Punjab to oppose death penalty abolition
Monday 4/10/2010
From: Gulf Times
The government in Pakistan’s Punjab province has decided to oppose the conversion of capital punishment into life imprisonment, contending that it would create lawlessness, lead to frequent occurrence of heinous crimes and proliferation of hired assassins.
Ending the death penalty, the provincial government claims, is also against Islamic injunctions, a Punjab home department official says. Executions were put on hold till December 2010 by President Asif Ali Zardari after he took over as the head of state in September 2008. The last condemned prisoner - a former soldier who had killed a colonel and his family - was hanged in November, 2008.
Monday, 4 October 2010
Thursday, 16 September 2010
Indonesia: Australian police appeal for mercy
Aussie Cops Seek Mercy for Bali 9 Drug Smuggler
Made Arya Kencana & AFP
September 16, 2010
From: The Jakarta Globe
Denpasar. The former Australian Federal Police commissioner who passed on intelligence to Indonesian police that helped doom the so-called Bali Nine drug smugglers, asked a court here on Thursday to spare the life of one of the smugglers.
Testifying at the appeal of 24-year-old Scott Rush, Mick Keelty, the former AFP commissioner, told the court that Rush was a "small-time player" and did not deserve his sentence of death by firing squad.
"His [Rush's] role was minimal. He was a courier," Keelty said during the hearing at the Denpasar District Court.
Keelty told the court that as the AFP's top-ranking officer in 2005, he had given the green light on two occasions for information to be passed on to his Indonesian counterparts about the nine Australians who conspired to smuggle 8.2 kilograms of heroin from Bali into Australia.
The Australian, a daily newspaper, reported in August that the AFP asked the Indonesian police in April 2005 to "attempt to keep the group under surveillance, identify the source of the drugs and obtain as much evidence and intelligence as possible to help the AFP nail the organizers in Australia."
The newspaper also reported that four days later, the AFP sent Indonesian authorities another letter containing the "dates, times and flight details of the Bali Nine's return to Australia."
Keelty told the court that the AFP, which was tipped off about the plan by a lawyer working for Rush's father, included intelligence on Rush's "minimal role" and his young age at the time of the foiled drug run.
Rush, whose original life sentence was changed to death on appeal by prosecutors, was 19 years old when he was caught with heroin strapped to his body at Bali's Ngurah Rai International Airport.
"This young man had just gone to Indonesia for the first time. In fact, it was the very first time he ever got out of Australia," Keelty told the court.
Michael Phelan, the current AFP deputy commissioner, told the court that Rush did not have a criminal record in Australia and because it was his first drug offense he would face "less than 10 years" if convicted of the same crime at home.
The hearing was adjourned until Sept. 26.
Rush was not in court on Thursday but last month he publicly apologized to the court and begged for forgiveness. Two other Bali Nine members, Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan, have also launched appeals against their death sentences.
Made Arya Kencana & AFP
September 16, 2010
From: The Jakarta Globe
Denpasar. The former Australian Federal Police commissioner who passed on intelligence to Indonesian police that helped doom the so-called Bali Nine drug smugglers, asked a court here on Thursday to spare the life of one of the smugglers.
Testifying at the appeal of 24-year-old Scott Rush, Mick Keelty, the former AFP commissioner, told the court that Rush was a "small-time player" and did not deserve his sentence of death by firing squad.
"His [Rush's] role was minimal. He was a courier," Keelty said during the hearing at the Denpasar District Court.
Keelty told the court that as the AFP's top-ranking officer in 2005, he had given the green light on two occasions for information to be passed on to his Indonesian counterparts about the nine Australians who conspired to smuggle 8.2 kilograms of heroin from Bali into Australia.
The Australian, a daily newspaper, reported in August that the AFP asked the Indonesian police in April 2005 to "attempt to keep the group under surveillance, identify the source of the drugs and obtain as much evidence and intelligence as possible to help the AFP nail the organizers in Australia."
The newspaper also reported that four days later, the AFP sent Indonesian authorities another letter containing the "dates, times and flight details of the Bali Nine's return to Australia."
Keelty told the court that the AFP, which was tipped off about the plan by a lawyer working for Rush's father, included intelligence on Rush's "minimal role" and his young age at the time of the foiled drug run.
Rush, whose original life sentence was changed to death on appeal by prosecutors, was 19 years old when he was caught with heroin strapped to his body at Bali's Ngurah Rai International Airport.
"This young man had just gone to Indonesia for the first time. In fact, it was the very first time he ever got out of Australia," Keelty told the court.
Michael Phelan, the current AFP deputy commissioner, told the court that Rush did not have a criminal record in Australia and because it was his first drug offense he would face "less than 10 years" if convicted of the same crime at home.
The hearing was adjourned until Sept. 26.
Rush was not in court on Thursday but last month he publicly apologized to the court and begged for forgiveness. Two other Bali Nine members, Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan, have also launched appeals against their death sentences.
Friday, 27 August 2010
Pakistan: Asian rights group calls for abolition
PAKISTAN: Government urged to commute all death sentences and abolish the death penalty
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 26, 2010
ALRC-CWS-15-08-2010
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Fifteenth session, Agenda Item 3
A written statement submitted by the Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC), a non-governmental organisation with general consultative status
The Asian Legal Resource Centre welcomes the discussion by the Human Rights Council during its 15th session concerning the report of the Secretary General on the question of the death penalty. In light of this discussion, the ALRC is hereby submitting information pertaining to the death penalty in Pakistan. The government of Pakistan has failed to abolish the death penalty in spite of the pledge it made in 2008 to commute death sentences to life imprisonment. According to estimates, there are around 7400 prisoners on death row1, the largest number in any country in the world. This number constitutes around one third of the death row prisoners in the world. It must be noted that the government has not carried out judicial executions since September 2008, which are typically carried out by hanging in Pakistan, but condemned prisoners remain seriously concerned for their future, as do their family members, while the death penalty remains in place. Many among them have already spent more than 10 years in prison. The ALRC recalls that prolonged detention on death row is at the very least cruel and inhuman treatment and therefore constitutes a violation of these persons' rights in of itself.
Prior to the present hiatus to executions, Pakistan was amongst the countries in the world which executed the highest number of persons each year. To date 128 countries have abolished the death penalty, and of those that have not, only around half carry out executions. Pakistan voted against a United Nation General Assembly resolution for a moratorium on the death penalty in December 2007.
The government of Pakistan has promised since June 21, 2008 to commute death sentences on several occasions, but little action has been taken to put this into effect. Reports have indicated that in some prisons, prisoners sentenced to death have been moved from death row cells to other barracks, but remain separated from other prisoners. Pakistan’s death penalty has been commuted before. Former Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and founder of the current ruling party, the Pakistan People's Party, commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment but he was later executed by the military.
The country's parliamentary bodies - the national assembly and senate - in mid-April 2010 approved the eighteenth amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan, deleting the majority of the amendments made by past military rulers, but the parliament has not touched the amendment made to the constitution by General Zia Ulhaq comprising the death penalty. In the 1970s, the government led by the late Zulfikar Ali Bhutto raised the minimum term of a life sentence from 14 to 25 years with the idea that capital punishment would be abolished in the years to come. However, this did not materialize and General Zia, the country's military ruler from 1977 to 1988, kept both the death penalty and the increased life sentence intact through an ordinance which was later incorporated in the Constitution. Mr. Bhutto was later hanged in 1979. Former President Musharraf did nothing to alter either the death sentence or the minimum term.
