The lawyer who defended the last Australian hanged in Asia said the Philippines should be held up as an example for other countries in the region to follow.
Lex Lasry QC said in late June that Australia should publicly congratulate the Philippines for abolishing the death penalty, and encourage other countries in Asia to do the same.
"Such a step demonstrates the potential in South-East Asia for countries in that region who have maintained capital punishment to be persuaded to change their policy," he said.
"Australia, a country internationally committed to the abolition of capital punishment, should immediately publicly congratulate the Philippines on its decision and use it as an example to persuade other countries in our region to do likewise."
Mr Lasry represented Van Tuong Nguyen, who was hanged for heroin trafficking in Singapore on 2 December 2005.
Thursday, 3 August 2006
Saturday, 22 July 2006
Malaysia's 'inexcusable' position on death penalty
Leading human rights activists and a newspaper columnist have rejected the Malaysian Government's claim that the death penalty was needed to deter serious crime and safeguard public interest.
Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk M. Kayveas told Parliament on 28 June that: "The Government has no intention of abolishing the death penalty."
The Deputy Minister said the death penalty was "only provided for serious crimes" such as murder and drug trafficking, and there were "enough safeguards" in the judicial system to ensure it was not handed out easily.
N. Surendran and Charles Hector, from the group Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET), said they were "disappointed" by the Deputy Minister's "unsubstantiated and false statement".
They said in a media release posted on the website of the Malaysia Bar that the statement was "baseless and cannot be justified by any facts or statistical proof", citing studies that have "failed to find convincing evidence that capital punishment is a more effective deterrent of crime than long-term imprisonment".
"The Malaysian government ought to have conducted a thorough study on the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the death penalty as a deterent to serious crime before having a Deputy Minister, who is a lawyer, stand up in Paliament and attempt to turn a myth into an empirical truth," they said.
Umran Kadir, a columnist with publication Sun 2 Surf, described the Deputy Minister's stance as "an inexcusable position to take when international studies overwhelmingly support the notion that the death penalty is not an effective deterrent to crime".
He said "the ugly truth is that in dispensing justice mistakes can and do happen".
"Civilisation has moved far beyond the time of Hammurabi when "an eye for an eye" was the basis of all laws. The death penalty creates a senseless and vicious cycle of violence. I firmly believe that we are in no position to take away that which God has bequeathed upon each of us," Umran Kadir wrote.
What safeguards?
MADPET also rejected the Deputy Minister's statement that there were adequate safeguards in the judicial system, and described as "laughable" the claim that the country's experienced police provided an additional safeguard against a miscarriage of justice.
"What safeguards is the Honourable Deputy Minister speaking of? In Malaysia there is no immediate access to a lawyer upon arrest, immediate right to a phone call and no right to full pre-trial disclosure [of all evidence to the accused]," they said.
"It must be reiterated that even in jurisdictions where all these safeguards exist, the number of persons wrongfully condemned to death have been frighteningly high. Human justice is dangerously fallible, and the only acceptable choice for any civilized nation is to abolish the death penalty.
"The fact that a person has the right to appeal to the Court of Appeal and then the Federal Court, and thereafter to the Pardons Board for clemency is grossly insufficient to justify the keeping of the Death Penalty in our law books.
"It is laughable that the Deputy Minister even suggested, at this day and time in Malaysia, that thorough investigations carried out by an experienced and effective police force is yet another safeguard to prevent miscarriage of justice," the MADPET statement said.
World turning away
Umran Kadir and MADPET both noted the worldwide trend of countries rejecting the death penalty and referred to the Philippines, which abolished the death penalty last month.
Umran Kadir wrote that: "Malaysia is among a shrinking group of 71 countries that continue to cling on to an unmerciful and irreversible punishment."
"It is high time we let compassion guide us on this issue."
In a footnote to his newspaper column, Umran Kadir noted "with sadness" that from 1970 to the present, 359 people had been condemned to death byMalaysian courts while 159 were currently on death row.
MADPET called for an immediate moratorium on all executions and the complete abolition of the death penalty in Malaysia.
The Deputy Minister tabled a written statement in Malaysia's Dewan Rakyat in response to a question from parliamentarian Karpal Singh.
Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk M. Kayveas told Parliament on 28 June that: "The Government has no intention of abolishing the death penalty."
The Deputy Minister said the death penalty was "only provided for serious crimes" such as murder and drug trafficking, and there were "enough safeguards" in the judicial system to ensure it was not handed out easily.
N. Surendran and Charles Hector, from the group Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET), said they were "disappointed" by the Deputy Minister's "unsubstantiated and false statement".
They said in a media release posted on the website of the Malaysia Bar that the statement was "baseless and cannot be justified by any facts or statistical proof", citing studies that have "failed to find convincing evidence that capital punishment is a more effective deterrent of crime than long-term imprisonment".
"The Malaysian government ought to have conducted a thorough study on the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the death penalty as a deterent to serious crime before having a Deputy Minister, who is a lawyer, stand up in Paliament and attempt to turn a myth into an empirical truth," they said.
Umran Kadir, a columnist with publication Sun 2 Surf, described the Deputy Minister's stance as "an inexcusable position to take when international studies overwhelmingly support the notion that the death penalty is not an effective deterrent to crime".
He said "the ugly truth is that in dispensing justice mistakes can and do happen".
"Civilisation has moved far beyond the time of Hammurabi when "an eye for an eye" was the basis of all laws. The death penalty creates a senseless and vicious cycle of violence. I firmly believe that we are in no position to take away that which God has bequeathed upon each of us," Umran Kadir wrote.
What safeguards?
MADPET also rejected the Deputy Minister's statement that there were adequate safeguards in the judicial system, and described as "laughable" the claim that the country's experienced police provided an additional safeguard against a miscarriage of justice.
"What safeguards is the Honourable Deputy Minister speaking of? In Malaysia there is no immediate access to a lawyer upon arrest, immediate right to a phone call and no right to full pre-trial disclosure [of all evidence to the accused]," they said.
"It must be reiterated that even in jurisdictions where all these safeguards exist, the number of persons wrongfully condemned to death have been frighteningly high. Human justice is dangerously fallible, and the only acceptable choice for any civilized nation is to abolish the death penalty.
"The fact that a person has the right to appeal to the Court of Appeal and then the Federal Court, and thereafter to the Pardons Board for clemency is grossly insufficient to justify the keeping of the Death Penalty in our law books.
"It is laughable that the Deputy Minister even suggested, at this day and time in Malaysia, that thorough investigations carried out by an experienced and effective police force is yet another safeguard to prevent miscarriage of justice," the MADPET statement said.
World turning away
Umran Kadir and MADPET both noted the worldwide trend of countries rejecting the death penalty and referred to the Philippines, which abolished the death penalty last month.
Umran Kadir wrote that: "Malaysia is among a shrinking group of 71 countries that continue to cling on to an unmerciful and irreversible punishment."
"It is high time we let compassion guide us on this issue."
In a footnote to his newspaper column, Umran Kadir noted "with sadness" that from 1970 to the present, 359 people had been condemned to death byMalaysian courts while 159 were currently on death row.
MADPET called for an immediate moratorium on all executions and the complete abolition of the death penalty in Malaysia.
The Deputy Minister tabled a written statement in Malaysia's Dewan Rakyat in response to a question from parliamentarian Karpal Singh.
Friday, 21 July 2006
Malaysia: Life sentence under the noose
The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) is investigating the country's long-term death row inmates, including a man who has spent 22 years in prison awaiting execution.
