cited Weng as an example of a criminal whose act was “heinous from heaven to earth.”
The execution has also aroused disapproval internationally. The European External Action Service (EEAS), the official diplomatic arm of the European Union, released a statement on April 3 condemning Weng’s crime and sympathizing with the families of the victims, while clarifying that the EU opposes the use of capital punishment under any circumstance.
"The death penalty is a cruel and inhumane punishment, which fails to act as a deterrent to crime and represents an unacceptable denial of human dignity and integrity," the EEAS statement read. It thereupon called on Taiwan to "refrain from any future executions" and to "pursue a consistent policy towards the abolition of the death penalty."
Taiwan is not the only country in which capital punishment is carried out. Many East Asian countries such as Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Singapore, and China are still executing prisoners and have received criticism from international human rights organizations.
However, it seems more morally inconsistent for Taiwan to keep the death penalty on the books. Taiwan has sought to brand itself as one of Asia’s most progressive democracies.
Weng was the second inmate executed under the Tsai administration. The first execution was carried out in August 2018 when a 41-year-old man was put to death for killing his ex-wife and five-year-old daughter. There are currently 39 prisoners on death row.
Since the outbreak of Covid-19, Taiwan's strong response to the crisis has helped raise its international profile, with media reports saluting its response appearing by the dozen. It has also successfully scored a public relations victory by donating over 10 million face masks to countries in need.
It seems that Taiwan has mitigated its international isolation with its "Taiwan Can Help" and "Taiwan is Helping" campaign. But while expressions of gratitude abound for Taiwan, the recent execution and ambiguous stance on gradual death penalty abolition may quickly reverse any diplomatic gains.
Saturday 4 April 2020
Rights groups lament latest Taiwan execution
Source: Channel News Asia (3 April 2020)
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/rights-groups-lament-latest-taiwan-execution-12606560
TAIPEI: Rights activists on Friday (Apr 3) condemned Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen's government for executing a convicted murderer, saying the continued use of capital punishment undermined the island's progressive reputation.
Death row inmate Weng Jen-hsien, found guilty last year of setting a fire that killed his parents and four relatives in 2016, was executed by a firing squad on Wednesday, the justice ministry said.
Weng, 53, was the second man to be executed since Tsai came to power in 2016 despite a pledge to eventually abolish the death penalty.
The ministry described Weng's crime as "brutal and ruthless".
But it added: "Our policy is to gradually abolish the death penalty."
International and local rights groups urged Taiwan to immediately announce a moratorium on executions and set a timeline for complete abolition.
Advertisement
"The government said its policy is to gradually abolish the death penalty but it took opposite action to carry out its second execution," Taiwan Association for Human Rights secretary general Shih Yi-Hsiang said.
"This is certainly a regression in human rights. Carrying out executions will not solve any problem," he told AFP.
Chiu E-Ling, director of Amnesty International Taiwan, accused the government of making a "cynical attempt to bury bad news" by carrying out the execution on the same day it announced the donation of 10 million face masks to countries hit hardest by the coronavirus.
The justice ministry statement announcing the execution was released late at night on Wednesday.
DICTATORSHIP TO DEMOCRACY
Over the last few decades Taiwan has morphed from a dictatorship to one of Asia's most progressive democracies.
Some rights groups and media organisations have even set up regional headquarters in Taiwan, primarily as a base to monitor more authoritarian China.
Tsai's Democratic Progressive Party successfully legalised same-sex marriage last year, making Taiwan the first place in Asia to do so.
But the death penalty remains on the books, with most surveys showing it is popular among the public.
Taiwan resumed capital punishment in 2010 after a five-year hiatus. There are currently 39 prisoners on death row.
The first execution under the Tsai administration was in August 2018 when a 41-year-old man was put to death for killing his ex-wife and five-year-old daughter.
In 2016 a former college student was executed for killing four people in a random stabbing spree on a subway that shocked the generally safe island.
Tsai won a landslide second term in January and will be inaugurated in May.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/rights-groups-lament-latest-taiwan-execution-12606560
TAIPEI: Rights activists on Friday (Apr 3) condemned Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen's government for executing a convicted murderer, saying the continued use of capital punishment undermined the island's progressive reputation.
Death row inmate Weng Jen-hsien, found guilty last year of setting a fire that killed his parents and four relatives in 2016, was executed by a firing squad on Wednesday, the justice ministry said.
Weng, 53, was the second man to be executed since Tsai came to power in 2016 despite a pledge to eventually abolish the death penalty.
The ministry described Weng's crime as "brutal and ruthless".
But it added: "Our policy is to gradually abolish the death penalty."
International and local rights groups urged Taiwan to immediately announce a moratorium on executions and set a timeline for complete abolition.
Advertisement
"The government said its policy is to gradually abolish the death penalty but it took opposite action to carry out its second execution," Taiwan Association for Human Rights secretary general Shih Yi-Hsiang said.
"This is certainly a regression in human rights. Carrying out executions will not solve any problem," he told AFP.