Pakistan’s legislators also did not attempt to commute the death sentence in the eighteenth amendment, allegedly because of pressure by Islamic fundamentalist parties. The federal cabinet decided on July 2, 2008 to commute the death sentence, but due to pressure from Muslim fundamentalists and a Suo Moto action from the then-Chief Justice of Pakistan, Mr. Abdul Hameed Dogar, who had been appointed by former president General Musharraf during the state of emergency, the government avoided issuing a formal notification commuting death sentences.
When Pakistan was founded 63 years ago, only murder and treason carried the death penalty. Now the death penalty can be handed to persons found guilty of 27 'crimes' including blasphemy, stripping a woman in public, terrorist acts, sabotage of sensitive installations, sabotage of railways, attacks on law enforcement personal, spreading hate against the armed forces, sedition, and many more.
Although the Pakistan Juvenile Justice System Ordinance was extended to apply nationwide in 2004, implementation remains limited. This is the case notably as, also in 2004, the High Court in Lahore revoked this ordinance, which exempted those under the age of 18 years from execution. An appeal is still pending. Pakistan is one of just five countries in the world to have executed a minor/juvenile offender in recent years. In one such case, Mutabar Khan was hanged on June 13, 2006 for a crime committed when he was 16, and the authorities of another jail, Mach Central Jail, have acknowledged holding two juvenile offenders on death row. Often, after years of trial defendants will have trouble convincing the judge that they were actually underage when they broke the law.
The country's two parallel judiciary systems, one secular and other one based on Shariah laws, creates a situation in which the death penalty has been handed out in ways that do not satisfy the requirements of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Pakistan ratified on June 23, 2010. The Islamic Shariah Courts are quick to hand out death sentences following trials that do not meet the internationally accepted standards of fair trial. The judicial bodies in the country follow Islamic injunctions and are a significant hindrance to the abolishment of the death penalty.
Pardons concerning death sentences can only be given by the victims. Death sentences are usually settled after a blood money payment called diyat and courts will often urge family members to resolve matters out of court. Human rights NGOs have branded this the 'privatisation of justice' and it tends to give the wealthy impunity. Because of diyat payments it is suspected that death penalties are dealt out more freely, because judges assume a settlement will be found.
Many among the 7,400 on death row are there as a result of the blasphemy law, under which crimes carry an obligatory death sentence, but for which evidence is often tenuous or involves personal vengeance. Section 295C of Pakistan's Penal Code provides the death penalty for "Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of The Holy Prophet (Peace be Upon Him)".
This law is vague and open to abuse, notably against non-Muslims in Pakistan. It represents a severe limitation on religious freedom, as it effectively targets religious minorities. The law is also used by Muslim fundamentalist groups against liberal Muslims. The law has also often been used by those with personal grudges, as well as against Muslims who have converted to Christianity. When Pakistan's former president, General Musharraf, considered amending the law to limit such potential abuses, pressure from Islamic hardliners caused him to abandon these amendments, so the law remains, with all its flaws. An accusation of blasphemy commonly subjects the accused, as well as police, lawyers, and judges involved in the case, to harassment, threats and attacks. An accusation is sometimes the prelude to vigilantism and rioting.
Pakistan ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in April 2010, which was signed by the President in June. While these steps are welcome, the ALRC believes that it is imperative for the government to also take immediate steps to ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty.
Recommendations: As stated above, Pakistan currently has around one third of the world’s death row prisoners, so any discussion of the issue of the death penalty must address this situation. The Asian Legal Resource Centre urges the Council to take all necessary steps to ensure that the government of Pakistan:
i. Provides immediate guarantees that none of the estimated 7400 death row prisoners will be executed.
ii. Commutes all death sentences to life imprisonment.
iii. Without delay abolishes the death penalty.
iv. Ratifies the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, bringing domestic legislation into line with its international obligations and ensuring the full implementation of this legislation.
v. Repeal the Blasphemy law and free all persons being detained pursuant to this law.
------------
1 According to ALRC sources as well as reports by Amnesty International and the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan# # #
About the ALRC: The Asian Legal Resource Centre is an independent regional non-governmental organisation holding general consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. It is the sister organisation of the Asian Human Rights Commission. The Hong Kong-based group seeks to strengthen and encourage positive action on legal and human rights issues at the local and national levels throughout Asia.
Posted on 2010-08-26
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 26, 2010
ALRC-CWS-15-08-2010
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Fifteenth session, Agenda Item 3
A written statement submitted by the Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC), a non-governmental organisation with general consultative status
The Asian Legal Resource Centre welcomes the discussion by the Human Rights Council during its 15th session concerning the report of the Secretary General on the question of the death penalty. In light of this discussion, the ALRC is hereby submitting information pertaining to the death penalty in Pakistan. The government of Pakistan has failed to abolish the death penalty in spite of the pledge it made in 2008 to commute death sentences to life imprisonment. According to estimates, there are around 7400 prisoners on death row1, the largest number in any country in the world. This number constitutes around one third of the death row prisoners in the world. It must be noted that the government has not carried out judicial executions since September 2008, which are typically carried out by hanging in Pakistan, but condemned prisoners remain seriously concerned for their future, as do their family members, while the death penalty remains in place. Many among them have already spent more than 10 years in prison. The ALRC recalls that prolonged detention on death row is at the very least cruel and inhuman treatment and therefore constitutes a violation of these persons' rights in of itself.
Prior to the present hiatus to executions, Pakistan was amongst the countries in the world which executed the highest number of persons each year. To date 128 countries have abolished the death penalty, and of those that have not, only around half carry out executions. Pakistan voted against a United Nation General Assembly resolution for a moratorium on the death penalty in December 2007.
The government of Pakistan has promised since June 21, 2008 to commute death sentences on several occasions, but little action has been taken to put this into effect. Reports have indicated that in some prisons, prisoners sentenced to death have been moved from death row cells to other barracks, but remain separated from other prisoners. Pakistan’s death penalty has been commuted before. Former Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and founder of the current ruling party, the Pakistan People's Party, commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment but he was later executed by the military.
The country's parliamentary bodies - the national assembly and senate - in mid-April 2010 approved the eighteenth amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan, deleting the majority of the amendments made by past military rulers, but the parliament has not touched the amendment made to the constitution by General Zia Ulhaq comprising the death penalty. In the 1970s, the government led by the late Zulfikar Ali Bhutto raised the minimum term of a life sentence from 14 to 25 years with the idea that capital punishment would be abolished in the years to come. However, this did not materialize and General Zia, the country's military ruler from 1977 to 1988, kept both the death penalty and the increased life sentence intact through an ordinance which was later incorporated in the Constitution. Mr. Bhutto was later hanged in 1979. Former President Musharraf did nothing to alter either the death sentence or the minimum term.
Pakistan’s legislators also did not attempt to commute the death sentence in the eighteenth amendment, allegedly because of pressure by Islamic fundamentalist parties. The federal cabinet decided on July 2, 2008 to commute the death sentence, but due to pressure from Muslim fundamentalists and a Suo Moto action from the then-Chief Justice of Pakistan, Mr. Abdul Hameed Dogar, who had been appointed by former president General Musharraf during the state of emergency, the government avoided issuing a formal notification commuting death sentences.
When Pakistan was founded 63 years ago, only murder and treason carried the death penalty. Now the death penalty can be handed to persons found guilty of 27 'crimes' including blasphemy, stripping a woman in public, terrorist acts, sabotage of sensitive installations, sabotage of railways, attacks on law enforcement personal, spreading hate against the armed forces, sedition, and many more.