The New Straits Times reported on 28 June that Suhakam came across at least five cases when a team visited death row in Kajang Prison while investigating the death in custody of Alex Wong.
The prisoners, who were convicted of murder, drug trafficking and firearms possession offences, have been held in prison for periods between 10 and 22 years.
The newspaper reported that Suhakam is examining whether the prisoners have in fact received two sentences for their crimes: long-term imprisonment in solitary confinement and a death sentence.
It said authorities would not say why the men had not been executed, but it understood "a combination of administrative hitches and delays in handing down written court judgements have kept these criminals in solitary confinement for years".
"Usually, those sentenced to death spend up to 10 years exhausting the appeals and clemency process," the paper said.
According to the NST, "In 1993, a British court found that it was inhuman and degrading to hang anyone who had spent more than five years on Death Row."
Lawyers welcome inquiry
The Malaysia Bar Council welcomed the report of an investigation by Suhakam and renewed its call for the abolition of the death penalty.
The Malaysia Bar passed a resolution at its annual general meeting on 18 March 2006, calling for an end to the death penalty and for all death sentences to be commuted.
Council Chairman Yeo Yang Poh said in a statement: "Death penalty is a cruel and extreme form of punishment. Keeping a person on death row waiting indefinitely or for a long period of time adds to its cruelty.
"The uncertain and indefinite waiting and fearing for the final moment constitutes inhumane psychological torture, the nature of which those who have not suffered the experience will not even begin to comprehend," Yeo Yang Poh said.
He said this situation was made worse by the fact that prisoners were kept in solitary confinement most of the time "which means that they have to face the suffering all alone".
Yeo Yang Poh said The Bar Council understood the delays were caused by the slow operation of the clemency process because "the Pardons Board convenes infrequently".
"This issue needs urgent attention, as long as capital punishment remains in our statute books," he said.
'An extreme process'
The Bar Council opposed the death penalty because "No legal system in the world is foolproof or error-free".
"No matter how procedurally fair the system is, how stringent the rules of evidence may be, how much reliance is placed on advanced and scientific investigation methods, or how many opportunities of appeal are afforded; one cannot rule out the possibility of error," Yeo Yang Poh said.
"Experience all over the world shows that this possibility is a real and not a theoretical one. Perfection and absolute correctness are neither expected of, nor attainable by, any legal system."
Yeo Yang Poh acknowledged "considerable" public support for the death penalty in Malaysia.
But he questioned whether it was acceptable for an innocent man or woman to be put to death under Malaysia's legal system "because society wishes to punish the guilty ones by employing this most extreme and irredeemable process".
The New Straits Times reported on 28 June that Suhakam came across at least five cases when a team visited death row in Kajang Prison while investigating the death in custody of Alex Wong.
The prisoners, who were convicted of murder, drug trafficking and firearms possession offences, have been held in prison for periods between 10 and 22 years.
The newspaper reported that Suhakam is examining whether the prisoners have in fact received two sentences for their crimes: long-term imprisonment in solitary confinement and a death sentence.
It said authorities would not say why the men had not been executed, but it understood "a combination of administrative hitches and delays in handing down written court judgements have kept these criminals in solitary confinement for years".
"Usually, those sentenced to death spend up to 10 years exhausting the appeals and clemency process," the paper said.
According to the NST, "In 1993, a British court found that it was inhuman and degrading to hang anyone who had spent more than five years on Death Row."
Lawyers welcome inquiry
The Malaysia Bar Council welcomed the report of an investigation by Suhakam and renewed its call for the abolition of the death penalty.
The Malaysia Bar passed a resolution at its annual general meeting on 18 March 2006, calling for an end to the death penalty and for all death sentences to be commuted.
Council Chairman Yeo Yang Poh said in a statement: "Death penalty is a cruel and extreme form of punishment. Keeping a person on death row waiting indefinitely or for a long period of time adds to its cruelty.
"The uncertain and indefinite waiting and fearing for the final moment constitutes inhumane psychological torture, the nature of which those who have not suffered the experience will not even begin to comprehend," Yeo Yang Poh said.
He said this situation was made worse by the fact that prisoners were kept in solitary confinement most of the time "which means that they have to face the suffering all alone".
Yeo Yang Poh said The Bar Council understood the delays were caused by the slow operation of the clemency process because "the Pardons Board convenes infrequently".
"This issue needs urgent attention, as long as capital punishment remains in our statute books," he said.
'An extreme process'
The Bar Council opposed the death penalty because "No legal system in the world is foolproof or error-free".
"No matter how procedurally fair the system is, how stringent the rules of evidence may be, how much reliance is placed on advanced and scientific investigation methods, or how many opportunities of appeal are afforded; one cannot rule out the possibility of error," Yeo Yang Poh said.
"Experience all over the world shows that this possibility is a real and not a theoretical one. Perfection and absolute correctness are neither expected of, nor attainable by, any legal system."
Yeo Yang Poh acknowledged "considerable" public support for the death penalty in Malaysia.
But he questioned whether it was acceptable for an innocent man or woman to be put to death under Malaysia's legal system "because society wishes to punish the guilty ones by employing this most extreme and irredeemable process".
Wednesday, 12 July 2006
Abolition sparks human rights debate in Philippines
The President of the Philippines presented the Pope with a copy of the bill abolishing the death penalty, two days after she signed it into law. But the final step in the long campaign to end executions in the Philippines has prompted further debate about human rights in the country.
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo gave Pope Benedict XVI a copy of Republic Act 9346 at their meeting in the Vatican on 26 June.
The act repealed the 1994 legislation that restored the death penalty and commuted all outstanding death sentences to life imprisonment without parole.
A statement from the presidential palace said the presentation to the Pope was a “gift of life” that was "wrapped in the high moral imperatives to walk away from capital punishment."
The statement said that abolition brought "swift emotional and moral relief to the third largest Catholic nation in the world".
"The President has made no secret that the abolition of the capital punishment would add new meaning to her meeting with Catholicism’s No. 1 defender of the sanctity of human life," it said.
The repeal of the death penalty law was criticised by anti-crime and victims' groups, and drew accusations that Mrs Arroyo was seeking support from the Church to strengthen her embattled presidency.
Political analyst Earl Perrano from the Institute of Political and Electoral Reforms told BBC News that the death penalty would always be divisive in the Philippines.
"There are often miscarriages of justice as police work in the Philippines is very sloppy and technology is outdated," he told the BBC.
"Because the justice system is very corrupt, most of the convicted are the poor because the rich bribe their way out of a sentence," he said.
'Prison conditions next'
Following victory in the campaign against the death penalty, the Catholic Church's Episcopal Commission on Prison Pastoral Care (ECPPC) plans to step up its campaign to address the state of the prison system.
A conference at the end of July will consider the Church's work with inmates in the Philippine prison system, which has problems with severe overcrowding, disease and detention of vulnerable juvenile prisoners in the same cells as adults.
AsiaNews.it reported that a Manila prison built to hold 800 detainees is currently housing more than 5,000, and the prison in Quezon City is built for 815 people but its population is nearly 3,500.
Call to end political killings
Human rights groups have also highlighted that while judicial killings have now been outlawed, there is a growing problem with extra-judicial killings -- political killings outside the framework of the law.
The International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH) and the Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA) "warmly" welcomed the abolition move and called on Mrs Arroyo to address an apparent increase in politically motivated killings.