Chiu E-Ling, director of Amnesty International Taiwan, accused the government of making a "cynical attempt to bury bad news" by carrying out the execution on the same day it announced the donation of 10 million face masks to countries hit hardest by the coronavirus.
The justice ministry statement announcing the execution was released late at night on Wednesday.
DICTATORSHIP TO DEMOCRACY
Over the last few decades Taiwan has morphed from a dictatorship to one of Asia's most progressive democracies.
Some rights groups and media organisations have even set up regional headquarters in Taiwan, primarily as a base to monitor more authoritarian China.
Tsai's Democratic Progressive Party successfully legalised same-sex marriage last year, making Taiwan the first place in Asia to do so.
But the death penalty remains on the books, with most surveys showing it is popular among the public.
Taiwan resumed capital punishment in 2010 after a five-year hiatus. There are currently 39 prisoners on death row.
The first execution under the Tsai administration was in August 2018 when a 41-year-old man was put to death for killing his ex-wife and five-year-old daughter.
In 2016 a former college student was executed for killing four people in a random stabbing spree on a subway that shocked the generally safe island.
Tsai won a landslide second term in January and will be inaugurated in May.
Friday 21 February 2020
Japan – If death penalty replaced with life imprisonment without parole, 52% for retaining death penalty
Source: Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (15 February 2020)
https://adpan.org/2020/02/15/japan-if-death-penalty-replaced-with-life-imprisonment-without-parole-52-for-retaining-death-penalty/
In a recent opinion poll by the Cabinet Office in November 2019 on the death penalty, 9.0% of Japanese respondents answered it should be abolished in all cases, while 80.8% said that it was necessary in some cases…
When asked if the death penalty should be kept or abolished in the case that a system of life sentencing without parole was introduced, 35.1% answered that it should be abolished, while 52.0% said it should continue.
Poll Reveals More than 80% Support Death Penalty in Japan
Society Feb 4, 2020
A poll conducted by the Cabinet Office in November 2019 found that 80.8% of Japanese people feel that the death penalty is sometimes necessary.
In a recent opinion poll on the death penalty, 9.0% of Japanese respondents answered it should be abolished in all cases, while 80.8% said that it was necessary in some cases.
The opinion poll was conducted by the Cabinet Office in November 2019, targeted at 3,000 Japanese adults. The poll is held every five years and in the four polls since 2004, support for the death penalty has continuously topped 80%.
Among those who want to see the death penalty abolished (multiple answers possible), the most common, with 50.7%, was that if there is a mistake in the judgment, it cannot be undone.
On the other hand, the most common reason given by those who said that the death penalty was necessary was that the victim’s feelings had to be considered (56.6%).
When asked if the death penalty should be kept or abolished in the case that a system of life sentencing without parole was introduced, 35.1% answered that it should be abolished, while 52.0% said it should continue.
According to the Amnesty International Global Report: Death Sentences and Executions 2018, executions were carried out in 20 countries in 2018, of which the only Group of Seven nations were Japan and the United States. That same year, 15 people were executed in Japan, 13 of whom were Aum Shinrikyō cult leaders who had been involved in the deadly Tokyo subway sarin gas attack in 1995.
https://adpan.org/2020/02/15/japan-if-death-penalty-replaced-with-life-imprisonment-without-parole-52-for-retaining-death-penalty/
In a recent opinion poll by the Cabinet Office in November 2019 on the death penalty, 9.0% of Japanese respondents answered it should be abolished in all cases, while 80.8% said that it was necessary in some cases…
When asked if the death penalty should be kept or abolished in the case that a system of life sentencing without parole was introduced, 35.1% answered that it should be abolished, while 52.0% said it should continue.
Poll Reveals More than 80% Support Death Penalty in Japan
Society Feb 4, 2020
A poll conducted by the Cabinet Office in November 2019 found that 80.8% of Japanese people feel that the death penalty is sometimes necessary.
In a recent opinion poll on the death penalty, 9.0% of Japanese respondents answered it should be abolished in all cases, while 80.8% said that it was necessary in some cases.
The opinion poll was conducted by the Cabinet Office in November 2019, targeted at 3,000 Japanese adults. The poll is held every five years and in the four polls since 2004, support for the death penalty has continuously topped 80%.
Among those who want to see the death penalty abolished (multiple answers possible), the most common, with 50.7%, was that if there is a mistake in the judgment, it cannot be undone.
On the other hand, the most common reason given by those who said that the death penalty was necessary was that the victim’s feelings had to be considered (56.6%).
When asked if the death penalty should be kept or abolished in the case that a system of life sentencing without parole was introduced, 35.1% answered that it should be abolished, while 52.0% said it should continue.
According to the Amnesty International Global Report: Death Sentences and Executions 2018, executions were carried out in 20 countries in 2018, of which the only Group of Seven nations were Japan and the United States. That same year, 15 people were executed in Japan, 13 of whom were Aum Shinrikyō cult leaders who had been involved in the deadly Tokyo subway sarin gas attack in 1995.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