Although the Pakistan Juvenile Justice System Ordinance was extended to apply nationwide in 2004, implementation remains limited. This is the case notably as, also in 2004, the High Court in Lahore revoked this ordinance, which exempted those under the age of 18 years from execution. An appeal is still pending. Pakistan is one of just five countries in the world to have executed a minor/juvenile offender in recent years. In one such case, Mutabar Khan was hanged on June 13, 2006 for a crime committed when he was 16, and the authorities of another jail, Mach Central Jail, have acknowledged holding two juvenile offenders on death row. Often, after years of trial defendants will have trouble convincing the judge that they were actually underage when they broke the law.
The country's two parallel judiciary systems, one secular and other one based on Shariah laws, creates a situation in which the death penalty has been handed out in ways that do not satisfy the requirements of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Pakistan ratified on June 23, 2010. The Islamic Shariah Courts are quick to hand out death sentences following trials that do not meet the internationally accepted standards of fair trial. The judicial bodies in the country follow Islamic injunctions and are a significant hindrance to the abolishment of the death penalty.
Pardons concerning death sentences can only be given by the victims. Death sentences are usually settled after a blood money payment called diyat and courts will often urge family members to resolve matters out of court. Human rights NGOs have branded this the 'privatisation of justice' and it tends to give the wealthy impunity. Because of diyat payments it is suspected that death penalties are dealt out more freely, because judges assume a settlement will be found.
Many among the 7,400 on death row are there as a result of the blasphemy law, under which crimes carry an obligatory death sentence, but for which evidence is often tenuous or involves personal vengeance. Section 295C of Pakistan's Penal Code provides the death penalty for "Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of The Holy Prophet (Peace be Upon Him)".
This law is vague and open to abuse, notably against non-Muslims in Pakistan. It represents a severe limitation on religious freedom, as it effectively targets religious minorities. The law is also used by Muslim fundamentalist groups against liberal Muslims. The law has also often been used by those with personal grudges, as well as against Muslims who have converted to Christianity. When Pakistan's former president, General Musharraf, considered amending the law to limit such potential abuses, pressure from Islamic hardliners caused him to abandon these amendments, so the law remains, with all its flaws. An accusation of blasphemy commonly subjects the accused, as well as police, lawyers, and judges involved in the case, to harassment, threats and attacks. An accusation is sometimes the prelude to vigilantism and rioting.
Pakistan ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in April 2010, which was signed by the President in June. While these steps are welcome, the ALRC believes that it is imperative for the government to also take immediate steps to ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty.
Recommendations: As stated above, Pakistan currently has around one third of the world’s death row prisoners, so any discussion of the issue of the death penalty must address this situation. The Asian Legal Resource Centre urges the Council to take all necessary steps to ensure that the government of Pakistan:
i. Provides immediate guarantees that none of the estimated 7400 death row prisoners will be executed.
ii. Commutes all death sentences to life imprisonment.
iii. Without delay abolishes the death penalty.
iv. Ratifies the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, bringing domestic legislation into line with its international obligations and ensuring the full implementation of this legislation.
v. Repeal the Blasphemy law and free all persons being detained pursuant to this law.
------------
1 According to ALRC sources as well as reports by Amnesty International and the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan# # #
About the ALRC: The Asian Legal Resource Centre is an independent regional non-governmental organisation holding general consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. It is the sister organisation of the Asian Human Rights Commission. The Hong Kong-based group seeks to strengthen and encourage positive action on legal and human rights issues at the local and national levels throughout Asia.
Posted on 2010-08-26
Tuesday, 24 August 2010
Bangladesh death penalty dangerous, corrupt
BANGLADESH: Death penalty continues despite a flawed criminal justice system
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 23, 2010
ALRC-CWS-15-02-2010
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Fifteenth session, Agenda Item 4, General Debate
A written statement submitted by the Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC), a non-governmental organisation with general consultative status
1. The Asian Legal Resource Centre welcomes the discussion by the Human Rights Council during its 15th session concerning the report of the Secretary General on the question of the death penalty. In light of this discussion, the ALRC is hereby submitting information pertaining to the death penalty in Bangladesh. Bangladesh acceded to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) on September 6, 2000, but has not yet ratified the Optional Protocols to the ICCPR and also does not comply with the international law aiming to the abolition of death penalty. The country has not only executed its citizens for decades, but officials, including Ministers, Parliamentarians and Judges also advocate publicly in favour of this practice, which denies people's right to life, often as the result of trials that do not meet the internationally recognized standards of fair trial.
2. The Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC) has learned from a reliable Home Ministry source, who requested anonymity, that there are around 407 convicts currently being detained in prisons across the country that face execution in the upcoming periods. Among the convicts, around 107 are being detained in Dhaka Central Jail, with the rest being detained in the country’s other main prisons. The high profile cases of execution to have taken place in Bangladesh include the death by hanging of five convicts on 28 January 2010 for the assassination of Bangladesh’s founder, President Sheikh Muzibur Rahman, who was killed by members of the Bangladesh Army along with almost all of his family members on 15 August 1975. In another case, six members of militant groups were hanged after being sentenced to death for the killing two judges in suicide bomb attacks in Jhalkathi district in 2005. Since its establishment in 1971 the Bangladeshi State has executed by hanging over 250 convicted criminals.
3. The country's Penal Code-1860 has several provisions that allow for capital punishment: Section 121: waging war against Bangladesh; Section 132: abetment of mutiny, if mutiny is committed; Section 194: giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of capital offence; Section 302: murder; Section 305: abetment of suicide of child or insane person; Section 307: attempted murder by life-convicts; and Section 396: robbery with murder.
4. There are several other laws in Bangladesh that also provide for the death penalty. The draconian Special Powers Act-1974, provides the death penalty for the offences of sabotage under Section 15, counterfeiting currency notes and Government stamps under Section 25A, smuggling under 25B, and adulteration of, or sale of adulterated food, drink, drugs or cosmetics under Section 25C. It is evident from the above that the death penalty is awarded for crimes that do not meet Bangladesh’s obligations under the ICCPR's Article 6(2) to ensure that death sentences "may be imposed only for the most serious crimes."
5. The Nari o' Shishu Nirjaton Daman Ain-2000 [Women and Children Repression (Prevention) Act-2000] further provides for the death penalty to be awarded as punishment for offences or attacks committed using corrosive, combustible or poisonous substances that cause burns or physical damage leading to the death of the victim, under Section 4; for trafficking of women and children, as per Sections 5 and 6 respectively; for ransom, according to Section 8; for sexual assaults resulting in the death of any woman or child who dies consequently, as per Section 9(2); causing death for dowry, in Section 11; and maiming or mutilation of children for begging, under Section 12. The Acid Crime Control Act-2002’s Section 5 (KA) also includes the death penalty for acid attacks on women if the victim's eyes, ears, face, chest or sexual organs are fully or partially damaged.
6. The legislative authorities of Bangladesh argue that the death penalty is necessary for maintaining control over serious crimes in the country and to transmit a message to potential offenders that committing murder will ultimately incur the death penalty. Pro-death penalty advocates in the country claim that the death penalty helps the nation to establish peace and justice in its society as part of upholding the rule of law. This alleged deterrent is shown to not be working effectively, as incidents of serious crimes rise each year. For example, according to the statistic contained in the website of the Bangladesh Police, there were 3592 murders during 2005 and 4219 murders in 2009.
7. The ALRC opposes the death penalty under all circumstances as a cruel practice that is shown to be an ineffective deterrent and open to serious abuse. No legal system in the world functions well enough to guarantee that errors in awarding the death penalty can be totally avoided, and in countries with deeply flawed criminal justice systems such as Bangladesh and most others in the Asian region, the use of the death penalty gives rise to serious travesties of justice and arbitrary, unjust and irrevocable violations for the right to life.