PAHRA Secretary-General Renato G. Mabunga and FIDH President Sidiki Kaba wrote an open letter to the President on 28 June urging her "to mark a new commitment to the absolute and unequivocal respect of the most fundamental human right, the right to life".
"Reports of extra-judicial killings in the Philippines are received by our organisations with alarming regularity," they wrote in their letter.
"There is a growing pattern of politically motivated killings, reported across a number of provinces nationwide. Witnesses have reported victims being shot dead by unidentified men, suspected of links with the military, police, and other security forces.
"The principal targets of the shootings are human rights defenders, journalists, lawyers, community leaders, and union workers who speak out against the authorities. Groups and individuals identified with the opposition are increasingly at risk. Over the past year dozens of activists identified with opposition groups have been killed."
Mr Mabunga and Mr Kaba accused the government of consistently failing to investigate or bring to justice the people responsible for the attacks.
"This climate of impunity further fuels human rights violations," they said.
They called on the Philippine authorities to meet their obligations under international human rights standards by conducting prompt, thorough and impartial investigations into all extra-judicial killings, and ensuring that those identified as responsible were brought to justice before independent and impartial tribunals.
"Our organisations call upon you as President to send a clear and strong message that these unlawful killings will not be tolerated under any circumstances" they said.
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo gave Pope Benedict XVI a copy of Republic Act 9346 at their meeting in the Vatican on 26 June.
The act repealed the 1994 legislation that restored the death penalty and commuted all outstanding death sentences to life imprisonment without parole.
A statement from the presidential palace said the presentation to the Pope was a “gift of life” that was "wrapped in the high moral imperatives to walk away from capital punishment."
The statement said that abolition brought "swift emotional and moral relief to the third largest Catholic nation in the world".
"The President has made no secret that the abolition of the capital punishment would add new meaning to her meeting with Catholicism’s No. 1 defender of the sanctity of human life," it said.
The repeal of the death penalty law was criticised by anti-crime and victims' groups, and drew accusations that Mrs Arroyo was seeking support from the Church to strengthen her embattled presidency.
Political analyst Earl Perrano from the Institute of Political and Electoral Reforms told BBC News that the death penalty would always be divisive in the Philippines.
"There are often miscarriages of justice as police work in the Philippines is very sloppy and technology is outdated," he told the BBC.
"Because the justice system is very corrupt, most of the convicted are the poor because the rich bribe their way out of a sentence," he said.
'Prison conditions next'
Following victory in the campaign against the death penalty, the Catholic Church's Episcopal Commission on Prison Pastoral Care (ECPPC) plans to step up its campaign to address the state of the prison system.
A conference at the end of July will consider the Church's work with inmates in the Philippine prison system, which has problems with severe overcrowding, disease and detention of vulnerable juvenile prisoners in the same cells as adults.
AsiaNews.it reported that a Manila prison built to hold 800 detainees is currently housing more than 5,000, and the prison in Quezon City is built for 815 people but its population is nearly 3,500.
Call to end political killings
Human rights groups have also highlighted that while judicial killings have now been outlawed, there is a growing problem with extra-judicial killings -- political killings outside the framework of the law.
The International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH) and the Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA) "warmly" welcomed the abolition move and called on Mrs Arroyo to address an apparent increase in politically motivated killings.
PAHRA Secretary-General Renato G. Mabunga and FIDH President Sidiki Kaba wrote an open letter to the President on 28 June urging her "to mark a new commitment to the absolute and unequivocal respect of the most fundamental human right, the right to life".
"Reports of extra-judicial killings in the Philippines are received by our organisations with alarming regularity," they wrote in their letter.
"There is a growing pattern of politically motivated killings, reported across a number of provinces nationwide. Witnesses have reported victims being shot dead by unidentified men, suspected of links with the military, police, and other security forces.
"The principal targets of the shootings are human rights defenders, journalists, lawyers, community leaders, and union workers who speak out against the authorities. Groups and individuals identified with the opposition are increasingly at risk. Over the past year dozens of activists identified with opposition groups have been killed."
Mr Mabunga and Mr Kaba accused the government of consistently failing to investigate or bring to justice the people responsible for the attacks.
"This climate of impunity further fuels human rights violations," they said.
They called on the Philippine authorities to meet their obligations under international human rights standards by conducting prompt, thorough and impartial investigations into all extra-judicial killings, and ensuring that those identified as responsible were brought to justice before independent and impartial tribunals.
"Our organisations call upon you as President to send a clear and strong message that these unlawful killings will not be tolerated under any circumstances" they said.
President Arroyo signs death penalty law
With one signature the death penalty was formally abolished in the Philippines and more than 1,000 people spared execution.
President Arroyo signed into law Republic Act 9346 abolishing the death penalty at a ceremony at the Malacañang presidential palace on 24 June 2006. The act commutes all death sentences to life imprisonment without parole.
The President signed the law one day before she was due to fly to the Vatican to meet the Pope.
Her signature formally ratified the bills passed by both houses of the Philippines Congress on 6 June.
At the signing ceremony she said that in gathering together to abolish the death penalty, "we celebrate life in the most meaningful way".
She said she appreciated the "enthusiasm of Congress" and thanked the church for providing a "beacon of grace and discernment".
"When I meet the Holy Father soon in the Vatican, I shall tell him that we have acted in the name of life for a world of peace and harmony," she said.
The President acknowledged concerns that abolishing the death penalty would lead to an increase in serious crime in the Philippines, and she committed her government to efforts to prevent and control crime.
"I allay the concerns of those who think that the abolition of the death penalty opens the floodgates to heinous acts... We shall continue to devote the increasing weight of our resources to the prevention and control of serious crimes, rather than take the lives of those who commit them," she said.
A report from the palace said Archbishop Fernando Filoni, Apostolic Nuncio to the Philippines, welcomed the move saying "this (abolition) shows that the culture of life is alive and important".
The report said the ceremony was witnessed by "the principal authors of the bill" Reps. Edcel Lagman, Salacnib Baterina and Rene Velarde, from the House of Representatives, and Senators Francis Pangilinan and Juan Flavier from the Senate.
Members of a number of non-government organisations which had lobbied Congress for the abolition of the death penalty were also present. They included Couples for Christ, the National Interfaith Convention Committee, the Coalition Against the Death Penalty, Samahang Pamilya sa Death Row, the Free Legal Assistance Group and Isaiah Prison Ministry.
The President's speech
The President's full speech on the occasion is reproduced below.
PGMA's Speech during the signing into law of the House Bill Abolishing the Death Penalty or Republic Act 9346 or An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines
Saturday, June 24, 2006
Rizal Hall, Malacañang
"Thank you, Secretary Ermita.
"Today in signing the abolition of the death penalty, we celebrate life in the most meaningful way by gathering our institutions together to repeal the death penalty.
"I appreciate the enthusiasm of Congress in expressing the moral and spiritual force of the Filipino in this law.
"I thank the church for the beacon of grace and discernment. When I meet the Holy Father soon in the Vatican, I shall tell him that we have acted in the name of life for a world of peace and harmony.
"I allay the concerns of those who think that the abolition of the death penalty opens the floodgates to heinous acts. We shall devote... We shall continue to devote the increasing weight of our resources to the prevention and control of serious crimes, rather than take the lives of those who commit them.
"I call on the entire criminal justice system -- law enforcers, prosecutors, judges, jailers and the whole community -- to take stock of the responsibility of sharpening law and justice for all.
"On the bombing in Maguindanao targeted at the governor and which killed five people, I condemn this act of terrorism in the strongest terms as a crime against peace and humanity. The authorities must identify the perpetrators, launch a manhunt with the proper rewards, and bring them to justice.
"I extend my sympathies to the families of the victims and assure them that the search for justice will be firm and relentless. We will never be intimidated by these treacherous acts and we shall fight terror as seriously as we embrace peace and development, solidarity among our law-abiding citizens, and our strategic alliances. This commitment stands firm and will not relent until the total defeat of terrorists in every part of the country.
"The rule of law, strictly enforced, shall ride side by side with social justice in paving the way for an atmosphere of political and economic security, so that every person and family shall have the blessings of stable employment, better health, education and public safety.
"We have taken a strong hand against the threats to the law and the republic, but at the same time we yield to the high moral imperatives dictated by God to walk away from capital punishment."
/Ends.
President Arroyo signed into law Republic Act 9346 abolishing the death penalty at a ceremony at the Malacañang presidential palace on 24 June 2006. The act commutes all death sentences to life imprisonment without parole.
The President signed the law one day before she was due to fly to the Vatican to meet the Pope.
Her signature formally ratified the bills passed by both houses of the Philippines Congress on 6 June.
At the signing ceremony she said that in gathering together to abolish the death penalty, "we celebrate life in the most meaningful way".
She said she appreciated the "enthusiasm of Congress" and thanked the church for providing a "beacon of grace and discernment".
"When I meet the Holy Father soon in the Vatican, I shall tell him that we have acted in the name of life for a world of peace and harmony," she said.
The President acknowledged concerns that abolishing the death penalty would lead to an increase in serious crime in the Philippines, and she committed her government to efforts to prevent and control crime.
"I allay the concerns of those who think that the abolition of the death penalty opens the floodgates to heinous acts... We shall continue to devote the increasing weight of our resources to the prevention and control of serious crimes, rather than take the lives of those who commit them," she said.
A report from the palace said Archbishop Fernando Filoni, Apostolic Nuncio to the Philippines, welcomed the move saying "this (abolition) shows that the culture of life is alive and important".
The report said the ceremony was witnessed by "the principal authors of the bill" Reps. Edcel Lagman, Salacnib Baterina and Rene Velarde, from the House of Representatives, and Senators Francis Pangilinan and Juan Flavier from the Senate.
Members of a number of non-government organisations which had lobbied Congress for the abolition of the death penalty were also present. They included Couples for Christ, the National Interfaith Convention Committee, the Coalition Against the Death Penalty, Samahang Pamilya sa Death Row, the Free Legal Assistance Group and Isaiah Prison Ministry.
The President's speech
The President's full speech on the occasion is reproduced below.
PGMA's Speech during the signing into law of the House Bill Abolishing the Death Penalty or Republic Act 9346 or An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines
Saturday, June 24, 2006
Rizal Hall, Malacañang
"Thank you, Secretary Ermita.
"Today in signing the abolition of the death penalty, we celebrate life in the most meaningful way by gathering our institutions together to repeal the death penalty.
"I appreciate the enthusiasm of Congress in expressing the moral and spiritual force of the Filipino in this law.
"I thank the church for the beacon of grace and discernment. When I meet the Holy Father soon in the Vatican, I shall tell him that we have acted in the name of life for a world of peace and harmony.
"I allay the concerns of those who think that the abolition of the death penalty opens the floodgates to heinous acts. We shall devote... We shall continue to devote the increasing weight of our resources to the prevention and control of serious crimes, rather than take the lives of those who commit them.
"I call on the entire criminal justice system -- law enforcers, prosecutors, judges, jailers and the whole community -- to take stock of the responsibility of sharpening law and justice for all.
"On the bombing in Maguindanao targeted at the governor and which killed five people, I condemn this act of terrorism in the strongest terms as a crime against peace and humanity. The authorities must identify the perpetrators, launch a manhunt with the proper rewards, and bring them to justice.
"I extend my sympathies to the families of the victims and assure them that the search for justice will be firm and relentless. We will never be intimidated by these treacherous acts and we shall fight terror as seriously as we embrace peace and development, solidarity among our law-abiding citizens, and our strategic alliances. This commitment stands firm and will not relent until the total defeat of terrorists in every part of the country.
"The rule of law, strictly enforced, shall ride side by side with social justice in paving the way for an atmosphere of political and economic security, so that every person and family shall have the blessings of stable employment, better health, education and public safety.
"We have taken a strong hand against the threats to the law and the republic, but at the same time we yield to the high moral imperatives dictated by God to walk away from capital punishment."
/Ends.
Wednesday, 5 July 2006
Trade undisturbed by Singapore execution
Singapore's Prime Minister visited Australia in mid-June and both governments agreed that the "difficult issue" of a hanging would not interrupt a strong and lucrative relationship.
On 14 June a 19-gun salute welcomed Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong to Parliament House in Canberra for official talks on trade and security issues.
Mr Lee's visit, his first as prime minister, came nearly seven months after the Singapore Government hanged convicted Australian drug trafficker Van Tuong Nguyen.
The execution was carried out on 2 December 2005 despite repeated appeals for clemency from the Australian government and widespread protest in the Australian community.
'Could not be closer'
At a joint press conference at Parliament House, Australian Prime Minister John Howard said "Australia and Singapore could not be closer", and referred to the two countries' common interests in strategic, defence and free trade issues.
Prime Minister Lee said the relationship between the two countries was "in good shape" despite having had "some difficult issues to deal with over the last year".
His remarks were widely interpreted to refer to the execution of Van Nguyen and disagreements over Singapore's access to Australian international aviation routes.
Mr Lee said these issues were handled "within the overall understanding that we are really strategic partners, Singapore with an interest in having Australia engaged in the region and Australia working with Singapore as a long term friend".
"These are issues which we can manage and keep in proportion as we move forward," he said.
Singapore is Australia's eight largest trading and investment partner and its largest trade and investment partner in ASEAN.
Death penalty to stay
When asked whether Singapore was going to soften its policy of executing or others convicted of drug crime, Mr Lee said the death penalty was "part of our criminal justice system, that applies in particular to drug traffickers whether they’re Singaporeans or foreigners".
"It is not targeted at Australians or any particular country but it is a set of laws which apply in Singapore in which we have to enforce impartially and which we will continue to do so."
In an interview with The Australian newspaper prior to his visit, Mr Lee said he accepted many Australians were opposed to the death penalty, but he said many also supported his government's policy.
"I don't think Australian pressure on high-profile cases like these will cause any Southeast Asian nation to change its position on the death penalty," he said.
Following the execution in December, Amnesty International Australia criticised the Australian government's "selective opposition" to the death penalty.
"Australia cannot support the death penalty when it is convenient and then argue that Australian citizens should be the only people spared execution," the organisation said.
"Australia should take a principled stance against the death penalty and not be afraid to express its views throughout the region. It is not unrealistic to expect Australia to take a strong and unapologetic position on such a cruel and inhuman punishment."
On 14 June a 19-gun salute welcomed Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong to Parliament House in Canberra for official talks on trade and security issues.
Mr Lee's visit, his first as prime minister, came nearly seven months after the Singapore Government hanged convicted Australian drug trafficker Van Tuong Nguyen.
The execution was carried out on 2 December 2005 despite repeated appeals for clemency from the Australian government and widespread protest in the Australian community.