8. Bangladesh's criminal justice system has manifold problems:
a. There is an absence of fairness and transparency in its complaint mechanism. The police arbitrarily control the complaint mechanisms, which are subverted by political interference and a chain of command dominated by corruption from the bottom to the top, resulting in abuses of power and injustices in determining who will be charged and for what crime. The fabrication of cases by the police officers for the purpose of extorting money from targeted persons and/or in order to set the real offender free is a common practice. The police deliberately distort facts related to crimes at the time of recording of complaints, which obstructs the already limited avenues available to the victims seeking justice and redress.
b. Criminal investigations are conducted by the police using primitive methods without acceptable levels of professionalism and efficiency. As a corrupt and political subservient entity, the police force is mostly used as hired gunmen of the ruling political and other authorities and elites.
c. The prosecutorial system is politicised, inefficient, disposable by nature, and incapable of assisting the judiciary to establish justice at the end of the trial. Every political party recruits their own activists cum lawyers as prosecutors, based on their loyalty to the ruling authorities rather than their knowledge of the law, jurisprudence and commitment to the rule of law.
d. The judiciary does not enjoy independence as far as the administration of justice is concerned in terms of logistics, manpower, integrity and the adjudication of the cases. Besides, there is a serious lack of judicial competence and commitment to upholding the rule of law among many judicial officers.
e. The country’s medico-legal system remains archaic and far off internationally acceptable standards and modern methods required to effectively assist the judicial process in determining rights or wrongs and forensic evidence accurately.
f. The legal profession is degraded and consists mainly of persons hunting cases to make the maximum money for their professional practices, rather than to assist the judicial procedures to ensure justice to both victims and the defendants in trials in the country’s courts.
g. The State's entrenched system designed to protect the perpetrators of gross human rights abuses through and extensive culture of impunity, creates serious grievances and a loss of faith in the justice institutions for victims of, for example, illegal arrests, arbitrary detention, custodial torture, extra-judicial killings and disappearances, as well as for their and the wider public who also live in a climate of fear.
h. The absence of interpersonal respect for each other and adequate cooperation among professionals, including the police that register the complaint, investigators, prosecutors, lawyers, medico-legal experts and supporting staff of the judiciary seriously hamper the effective and timely conduct of trials and administration of justice.
i. Inadequate remuneration and facilities for relevant professional experts as well as their supporting staff, poor infrastructure for maintaining material evidence, and the failure to recruit persons with the required educational, moral and ethical background, or to provide adequate training contributes to the further deterioration of the criminal justice system.
9. The reality regarding the criminal justice system must be understood to evaluate how dangerous the use of the death penalty can be in Bangladesh. Realistic policies followed by prompt actions must be in place in order to reduce the recurrence of crimes that are currently punished by the death penalty instead of continuing with this failed deterrent.
10. Bangladesh's constitution's Article 35 (5) prohibits "torture, cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment or treatment". There can hardly be any debate that the death penalty does not amount to cruel punishment, which is prohibited in the country's supreme law. In fact, such cruel punishment comprises a violation of the Constitution by undermining the natural dignity of human beings.
11. The Asian Legal Resource Centre urges the government of Bangladesh to abolish the death penalty immediately and to ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, and bring its domestic legislation and practices in line with obligations under this instrument. The Bangladeshi authorities should immediately initiate thorough reforms of the country’s criminal justice system, in order to establish the rule of law and the enjoyment of rights, justice and peace in its society.
About the ALRC: The Asian Legal Resource Centre is an independent regional non-governmental organisation holding general consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. It is the sister organisation of the Asian Human Rights Commission. The Hong Kong-based group seeks to strengthen and encourage positive action on legal and human rights issues at the local and national levels throughout Asia.
Posted on 2010-08-23
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 23, 2010
ALRC-CWS-15-02-2010
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Fifteenth session, Agenda Item 4, General Debate
A written statement submitted by the Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC), a non-governmental organisation with general consultative status
1. The Asian Legal Resource Centre welcomes the discussion by the Human Rights Council during its 15th session concerning the report of the Secretary General on the question of the death penalty. In light of this discussion, the ALRC is hereby submitting information pertaining to the death penalty in Bangladesh. Bangladesh acceded to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) on September 6, 2000, but has not yet ratified the Optional Protocols to the ICCPR and also does not comply with the international law aiming to the abolition of death penalty. The country has not only executed its citizens for decades, but officials, including Ministers, Parliamentarians and Judges also advocate publicly in favour of this practice, which denies people's right to life, often as the result of trials that do not meet the internationally recognized standards of fair trial.
2. The Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC) has learned from a reliable Home Ministry source, who requested anonymity, that there are around 407 convicts currently being detained in prisons across the country that face execution in the upcoming periods. Among the convicts, around 107 are being detained in Dhaka Central Jail, with the rest being detained in the country’s other main prisons. The high profile cases of execution to have taken place in Bangladesh include the death by hanging of five convicts on 28 January 2010 for the assassination of Bangladesh’s founder, President Sheikh Muzibur Rahman, who was killed by members of the Bangladesh Army along with almost all of his family members on 15 August 1975. In another case, six members of militant groups were hanged after being sentenced to death for the killing two judges in suicide bomb attacks in Jhalkathi district in 2005. Since its establishment in 1971 the Bangladeshi State has executed by hanging over 250 convicted criminals.
3. The country's Penal Code-1860 has several provisions that allow for capital punishment: Section 121: waging war against Bangladesh; Section 132: abetment of mutiny, if mutiny is committed; Section 194: giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of capital offence; Section 302: murder; Section 305: abetment of suicide of child or insane person; Section 307: attempted murder by life-convicts; and Section 396: robbery with murder.
4. There are several other laws in Bangladesh that also provide for the death penalty. The draconian Special Powers Act-1974, provides the death penalty for the offences of sabotage under Section 15, counterfeiting currency notes and Government stamps under Section 25A, smuggling under 25B, and adulteration of, or sale of adulterated food, drink, drugs or cosmetics under Section 25C. It is evident from the above that the death penalty is awarded for crimes that do not meet Bangladesh’s obligations under the ICCPR's Article 6(2) to ensure that death sentences "may be imposed only for the most serious crimes."
5. The Nari o' Shishu Nirjaton Daman Ain-2000 [Women and Children Repression (Prevention) Act-2000] further provides for the death penalty to be awarded as punishment for offences or attacks committed using corrosive, combustible or poisonous substances that cause burns or physical damage leading to the death of the victim, under Section 4; for trafficking of women and children, as per Sections 5 and 6 respectively; for ransom, according to Section 8; for sexual assaults resulting in the death of any woman or child who dies consequently, as per Section 9(2); causing death for dowry, in Section 11; and maiming or mutilation of children for begging, under Section 12. The Acid Crime Control Act-2002’s Section 5 (KA) also includes the death penalty for acid attacks on women if the victim's eyes, ears, face, chest or sexual organs are fully or partially damaged.
6. The legislative authorities of Bangladesh argue that the death penalty is necessary for maintaining control over serious crimes in the country and to transmit a message to potential offenders that committing murder will ultimately incur the death penalty. Pro-death penalty advocates in the country claim that the death penalty helps the nation to establish peace and justice in its society as part of upholding the rule of law. This alleged deterrent is shown to not be working effectively, as incidents of serious crimes rise each year. For example, according to the statistic contained in the website of the Bangladesh Police, there were 3592 murders during 2005 and 4219 murders in 2009.