'Could not be closer'
At a joint press conference at Parliament House, Australian Prime Minister John Howard said "Australia and Singapore could not be closer", and referred to the two countries' common interests in strategic, defence and free trade issues.
Prime Minister Lee said the relationship between the two countries was "in good shape" despite having had "some difficult issues to deal with over the last year".
His remarks were widely interpreted to refer to the execution of Van Nguyen and disagreements over Singapore's access to Australian international aviation routes.
Mr Lee said these issues were handled "within the overall understanding that we are really strategic partners, Singapore with an interest in having Australia engaged in the region and Australia working with Singapore as a long term friend".
"These are issues which we can manage and keep in proportion as we move forward," he said.
Singapore is Australia's eight largest trading and investment partner and its largest trade and investment partner in ASEAN.
Death penalty to stay
When asked whether Singapore was going to soften its policy of executing or others convicted of drug crime, Mr Lee said the death penalty was "part of our criminal justice system, that applies in particular to drug traffickers whether they’re Singaporeans or foreigners".
"It is not targeted at Australians or any particular country but it is a set of laws which apply in Singapore in which we have to enforce impartially and which we will continue to do so."
In an interview with The Australian newspaper prior to his visit, Mr Lee said he accepted many Australians were opposed to the death penalty, but he said many also supported his government's policy.
"I don't think Australian pressure on high-profile cases like these will cause any Southeast Asian nation to change its position on the death penalty," he said.
Following the execution in December, Amnesty International Australia criticised the Australian government's "selective opposition" to the death penalty.
"Australia cannot support the death penalty when it is convenient and then argue that Australian citizens should be the only people spared execution," the organisation said.
"Australia should take a principled stance against the death penalty and not be afraid to express its views throughout the region. It is not unrealistic to expect Australia to take a strong and unapologetic position on such a cruel and inhuman punishment."
Sunday, 2 July 2006
Political questions over China's new appeal judges
China's supreme court is preparing to hear appeals against death sentences, but it appears the new system will still raise concerns about political interference in the administration of the death penalty.
Xinhua newsagency reports the Supreme People's Court (SPC) is recruiting new judges from a list of experienced lawyers and law teachers nominated by provincial judicial organs.
The report said those with "strong political qualifications and a sense of responsibility" would be chosen as judges to hear death penalty reviews, according to SPC Vice-President Xiong Xuanguo.
In April, Xinhua reported that tribunal staff had been selected from regional courts across China and they were receiving a month of training in Beijing.
Xinhua said that the move by the SPC "appears to be a response to many Chinese media reports in recent years, which exposed wrongful death penalty sentences, sparking public debate". (See the ADP report here.)
It is still unclear when the supreme court will begin hearing appeals or how the provincial courts will respond to the reassertion of authority by the SPC.
Xiong Xuanguo was quoted in the latest Xinhua report as saying: "Taking back the power of death penalty review is the final safeguard (against miscarriages of justice). We'll ensure the sentence is appropriate and follow the principle of strictly controlling the passing down of the death penalty."
Xinhua said the SPC's appeal judges may question the defendant and hear the prosecution arguments, where the case is in dispute between the prosecution and defence.
Where the prosecution and defence "do not have conflicting opinions", the SPC is likely to base its decision on a review of the files from the hearings in the local courts.
Xinhua newsagency reports the Supreme People's Court (SPC) is recruiting new judges from a list of experienced lawyers and law teachers nominated by provincial judicial organs.
The report said those with "strong political qualifications and a sense of responsibility" would be chosen as judges to hear death penalty reviews, according to SPC Vice-President Xiong Xuanguo.
In April, Xinhua reported that tribunal staff had been selected from regional courts across China and they were receiving a month of training in Beijing.
Xinhua said that the move by the SPC "appears to be a response to many Chinese media reports in recent years, which exposed wrongful death penalty sentences, sparking public debate". (See the ADP report here.)
It is still unclear when the supreme court will begin hearing appeals or how the provincial courts will respond to the reassertion of authority by the SPC.
Xiong Xuanguo was quoted in the latest Xinhua report as saying: "Taking back the power of death penalty review is the final safeguard (against miscarriages of justice). We'll ensure the sentence is appropriate and follow the principle of strictly controlling the passing down of the death penalty."
Xinhua said the SPC's appeal judges may question the defendant and hear the prosecution arguments, where the case is in dispute between the prosecution and defence.
Where the prosecution and defence "do not have conflicting opinions", the SPC is likely to base its decision on a review of the files from the hearings in the local courts.
Tuesday, 27 June 2006
Call for South Korea to show 'leadership'
Amnesty International (AI) has written an open letter to South Korea's Minister of Justice, Mr Chun Jung-bae, welcoming the current review of the death penalty and encouraging the country to consider its abolition.
The letter, from AI's Secretary-General Irene Khan, highlighted and addressed four "key arguments" for abolition:
"The death penalty is most commonly used in the belief that it acts as a deterrent to violent crime and governments therefore find it difficult to abandon a measure they believe protects their citizens," the organisation said.
"Scientific studies have, however, consistently failed to find convincing evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments."
The open letter noted the Asian region was an exception to the global trend towards abolition and urged South Korea to provide leadership and a positive example on human rights.
"The region contains countries with high rates of executions and no apparent prospect of abolition. Nations such as Japan, China, Singapore and Indonesia appear to be staunch supporters of capital punishment," it said.
"Amnesty International believes that the abolition of the death penalty in South Korea would provide the region with much needed human rights leadership and be a valuable example of a nation progressing towards the full protection of human rights.
"Such a step would encourage further positive developments in the region such as the abolition of the death penalty in Cambodia, Nepal and Timor Leste, and the Philippines’ decision this month to abolish the death penalty after it was re-imposed in 1994."
The human rights organisation concluded: "Executions give society the illusion of control over the threat posed to public safety by serious crimes. In the immediate period around an execution there is a feeling that a blow has somehow been dealt against criminality. However, the reality is that capital punishment serves no useful purpose in the fight against crime."
Read the full text of the open letter here.
The letter, from AI's Secretary-General Irene Khan, highlighted and addressed four "key arguments" for abolition:
- Whether executions achieve justice for the victims of crimes and their relatives
- The death penalty as a deterrent to crime, and the corresponding fear that abolition will lead to higher rates of criminality
- The "ever present" risk of executing the innocent, and
- Whether societies should show their "revulsion" for heinous crimes by executing the perpetrators.
"The death penalty is most commonly used in the belief that it acts as a deterrent to violent crime and governments therefore find it difficult to abandon a measure they believe protects their citizens," the organisation said.
"Scientific studies have, however, consistently failed to find convincing evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments."
The open letter noted the Asian region was an exception to the global trend towards abolition and urged South Korea to provide leadership and a positive example on human rights.
"The region contains countries with high rates of executions and no apparent prospect of abolition. Nations such as Japan, China, Singapore and Indonesia appear to be staunch supporters of capital punishment," it said.
"Amnesty International believes that the abolition of the death penalty in South Korea would provide the region with much needed human rights leadership and be a valuable example of a nation progressing towards the full protection of human rights.
"Such a step would encourage further positive developments in the region such as the abolition of the death penalty in Cambodia, Nepal and Timor Leste, and the Philippines’ decision this month to abolish the death penalty after it was re-imposed in 1994."
The human rights organisation concluded: "Executions give society the illusion of control over the threat posed to public safety by serious crimes. In the immediate period around an execution there is a feeling that a blow has somehow been dealt against criminality. However, the reality is that capital punishment serves no useful purpose in the fight against crime."
Read the full text of the open letter here.
Saturday, 24 June 2006
Viet Nam: Take action against the death penalty
Amnesty International Australia has issued a letter-writing action encouraging people to write to the Vietnamese government outlining human rights concerns about its use of the death penalty.
According to Amnesty International, there has been a "dramatic increase in Viet Nam's use of the death penalty, especially for drug-related crimes". The organisation is particularly concerned about the application of the death penalty for economic crimes such as embezzling state property, as well as drug-related offences.
The action says that: "Concern about the use of the death penalty in Viet Nam is compounded by the routine unfairness of trials that do not conform to international standards."
However, there are "some positive signs that the death penalty is being discussed within the Vietnamese government," and AI Australia is asking people to write to the government to encourage this discussion.
"These debates are an opportunity to point out that the death penalty has not been shown to be a more effective deterrent to crime, and to encourage Viet Nam to abolish the death penalty," the action says.
According to Amnesty International, there has been a "dramatic increase in Viet Nam's use of the death penalty, especially for drug-related crimes". The organisation is particularly concerned about the application of the death penalty for economic crimes such as embezzling state property, as well as drug-related offences.
The action says that: "Concern about the use of the death penalty in Viet Nam is compounded by the routine unfairness of trials that do not conform to international standards."
However, there are "some positive signs that the death penalty is being discussed within the Vietnamese government," and AI Australia is asking people to write to the government to encourage this discussion.
"These debates are an opportunity to point out that the death penalty has not been shown to be a more effective deterrent to crime, and to encourage Viet Nam to abolish the death penalty," the action says.
Tuesday, 20 June 2006
China: Another province takes up the needle
A number of countries in Asia are turning to lethal injection in the hope that it will provide a more efficient, politically palatable and less traumatic method of killing prisoners.
Recent reports in Viet Nam indicated the Police Ministry was in favour of a move to lethal injection (see the ADP report here).
In China, Yunnan Province reportedly pioneered the use of lethal injection following the 1996 amendments to the Criminal Procedure Law, and other provinces have since followed suit. Amnesty International has cited official press reports that Yunnan bought 18 buses in March 2003 and converted them to operate as mobile execution chambers.
Now China's Eastern Zhejiang province has embraced the trend, with the announcement that all executions will be carried out by lethal injection from 1 September this year.
The Zhejiang Provincial Supreme Court announced the change on 1 June, according to a report by the China Daily newspaper.
Lethal injection will replace the province's current use of firing squads.
China Daily reports that Supreme Court director Ying Yong said: "Execution by lethal injection demonstrates tremendous progress in China's criminal judgment proceedings and due to our solid efforts, Zhejing Province is capable of carrying out a death penalty of this kind."
"We won't be merciful with those who deserve the death penalty, but to those who haven't committed a grave crime, we won't carry out such a penalty," he said.
Recent reports in Viet Nam indicated the Police Ministry was in favour of a move to lethal injection (see the ADP report here).
In China, Yunnan Province reportedly pioneered the use of lethal injection following the 1996 amendments to the Criminal Procedure Law, and other provinces have since followed suit. Amnesty International has cited official press reports that Yunnan bought 18 buses in March 2003 and converted them to operate as mobile execution chambers.
Now China's Eastern Zhejiang province has embraced the trend, with the announcement that all executions will be carried out by lethal injection from 1 September this year.
The Zhejiang Provincial Supreme Court announced the change on 1 June, according to a report by the China Daily newspaper.
Lethal injection will replace the province's current use of firing squads.
China Daily reports that Supreme Court director Ying Yong said: "Execution by lethal injection demonstrates tremendous progress in China's criminal judgment proceedings and due to our solid efforts, Zhejing Province is capable of carrying out a death penalty of this kind."
"We won't be merciful with those who deserve the death penalty, but to those who haven't committed a grave crime, we won't carry out such a penalty," he said.
Wednesday, 7 June 2006
Philippines abolishes death penalty
The Philippines Congress yesterday abolished the death penalty, repealing the 1993 legislation that reintroduced lethal injection.
More than 1,000 prisoners on death row will now be spared execution with their sentences commuted to life imprisonment without parole.
The Senate voted 16-0, with one abstention, to pass the abolition bills. Within hours the House of Representatives also passed the bills, which now go to the President for signature.
"Victory of life"
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo today celebrated the move as a "victory of life".
The President said in a statement posted on her website: "We celebrate the victory of life as I thank Congress for its immediate action in abolishing the death penalty law. But make no mistake about it, the abolition of the death penalty will be complemented by a stricter and sterner enforcement of the law in all fronts.
"This is not a victory for criminals as some would claim, but rather, clear proof that Filipinos respect and value the sanctity of human life and uphold the virtue and religious doctrines that are expected of us as a dominant Christian nation," she said.
She also said the government would improve the country's jail facilities to create an environment that is more conducive to prisoners' rehabilitation and reformation.
Last week, Mrs Arroyo wrote to Senate President Franklin Drilon calling for the urgent passage of the abolition bills before the adjournment of Congress this week.
In a letter sent to Senate President Franklin M. Drilon, the President pointed to the urgent need for "abolishing death penalty as its imposition was shown to have not served its principal purpose of effectively deterring the commission of heinous crimes".
She also said abolition would "remedy the findings that death penalty is anti-poor as the underprivileged who cannot afford the services of competent counsels are oftentimes the ones convicted of death penalty".
On 15 April, the President announced that the government would commute death sentences to life imprisonment. The following week she certified as urgent a bill abolishing the death penalty.
Supporting "retribution"
Philippines Protestant churches yesterday reaffirmed their support for the death penalty.
The Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches (PCEC) issued a 3-page statement supporting the death penalty as retribution for a "short list of capital crimes".
PCEC national director Evangelical Bishop Efraim Tendero said the death penalty was justified by the Bible.
"The massacre of civilians must be punishable by death. Capital crimes, or those that led to loss of other lives, deserve capital punishment. A man who takes away the life of another forfeits his own," the statement said.
The PCEC statement stands in stark contrast to the position of the Catholic Church in the Philippines, which has campaigned strongly in favour of abolition.
More than 1,000 prisoners on death row will now be spared execution with their sentences commuted to life imprisonment without parole.
The Senate voted 16-0, with one abstention, to pass the abolition bills. Within hours the House of Representatives also passed the bills, which now go to the President for signature.
"Victory of life"
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo today celebrated the move as a "victory of life".
The President said in a statement posted on her website: "We celebrate the victory of life as I thank Congress for its immediate action in abolishing the death penalty law. But make no mistake about it, the abolition of the death penalty will be complemented by a stricter and sterner enforcement of the law in all fronts.
"This is not a victory for criminals as some would claim, but rather, clear proof that Filipinos respect and value the sanctity of human life and uphold the virtue and religious doctrines that are expected of us as a dominant Christian nation," she said.
She also said the government would improve the country's jail facilities to create an environment that is more conducive to prisoners' rehabilitation and reformation.
Last week, Mrs Arroyo wrote to Senate President Franklin Drilon calling for the urgent passage of the abolition bills before the adjournment of Congress this week.
In a letter sent to Senate President Franklin M. Drilon, the President pointed to the urgent need for "abolishing death penalty as its imposition was shown to have not served its principal purpose of effectively deterring the commission of heinous crimes".
She also said abolition would "remedy the findings that death penalty is anti-poor as the underprivileged who cannot afford the services of competent counsels are oftentimes the ones convicted of death penalty".