7. The ALRC opposes the death penalty under all circumstances as a cruel practice that is shown to be an ineffective deterrent and open to serious abuse. No legal system in the world functions well enough to guarantee that errors in awarding the death penalty can be totally avoided, and in countries with deeply flawed criminal justice systems such as Bangladesh and most others in the Asian region, the use of the death penalty gives rise to serious travesties of justice and arbitrary, unjust and irrevocable violations for the right to life.
8. Bangladesh's criminal justice system has manifold problems:
a. There is an absence of fairness and transparency in its complaint mechanism. The police arbitrarily control the complaint mechanisms, which are subverted by political interference and a chain of command dominated by corruption from the bottom to the top, resulting in abuses of power and injustices in determining who will be charged and for what crime. The fabrication of cases by the police officers for the purpose of extorting money from targeted persons and/or in order to set the real offender free is a common practice. The police deliberately distort facts related to crimes at the time of recording of complaints, which obstructs the already limited avenues available to the victims seeking justice and redress.
b. Criminal investigations are conducted by the police using primitive methods without acceptable levels of professionalism and efficiency. As a corrupt and political subservient entity, the police force is mostly used as hired gunmen of the ruling political and other authorities and elites.
c. The prosecutorial system is politicised, inefficient, disposable by nature, and incapable of assisting the judiciary to establish justice at the end of the trial. Every political party recruits their own activists cum lawyers as prosecutors, based on their loyalty to the ruling authorities rather than their knowledge of the law, jurisprudence and commitment to the rule of law.
d. The judiciary does not enjoy independence as far as the administration of justice is concerned in terms of logistics, manpower, integrity and the adjudication of the cases. Besides, there is a serious lack of judicial competence and commitment to upholding the rule of law among many judicial officers.
e. The country’s medico-legal system remains archaic and far off internationally acceptable standards and modern methods required to effectively assist the judicial process in determining rights or wrongs and forensic evidence accurately.
f. The legal profession is degraded and consists mainly of persons hunting cases to make the maximum money for their professional practices, rather than to assist the judicial procedures to ensure justice to both victims and the defendants in trials in the country’s courts.
g. The State's entrenched system designed to protect the perpetrators of gross human rights abuses through and extensive culture of impunity, creates serious grievances and a loss of faith in the justice institutions for victims of, for example, illegal arrests, arbitrary detention, custodial torture, extra-judicial killings and disappearances, as well as for their and the wider public who also live in a climate of fear.
h. The absence of interpersonal respect for each other and adequate cooperation among professionals, including the police that register the complaint, investigators, prosecutors, lawyers, medico-legal experts and supporting staff of the judiciary seriously hamper the effective and timely conduct of trials and administration of justice.
i. Inadequate remuneration and facilities for relevant professional experts as well as their supporting staff, poor infrastructure for maintaining material evidence, and the failure to recruit persons with the required educational, moral and ethical background, or to provide adequate training contributes to the further deterioration of the criminal justice system.
9. The reality regarding the criminal justice system must be understood to evaluate how dangerous the use of the death penalty can be in Bangladesh. Realistic policies followed by prompt actions must be in place in order to reduce the recurrence of crimes that are currently punished by the death penalty instead of continuing with this failed deterrent.
10. Bangladesh's constitution's Article 35 (5) prohibits "torture, cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment or treatment". There can hardly be any debate that the death penalty does not amount to cruel punishment, which is prohibited in the country's supreme law. In fact, such cruel punishment comprises a violation of the Constitution by undermining the natural dignity of human beings.
11. The Asian Legal Resource Centre urges the government of Bangladesh to abolish the death penalty immediately and to ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, and bring its domestic legislation and practices in line with obligations under this instrument. The Bangladeshi authorities should immediately initiate thorough reforms of the country’s criminal justice system, in order to establish the rule of law and the enjoyment of rights, justice and peace in its society.
About the ALRC: The Asian Legal Resource Centre is an independent regional non-governmental organisation holding general consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. It is the sister organisation of the Asian Human Rights Commission. The Hong Kong-based group seeks to strengthen and encourage positive action on legal and human rights issues at the local and national levels throughout Asia.
Posted on 2010-08-23
Saturday, 14 August 2010
Bali appeals with Indonesian court
Two Bali Nine convicts lodge death sentence appeals
Desy Nurhayati, The Jakarta Post, Denpasar
Sat, 08/14/2010 9:46 AM
Two Australian drug convicts on death row have formally launched final appeals on Friday, seeking to have their sentences commuted to 20 years in prison.
Attorneys for Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, members of the so-called "Bali Nine" syndicate of heroin smugglers, lodged the appeal to the Supreme Court via the Denpasar District Court.
Attorneys Todung Mulya Lubis said the appeal was not filed on the basis of new evidence, but due to a misapplication of the law by the judges.
"We filed the appeal as we consider this case violates the right to life. It is a basic right guaranteed in our Constitution," he said, adding that the death sentence would not discourage people from committing crimes and violated human rights.
He said that according to the UN, the death penalty should only be imposed for the most serious crimes, which excludes drug-related crimes.
"It's true they should be punished, but they don't deserve the death penalty. We are seeking to have it reduced to a 20-year prison term."
Chan, 26, and Sukumaran, 29, were convicted for an attempt in 2005 to smuggle 8.3 kilograms of heroin from Bali to Australia.
In the appeal, both argue that they had been successfully rehabilitated and were now teachers and role models for fellow inmates at Kerobokan Prison.
"The judges should take into consideration that both convicts have changed a lot. They teach their fellow inmates skills such as operating computers and painting."
The appeal also argues that previous rulings against the pair erred by finding them guilty of exporting drugs. It said the pair should have been given more lenient sentences because while they attempted to export the drugs, they did not succeed in doing so.
"Technically speaking, there was no export of the drugs. An attempt to export is not the same as exporting," Todung said. attorneys Nyoman Sudiantara said the pair’s legal team would request that both men be present at the appeals hearing.
Four witnesses will be called to testify at fresh hearings, likely to begin next month. They a prominent Australian psychologist from Monash University Paul Mullen, prominent Ireland-based human rights law expert William Schabas, Kerobokan Prison head Siswanto and former Indonesian Supreme Court justice Yahya Harahap.
Chan and Sukumaran are launching their appeal less than a month after fellow death row inmate Scott Anthony Rush launched his own. If this final appeal fails, the three men will be left with one last chance to avoid the death sentence — clemency from President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.
Five other members of the drug smuggling plot are serving life sentences in Bali’s Kerobokan Prison.
Of the remaining two, Martin Stephens’ judicial review is currently being considered by the Supreme Court, while courier Renae Lawrence is serving a 20-year prison sentence.
Desy Nurhayati, The Jakarta Post, Denpasar
Sat, 08/14/2010 9:46 AM
Two Australian drug convicts on death row have formally launched final appeals on Friday, seeking to have their sentences commuted to 20 years in prison.
Attorneys for Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, members of the so-called "Bali Nine" syndicate of heroin smugglers, lodged the appeal to the Supreme Court via the Denpasar District Court.
Attorneys Todung Mulya Lubis said the appeal was not filed on the basis of new evidence, but due to a misapplication of the law by the judges.
"We filed the appeal as we consider this case violates the right to life. It is a basic right guaranteed in our Constitution," he said, adding that the death sentence would not discourage people from committing crimes and violated human rights.
He said that according to the UN, the death penalty should only be imposed for the most serious crimes, which excludes drug-related crimes.
"It's true they should be punished, but they don't deserve the death penalty. We are seeking to have it reduced to a 20-year prison term."