On 15 April, the President announced that the government would commute death sentences to life imprisonment. The following week she certified as urgent a bill abolishing the death penalty.
Supporting "retribution"
Philippines Protestant churches yesterday reaffirmed their support for the death penalty.
The Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches (PCEC) issued a 3-page statement supporting the death penalty as retribution for a "short list of capital crimes".
PCEC national director Evangelical Bishop Efraim Tendero said the death penalty was justified by the Bible.
"The massacre of civilians must be punishable by death. Capital crimes, or those that led to loss of other lives, deserve capital punishment. A man who takes away the life of another forfeits his own," the statement said.
The PCEC statement stands in stark contrast to the position of the Catholic Church in the Philippines, which has campaigned strongly in favour of abolition.
Sunday, 28 May 2006
China to video death penalty appeals
China will video appeal hearings against death sentences from 1st July, Chief Justice Xiao Yang announced last week.
Xinhua News reports the Chief Justice made the announcement at a national working meeting on criminal trials on 23 May.
Xinhua News reports the Chief Justice made the announcement at a national working meeting on criminal trials on 23 May.
"Video recording of the entire proceedings will be gradually adopted in appeal hearings of death sentence in open court session so that justice of the process can be ensured," he said.
In February, Xiao Yang confirmed that all appeals against death sentences would be heard in an open court from 1st July, part of a series of reforms to China's justice system. The Supreme People's Court will also be reasserting its power to hear all appeals in death penalty cases.
Bangladesh: Death penalty to stay in terrorism law
A Bangladesh government committee is pressing ahead with plans to include the death penalty in new anti-terrorism legislation, according to The New Nation.
The news service reports that a Cabinet committee met on 16 May and agreed to study a draft Anti-Terrorism Act 2006 which includes a maximum sentence of the death penalty.
Cabinet agreed on 13 March to form the committee to examine the draft law in detail.
The New Nation reports that the Cabinet committee’s chair said the draft act would be finalised by 18 June.
It says the Chairman of the Cabinet Committee and Minister for Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Moudud Ahmed told journalists after the meeting that the act would then be submitted to Cabinet for final approval.
Moudud Ahmed said the Anti-Terrorism Act 2006 would be introduced into Parliament after the passage of the National Budget.
In recent years Bangladesh has come under pressure from the United States and the EU to take stronger action to combat terrorism.
The New Nation reports that the draft anti-terrorism act was prepared after research into similar legislation in effect in the UK, the United States, India, Pakistan and Indonesia.
The news service reports that a Cabinet committee met on 16 May and agreed to study a draft Anti-Terrorism Act 2006 which includes a maximum sentence of the death penalty.
Cabinet agreed on 13 March to form the committee to examine the draft law in detail.
The New Nation reports that the Cabinet committee’s chair said the draft act would be finalised by 18 June.
It says the Chairman of the Cabinet Committee and Minister for Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Moudud Ahmed told journalists after the meeting that the act would then be submitted to Cabinet for final approval.
Moudud Ahmed said the Anti-Terrorism Act 2006 would be introduced into Parliament after the passage of the National Budget.
In recent years Bangladesh has come under pressure from the United States and the EU to take stronger action to combat terrorism.
The New Nation reports that the draft anti-terrorism act was prepared after research into similar legislation in effect in the UK, the United States, India, Pakistan and Indonesia.
Tuesday, 16 May 2006
Indonesia: Poso 3 facing imminent execution
[Please note: long post]
Three Indonesian Catholics may be days -- or hours -- away from execution following the rejection of their second appeal by the Supreme Court last week.
Fabianus Tibo, 60, Dominggus da Silva, 42, and Marinus Riwu, 48, were sentenced to death in April 2001 for premeditated murder and inciting riots in the town of Poso, Central Sulawesi. They were convicted of orchestrating sectarian violence in May 2000, in which hundreds of Muslims were killed.
About 2,000 people are estimated to have died in clashes between Christians and Muslims on the island of Sulawesi between 1998 and 2001.
Catholic newsagency AsiaNews.it reports the three men were last week placed in isolation in the Palu prison in Central Sulawesi, in preparation for their execution.
AsiaNews reports the panel of five Supreme Court judges unanimously rejected the second appeal on 10 May, saying that now "there were no more legal venues available to the [the three prisoners'] defence team".
"Others responsible"
The men have denied planning the attacks and, on 1 February 2006, their lawyers announced they had new evidence demonstrating that 16 other men had masterminded the violence.
Their lawyers said the three men were key witnesses in the case and called for a fresh investigation into the attacks.
The men's supporters have claimed that the attacks were organised or supported by well-connected officials from the government, military and intelligence services.
Divided responses
Muslim organisations were reportedly divided in their response to the men's conviction and death sentences.
In early April, the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) and Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), the country's largest Muslim organization, called for a stay of execution until the men’s claims of innocence could be fully examined.
NU leader Ulama Masdar Farid Mas'udi warned that the execution of the three could inflame religious and ethnic divisions and revive the conflict.
Former president and Muslim leader Abdurrahman Wahid made several appeals for clemency, including signing a joint letter asking for a stay of execution, along with leaders from the Protestant, Catholic, Hindu, and Buddhist communities. The letter was sent to President Yudhoyono on 7 April.
Other religious leaders and human rights organisations have called for the death sentences to be delayed or overturned completely.
In contrast, several Muslim student groups in Central Sulawesi have called for the quick execution of the three Christians.
Hundreds of Muslims reportedly held a rally outside the Central Sulawesi Prosecutor's Office on 21 April, demanding that the men be executed immediately for their role in the riots.
Trial questions
Amnesty International has expressed its concern at "reports indicating that the trial of the three men in Palu District Court did not meet international standards of fairness".
The organisation said "witness testimony provided as evidence by the defence may have been ignored by the Court when giving its verdict". It said armed demonstrators had also reportedly gathered outside the courthouse demanding the three men be convicted, and this "intimidation may have affected the outcome of the trial".
Appeals exhausted
The three were sentenced to death in the Palu District Court in Central Sulawesi, and their sentences were upheld by the Central Sulawesi High Court and the Indonesian Supreme Court later in 2001.
In February 2006, Indonesian authorities were reportedly preparing to carry out the death sentences. The Central Sulawesi Prosecutor’s office was reported to have ordered three coffins and begun final preparations to execute the men.
The men exhausted all avenues of appeal when President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono rejected their appeal for clemency on 10 November.
In April 2006, the Supreme Court agreed to conduct a second review of the case, but the Attorney General's Office said the review would not change the original death sentence. Spokesman Masyhudi Ridwan told The Jakarta Post that his office would not accept a new ruling by the Supreme Court, and it was "still preparing the execution, not delaying it".
Generating debate
The case has attracted widespread coverage in Indonesia, and generated an unprecedented level of discussion about the country's use of the death penalty.
For example, on 15 April The Jakarta Post published a column entitled "Death sentence not a solution but a problem", by Frans H. Winarta, a Jakarta-based human rights lawyer and member of the National Law Commission.
He wrote that "the concept of capital punishment as a deterrence must be eliminated if Indonesia wants to be considered a civilized society".
"Indonesia must not embrace the death penalty in its criminal justice system, not only because it is inhumane, but also because it runs counter to our Constitution. The right to life is guaranteed and protected by the Constitution, particularly as far as Article 28 is concerned. Therefore, the new Criminal Code should not adopt the death penalty."