Chan, 26, and Sukumaran, 29, were convicted for an attempt in 2005 to smuggle 8.3 kilograms of heroin from Bali to Australia.
In the appeal, both argue that they had been successfully rehabilitated and were now teachers and role models for fellow inmates at Kerobokan Prison.
"The judges should take into consideration that both convicts have changed a lot. They teach their fellow inmates skills such as operating computers and painting."
The appeal also argues that previous rulings against the pair erred by finding them guilty of exporting drugs. It said the pair should have been given more lenient sentences because while they attempted to export the drugs, they did not succeed in doing so.
"Technically speaking, there was no export of the drugs. An attempt to export is not the same as exporting," Todung said. attorneys Nyoman Sudiantara said the pair’s legal team would request that both men be present at the appeals hearing.
Four witnesses will be called to testify at fresh hearings, likely to begin next month. They a prominent Australian psychologist from Monash University Paul Mullen, prominent Ireland-based human rights law expert William Schabas, Kerobokan Prison head Siswanto and former Indonesian Supreme Court justice Yahya Harahap.
Chan and Sukumaran are launching their appeal less than a month after fellow death row inmate Scott Anthony Rush launched his own. If this final appeal fails, the three men will be left with one last chance to avoid the death sentence — clemency from President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.
Five other members of the drug smuggling plot are serving life sentences in Bali’s Kerobokan Prison.
Of the remaining two, Martin Stephens’ judicial review is currently being considered by the Supreme Court, while courier Renae Lawrence is serving a 20-year prison sentence.
Friday, 13 August 2010
Indonesia: remorse appeal for life
Bali nine pair admit guilt in bid to avoid firing squad
Tom Allard
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
August 13, 2010
Sydneysiders Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran have, for the first time, admitted their role in the Bali nine heroin smuggling syndicate, but asked to be handed a 20-year prison term as they launch their final judicial appeals to avoid the firing squad.
The admission of guilt, contained in documents submitted to a Denpasar court today, follows repeated pleas of not guilty at three previous trials.
The two were arrested with seven other Australians in 2005 for trying to smuggle eight kilograms of heroin from Bali to Australia.
Chan and Sukumaran were found guilty of smuggling the drugs and sentenced to death at the three other trials, accused of being the ringleaders of the plot.
The appeal requests the Indonesian Supreme Court consider their efforts to rehabilitate themselves and take on leadership roles in Kerobokan prison by training other prisoners in skills to prepare them for life outside the prison walls.
Both Chan and Sukumaran acknowledge that what they did had been harmful to the community and themselves, but that they had vowed to be "better" men.
Their court submissions argue both have "changed radically" since being imprisoned.
As for their lack of previous co-operation with authorities, Chan and Sukumaran apologise and put it down to an "inability to think clearly".
Sukumaran's submission argues he was traumatised by the arrest in a foreign country and had "poor advice from a certain party".
As required by law, the judicial review is based on legal argument that previous rulings made manifest errors, including not properly considering that the two had been rehabilitated and a finding by Indonesia's constitutional court that the death penalty should only be used sparingly as a "special and alternative punishment".
Sukumaran's submission also argues that Indonesia has signed the UN convention of civil and political rights, a treaty which underpins a body of international law that explicitly rejects the use of the death penalty for narcotics crimes.
Evidence from other members of the Bali nine needs to be treated with caution, it says. It also cites the Indonesian constitution's recognition that all people have a basic right to life.
A key argument is that previous rulings had mistakenly found them guilty of exporting drugs. As the drug mules were arrested before they left Indonesia's customs area at Denpasar airport, the judicial review argues that the act of exporting did not take place.
Rather, they had only attempted to smuggle the heroin to Australia.
"An attempted crime is usually subject to a more lenient sentence compared to one that has been completed. This is because of the consequences that arise differ between the two crimes," the judicial reviews say.
"The narcotics did not reach its users."The fact that the crime was only an "attempt", and that Chan and Sukumaran had made strong efforts, with the assistance of prison officials, to rehabilitate themselves warranted a 20-year sentence, they argue.
The trial of Chan and Sukumaran is likely to begin in a couple of weeks and a verdict handed down before the end of the year.
The other Bali nine member facing the death penalty, Scott Rush, launched his final appeal last month. Rush's first hearing before the court is on Wednesday.
Tom Allard is the Herald's correspondent in Indonesia.
Tom Allard
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
August 13, 2010
Sydneysiders Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran have, for the first time, admitted their role in the Bali nine heroin smuggling syndicate, but asked to be handed a 20-year prison term as they launch their final judicial appeals to avoid the firing squad.
The admission of guilt, contained in documents submitted to a Denpasar court today, follows repeated pleas of not guilty at three previous trials.
The two were arrested with seven other Australians in 2005 for trying to smuggle eight kilograms of heroin from Bali to Australia.
Chan and Sukumaran were found guilty of smuggling the drugs and sentenced to death at the three other trials, accused of being the ringleaders of the plot.
The appeal requests the Indonesian Supreme Court consider their efforts to rehabilitate themselves and take on leadership roles in Kerobokan prison by training other prisoners in skills to prepare them for life outside the prison walls.
Both Chan and Sukumaran acknowledge that what they did had been harmful to the community and themselves, but that they had vowed to be "better" men.
Their court submissions argue both have "changed radically" since being imprisoned.
As for their lack of previous co-operation with authorities, Chan and Sukumaran apologise and put it down to an "inability to think clearly".
Sukumaran's submission argues he was traumatised by the arrest in a foreign country and had "poor advice from a certain party".
As required by law, the judicial review is based on legal argument that previous rulings made manifest errors, including not properly considering that the two had been rehabilitated and a finding by Indonesia's constitutional court that the death penalty should only be used sparingly as a "special and alternative punishment".
Sukumaran's submission also argues that Indonesia has signed the UN convention of civil and political rights, a treaty which underpins a body of international law that explicitly rejects the use of the death penalty for narcotics crimes.
Evidence from other members of the Bali nine needs to be treated with caution, it says. It also cites the Indonesian constitution's recognition that all people have a basic right to life.
A key argument is that previous rulings had mistakenly found them guilty of exporting drugs. As the drug mules were arrested before they left Indonesia's customs area at Denpasar airport, the judicial review argues that the act of exporting did not take place.
Rather, they had only attempted to smuggle the heroin to Australia.
"An attempted crime is usually subject to a more lenient sentence compared to one that has been completed. This is because of the consequences that arise differ between the two crimes," the judicial reviews say.
"The narcotics did not reach its users."The fact that the crime was only an "attempt", and that Chan and Sukumaran had made strong efforts, with the assistance of prison officials, to rehabilitate themselves warranted a 20-year sentence, they argue.
The trial of Chan and Sukumaran is likely to begin in a couple of weeks and a verdict handed down before the end of the year.
The other Bali nine member facing the death penalty, Scott Rush, launched his final appeal last month. Rush's first hearing before the court is on Wednesday.
Tom Allard is the Herald's correspondent in Indonesia.
Thursday, 8 July 2010
Victims call on Taiwan: End death penalty
Victims rights activists urge Taiwan government to reconsider death penalty
By Dennis Engbarth
Taiwan News, Staff Reporter
3 July, 2010
A group of murder victims from the United States and Japan are holding a series of lectures in Taipei and other cities this weekend to support calls by local activists for a cessation of capital punishment in Taiwan.
Under the theme of "Don't Kill in My Name," four members of the U.S. - based "Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights" arrived Friday for a four day visit during which they will hold four public lectures and meet with Kuomintang government officials, murder victim support groups and persons and organizations both supporting and opposing abolition of the death penalty.
Participants in the MVFHR Asia Speech Tour in Taiwan program include Robert Meeropol, the son of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg who were executed in New York's Sing Sing prison in June 1953 on charges of atomic weapon - related espionage for the Soviet Union; Aba Gayle, whose daughter Catherine was murdered at 19 years of age; MVFHR Executive Director Renny Cushing, whose father was murdered and who became an advocate of victims rights; and Toshi Kazama, a photojournalist and victim of a violent crime who initiated the "Ocean" victims support group in Japan.
During a news conference held at the National Taiwan University Alumni Association Friday morning to announce the program for the "Victims, We Care!" speaking tour, Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty Executie Director Lin Hsin-yi related that "many people in Taiwan tell advocates of abolition of the death penalty that victims of murders and other violent crimes support the death penalty and that advanced countries like the United States also still have the death penalty."
Lin stated that the MVFHR members "have come to South Korean, Japan and Taiwan "to share their views and experiences on why they as survivors or relatives of victims oppose the death penalty."
Cushing, who is one of the founders of the MVFHR which was formed on Dec. 10, 2004, said "we have all had members of our families murdered but we oppose the death penalty as a violation of the right to life and as a form of torture."
Given Taiwan's past history of "white terror" in which thousands were subject to state sanctioned killings, Cushing said that "we are particularly saddened to see the government of a democratic Taiwan going back to the policy of killing prisoners."
Referring to his experience and thoughts after seeing his father shot before his eyes, Cushing said that "if we let those who kill turn us into killers, then evil will triumph and we will all lose."
"As a survivor, I oppose the death penalty because I do not want to live in a world where governments kill people and I look forward to discussing in Taiwan why we should not kill people in the name of the victims," the MVFHR executive said.
Kazama, who planned the Asian speaking tour and who has photographed execution sites in the Taipei and Kaohsiung detention centers in 2005, stated that "we should hate crime and violence, but not hate yourself or hate those people."
"If you support the death penalty, you should realize that it means that you must have the guts to have a gun in your hand and shoot someone in the name of justice," said Kazama.
"Can you pull the trigger?" asked the Japanese photojournalist, a resident of New York City since 1980, who related that "I have met many executions who suffer emotionally because they have had to kill people like that."
Aba Gayle, a MVFHR member whose daughter Catherine was murdered in 1980 at the age of 19, stated that she learned after 12 years of "a dark time" that "I have a choice about how to live and I chose to stop being a victim."
Gayle related that "I got stuck in anger and rage" for eight years but said that she "realized that anger and rage is detrimental to our health and can destroy us."
"When I heard the letter drop in the mailbox, all the anger, rage and ugliness I had kept in my body for 12 years vanished and I was filled with inner peace and I knew at that moment that I did not need to have anyone executed for me to be healed," Gayle said.
In addition to lectures in Hsinchu City and Taichung City Saturday, the MVFHR group will hold a seminar and concert program Sunday afternoon at the Eslite Hsinyi Bookstore featuring the themes of "Victims of the State Machine?" and "Civic Movements to Protect Victims."
Before leaving Monday, the delegation will also hold private meetings with Justice Minister Huang and victims support groups, human rights organizations and personages and organizations both for and against the death penalty.
By Dennis Engbarth
Taiwan News, Staff Reporter
3 July, 2010
A group of murder victims from the United States and Japan are holding a series of lectures in Taipei and other cities this weekend to support calls by local activists for a cessation of capital punishment in Taiwan.
Under the theme of "Don't Kill in My Name," four members of the U.S. - based "Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights" arrived Friday for a four day visit during which they will hold four public lectures and meet with Kuomintang government officials, murder victim support groups and persons and organizations both supporting and opposing abolition of the death penalty.
Participants in the MVFHR Asia Speech Tour in Taiwan program include Robert Meeropol, the son of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg who were executed in New York's Sing Sing prison in June 1953 on charges of atomic weapon - related espionage for the Soviet Union; Aba Gayle, whose daughter Catherine was murdered at 19 years of age; MVFHR Executive Director Renny Cushing, whose father was murdered and who became an advocate of victims rights; and Toshi Kazama, a photojournalist and victim of a violent crime who initiated the "Ocean" victims support group in Japan.
During a news conference held at the National Taiwan University Alumni Association Friday morning to announce the program for the "Victims, We Care!" speaking tour, Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty Executie Director Lin Hsin-yi related that "many people in Taiwan tell advocates of abolition of the death penalty that victims of murders and other violent crimes support the death penalty and that advanced countries like the United States also still have the death penalty."
Lin stated that the MVFHR members "have come to South Korean, Japan and Taiwan "to share their views and experiences on why they as survivors or relatives of victims oppose the death penalty."
Cushing, who is one of the founders of the MVFHR which was formed on Dec. 10, 2004, said "we have all had members of our families murdered but we oppose the death penalty as a violation of the right to life and as a form of torture."
Given Taiwan's past history of "white terror" in which thousands were subject to state sanctioned killings, Cushing said that "we are particularly saddened to see the government of a democratic Taiwan going back to the policy of killing prisoners."
Referring to his experience and thoughts after seeing his father shot before his eyes, Cushing said that "if we let those who kill turn us into killers, then evil will triumph and we will all lose."
"As a survivor, I oppose the death penalty because I do not want to live in a world where governments kill people and I look forward to discussing in Taiwan why we should not kill people in the name of the victims," the MVFHR executive said.
Kazama, who planned the Asian speaking tour and who has photographed execution sites in the Taipei and Kaohsiung detention centers in 2005, stated that "we should hate crime and violence, but not hate yourself or hate those people."
"If you support the death penalty, you should realize that it means that you must have the guts to have a gun in your hand and shoot someone in the name of justice," said Kazama.
"Can you pull the trigger?" asked the Japanese photojournalist, a resident of New York City since 1980, who related that "I have met many executions who suffer emotionally because they have had to kill people like that."
Aba Gayle, a MVFHR member whose daughter Catherine was murdered in 1980 at the age of 19, stated that she learned after 12 years of "a dark time" that "I have a choice about how to live and I chose to stop being a victim."
Gayle related that "I got stuck in anger and rage" for eight years but said that she "realized that anger and rage is detrimental to our health and can destroy us."
"When I heard the letter drop in the mailbox, all the anger, rage and ugliness I had kept in my body for 12 years vanished and I was filled with inner peace and I knew at that moment that I did not need to have anyone executed for me to be healed," Gayle said.
In addition to lectures in Hsinchu City and Taichung City Saturday, the MVFHR group will hold a seminar and concert program Sunday afternoon at the Eslite Hsinyi Bookstore featuring the themes of "Victims of the State Machine?" and "Civic Movements to Protect Victims."
Before leaving Monday, the delegation will also hold private meetings with Justice Minister Huang and victims support groups, human rights organizations and personages and organizations both for and against the death penalty.
Saturday, 5 June 2010
Taiwan: Activists' plea for abolition
Government must clarify death penalty policy: activists
Focus Taiwan News
2 June, 2010
Taipei, June 2 (CNA) Disappointed anti-death penalty activists said Wednesday that they will stop pursuing a constitutional interpretation on capital punishment after the Justices of Constitutional Court rejected a petition last week on halting the death penalty.
However, they urged President Ma Ying-jeou to live up to his pledge to end the practice in the future.
Accusing Ma of duplicity, the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP) , along with over 50 supporters from the medical, environmental, religious and legal sectors, complained that while the president has vowed to abolish the death penalty, he continues to allow the Ministry of Justice to execute people.