In another high-profile capital case, Indonesian authorities are also preparing to execute three men convicted of organising the October 2002 Bali bombings.
Three Indonesian Catholics may be days -- or hours -- away from execution following the rejection of their second appeal by the Supreme Court last week.
Fabianus Tibo, 60, Dominggus da Silva, 42, and Marinus Riwu, 48, were sentenced to death in April 2001 for premeditated murder and inciting riots in the town of Poso, Central Sulawesi. They were convicted of orchestrating sectarian violence in May 2000, in which hundreds of Muslims were killed.
About 2,000 people are estimated to have died in clashes between Christians and Muslims on the island of Sulawesi between 1998 and 2001.
Catholic newsagency AsiaNews.it reports the three men were last week placed in isolation in the Palu prison in Central Sulawesi, in preparation for their execution.
AsiaNews reports the panel of five Supreme Court judges unanimously rejected the second appeal on 10 May, saying that now "there were no more legal venues available to the [the three prisoners'] defence team".
"Others responsible"
The men have denied planning the attacks and, on 1 February 2006, their lawyers announced they had new evidence demonstrating that 16 other men had masterminded the violence.
Their lawyers said the three men were key witnesses in the case and called for a fresh investigation into the attacks.
The men's supporters have claimed that the attacks were organised or supported by well-connected officials from the government, military and intelligence services.
Divided responses
Muslim organisations were reportedly divided in their response to the men's conviction and death sentences.
In early April, the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) and Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), the country's largest Muslim organization, called for a stay of execution until the men’s claims of innocence could be fully examined.
NU leader Ulama Masdar Farid Mas'udi warned that the execution of the three could inflame religious and ethnic divisions and revive the conflict.
Former president and Muslim leader Abdurrahman Wahid made several appeals for clemency, including signing a joint letter asking for a stay of execution, along with leaders from the Protestant, Catholic, Hindu, and Buddhist communities. The letter was sent to President Yudhoyono on 7 April.
Other religious leaders and human rights organisations have called for the death sentences to be delayed or overturned completely.
In contrast, several Muslim student groups in Central Sulawesi have called for the quick execution of the three Christians.
Hundreds of Muslims reportedly held a rally outside the Central Sulawesi Prosecutor's Office on 21 April, demanding that the men be executed immediately for their role in the riots.
Trial questions
Amnesty International has expressed its concern at "reports indicating that the trial of the three men in Palu District Court did not meet international standards of fairness".
The organisation said "witness testimony provided as evidence by the defence may have been ignored by the Court when giving its verdict". It said armed demonstrators had also reportedly gathered outside the courthouse demanding the three men be convicted, and this "intimidation may have affected the outcome of the trial".
Appeals exhausted
The three were sentenced to death in the Palu District Court in Central Sulawesi, and their sentences were upheld by the Central Sulawesi High Court and the Indonesian Supreme Court later in 2001.
In February 2006, Indonesian authorities were reportedly preparing to carry out the death sentences. The Central Sulawesi Prosecutor’s office was reported to have ordered three coffins and begun final preparations to execute the men.
The men exhausted all avenues of appeal when President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono rejected their appeal for clemency on 10 November.
In April 2006, the Supreme Court agreed to conduct a second review of the case, but the Attorney General's Office said the review would not change the original death sentence. Spokesman Masyhudi Ridwan told The Jakarta Post that his office would not accept a new ruling by the Supreme Court, and it was "still preparing the execution, not delaying it".
Generating debate
The case has attracted widespread coverage in Indonesia, and generated an unprecedented level of discussion about the country's use of the death penalty.
For example, on 15 April The Jakarta Post published a column entitled "Death sentence not a solution but a problem", by Frans H. Winarta, a Jakarta-based human rights lawyer and member of the National Law Commission.
He wrote that "the concept of capital punishment as a deterrence must be eliminated if Indonesia wants to be considered a civilized society".
"Indonesia must not embrace the death penalty in its criminal justice system, not only because it is inhumane, but also because it runs counter to our Constitution. The right to life is guaranteed and protected by the Constitution, particularly as far as Article 28 is concerned. Therefore, the new Criminal Code should not adopt the death penalty."
In another high-profile capital case, Indonesian authorities are also preparing to execute three men convicted of organising the October 2002 Bali bombings.
Tuesday, 9 May 2006
Malaysia: Opposition to water pollution death sentences
Opponents of the death penalty in Malaysia have seriously questioned the practicality and effectiveness of government proposals to apply the death penalty for contaminating water.
The IPS newsagency reports that the death penalty provisions are part of a bill that "seeks to revamp the way water is managed in the country, transferring control of state water authorities and privatised firms to a single federal regulatory body".
IPS reports the new Water Services Industry Bill, which also provides for the death penalty for serious water contamination that results in loss of life, is due for a second reading in parliament this week.
It said the death penalty could apply to a person who contaminated the water supply with the intention of endangering lives or causing death, as well as to someone who contaminated the water supply with any substance that would be likely to endanger lives.
'Absurd' penalty
The IPS report said opponents of the law saw it as draconian, unworkable and ineffective in addressing the true causes of water pollution.
It quoted Charles Hector, a human rights lawyer and one of the coordinators of the campaign network Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET). Mr Hector said: "Most of the time, the real offenders are likely to be companies and you can't hang the companies.
"So who would face the death penalty then -- the chairman of the board? All the directors? The general manager? The administrative officer? It's absurd," he said.
Hector told IPS there were already provisions in the penal code that covered an intention to kill.
IPS reports that more than half of Malaysia's rivers are polluted by "raw or partially treated sewage as well as industrial effluents, agricultural run-offs, waste from animal husbandry and land development, and municipal rubbish".
Opposition Parliamentarian Teresa Kok said she thought that, when the government framed the bill, it had in mind terrorists who might deliberately contaminate water sources.
In April, Amnesty International Malaysia condemned the death penalty provisions in the bill, saying the move was "bucking" the worldwide trend towards abolition of the death penalty. (See the ADP report here.)
The IPS newsagency reports that the death penalty provisions are part of a bill that "seeks to revamp the way water is managed in the country, transferring control of state water authorities and privatised firms to a single federal regulatory body".
IPS reports the new Water Services Industry Bill, which also provides for the death penalty for serious water contamination that results in loss of life, is due for a second reading in parliament this week.
It said the death penalty could apply to a person who contaminated the water supply with the intention of endangering lives or causing death, as well as to someone who contaminated the water supply with any substance that would be likely to endanger lives.
'Absurd' penalty
The IPS report said opponents of the law saw it as draconian, unworkable and ineffective in addressing the true causes of water pollution.
It quoted Charles Hector, a human rights lawyer and one of the coordinators of the campaign network Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET). Mr Hector said: "Most of the time, the real offenders are likely to be companies and you can't hang the companies.
"So who would face the death penalty then -- the chairman of the board? All the directors? The general manager? The administrative officer? It's absurd," he said.
Hector told IPS there were already provisions in the penal code that covered an intention to kill.
IPS reports that more than half of Malaysia's rivers are polluted by "raw or partially treated sewage as well as industrial effluents, agricultural run-offs, waste from animal husbandry and land development, and municipal rubbish".
Opposition Parliamentarian Teresa Kok said she thought that, when the government framed the bill, it had in mind terrorists who might deliberately contaminate water sources.
In April, Amnesty International Malaysia condemned the death penalty provisions in the bill, saying the move was "bucking" the worldwide trend towards abolition of the death penalty. (See the ADP report here.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