In April, Taiwan ended a four-year de facto moratorium on capital punishment by executing four of its 44 death row inmates.
Justice Minister Tseng Yong-fu, who was appointed after his predecessor resigned for refusing to sign off on executions, has been vague on the eventual plight of the remaining 40, saying only that he will respect the decision of the Constitutional Court.
According to the court, the government's adherence to its death penalty policy does not go against the two U.N. covenants -- the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights -- signed by the president in late March.
Human rights lawyer Wellington Koo lamented the court's decision, saying the rejection means the group has exhausted all legal means of swaying the government and that "all we can do now is to plead with the government to hear us out."
According to the TAEDP, Taiwan is one of 18 countries, including the United States and China, that continue to enforce capital punishment.
"The president and the justice minister have publicly vowed to end the death penalty but yet they continue to sign off on death warrants. Their actions make us highly dubious of their true intentions, " said TAEDP Chairwoman Chiu Hei-yuan, urging Ma to clarify his stance.
Another of the activists, Catholic Archbishop John Hung, said that "it has been proven over and over again that the death penalty is not an antidote for reducing violence in society." (By Jenny W. Hsu) ENDITEM/J
Focus Taiwan News
2 June, 2010
Taipei, June 2 (CNA) Disappointed anti-death penalty activists said Wednesday that they will stop pursuing a constitutional interpretation on capital punishment after the Justices of Constitutional Court rejected a petition last week on halting the death penalty.
However, they urged President Ma Ying-jeou to live up to his pledge to end the practice in the future.
Accusing Ma of duplicity, the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP) , along with over 50 supporters from the medical, environmental, religious and legal sectors, complained that while the president has vowed to abolish the death penalty, he continues to allow the Ministry of Justice to execute people.
In April, Taiwan ended a four-year de facto moratorium on capital punishment by executing four of its 44 death row inmates.
Justice Minister Tseng Yong-fu, who was appointed after his predecessor resigned for refusing to sign off on executions, has been vague on the eventual plight of the remaining 40, saying only that he will respect the decision of the Constitutional Court.
According to the court, the government's adherence to its death penalty policy does not go against the two U.N. covenants -- the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights -- signed by the president in late March.
Human rights lawyer Wellington Koo lamented the court's decision, saying the rejection means the group has exhausted all legal means of swaying the government and that "all we can do now is to plead with the government to hear us out."
According to the TAEDP, Taiwan is one of 18 countries, including the United States and China, that continue to enforce capital punishment.
"The president and the justice minister have publicly vowed to end the death penalty but yet they continue to sign off on death warrants. Their actions make us highly dubious of their true intentions, " said TAEDP Chairwoman Chiu Hei-yuan, urging Ma to clarify his stance.
Another of the activists, Catholic Archbishop John Hung, said that "it has been proven over and over again that the death penalty is not an antidote for reducing violence in society." (By Jenny W. Hsu) ENDITEM/J
Tuesday, 18 May 2010
Drugs and death: Major new study released
IHRA launches 'The Death Penalty for Drug Offences: Global Overview 2010' report
17 May 2010
The International Harm Reduction Association released a study on the death penalty for drug offences today on the opening day of the 19th session of the UN Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, taking place in Vienna. The report, titled ‘The Death Penalty for Drug Offences: Global Overview 2010’, finds that hundreds of people are executed for drug offences each year around the world, a figure that very likely exceeds one thousand when taking into account those countries that keep their death penalty statistics secret.
The report is the first detailed country by country overview of the death penalty for drugs, monitoring both national legislation and state practice of enforcement. Of the states worldwide that retain the death penalty, 32 jurisdictions maintain laws that prescribe the death penalty for drug offences. The study also found that in some states, drug offenders make up a significant portion – if not the outright majority – of those sentenced to death and/or executed each year.
Direct link to the report. (Please note 2.42MB file.)
17 May 2010
The International Harm Reduction Association released a study on the death penalty for drug offences today on the opening day of the 19th session of the UN Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, taking place in Vienna. The report, titled ‘The Death Penalty for Drug Offences: Global Overview 2010’, finds that hundreds of people are executed for drug offences each year around the world, a figure that very likely exceeds one thousand when taking into account those countries that keep their death penalty statistics secret.
The report is the first detailed country by country overview of the death penalty for drugs, monitoring both national legislation and state practice of enforcement. Of the states worldwide that retain the death penalty, 32 jurisdictions maintain laws that prescribe the death penalty for drug offences. The study also found that in some states, drug offenders make up a significant portion – if not the outright majority – of those sentenced to death and/or executed each year.
Direct link to the report. (Please note 2.42MB file.)
Sunday, 16 May 2010
Singapore: Appeal against hanging of Yong Vui Kong
Amnesty International has issued the following Urgent Action appeal, calling for people to write to the Singapore government urging it not to execute Malaysian man Yong Vui Kong. Details of the latest appeal are above, with background on his case below.
URGENT ACTION
22-YEAR-OLD DUE TO BE HANGED IN SINGAPORE
14 May 2010
A Malaysian man is at immediate risk of execution in Singapore. On 14 May, the Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal against a mandatory death sentence, which violates fair-trial rights.
Yong Vui Kong was sentenced to death in January 2009 for trafficking 47 grams of diamorphine (heroin), a crime committed when he was 19 years old.
Singapore's Misuse of Drugs Act makes the death penalty mandatory for trafficking more than 30 grams of heroin, leaving judges no discretion to consider issues such as mitigating circumstances or to hand down alternative sentences. The law presumes trafficking in all cases involving the possession of over 2 grams of heroin, which shifts the burden of proving that no trafficking was involved from the prosecution to the defendant. This violates the core human right to be presumed innocent of a crime until proven guilty.
The President of Singapore rejected Yong Vui Kong's petition for clemency on 1 December 2009. On 2 December 2009, the High Court postponed Yong Vui Kong’s execution (which had been set to take place on 4 December) to allow the Court of Appeal time to hear an application for a stay.
PLEASE WRITE IMMEDIATELY in English or your own language:
- Urging President Nathan to reconsider Yong Vui Kong's clemency petition and commute his death sentence;
- Calling on the president to introduce an immediate moratorium on all executions, with a view to complete abolition of the death penalty;
- Reminding Law Minister Shanmugam, that the Misuse of Drugs Act violates international human rights law and standards concerning fairness of prosecutions and trials;
- Urging the Law Minister to recommend that Parliament revoke the mandatory death penalty for drug-trafficking and all other offences.
PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 25 JUNE 2010 TO:
President
His Excellency SR Nathan
Office of the President
Orchard Road, Istana
Singapore 0922
Fax: +65 6735 3135
Email: s_r_nathan@istana.gov.sg
Salutation: Your Excellency
Minister for Law
The Honourable K Shanmugam
Ministry of Home Affairs
New Phoenix Park
28 Irrawaddy Road
Singapore 329560
Fax: +65 6258 0921
Email: k_shanmugam@mlaw.gov.sg
Salutation: Dear Mr Minister
And copies to:
Editor-in-Chief
The Straits Times
1000 Toa Payoh North
News Centre
Singapore 318994
Fax: +65 6319 8282
Email: stonline@sph.com.sg
Also please send copies to Singapore's diplomatic representatives in your country.
This is the third update of UA 296/09. Further information:
www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA36/004/2009/en
www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA36/005/2009/en
www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA36/007/2009/en
Background - from Amnesty International Urgent Action appeal 269/09, 3 November 2009
Index: ASA 36/004/2009 Singapore
URGENT ACTION
malaysian man facing execution in singapore
Yong Vui Kong was sentenced to death for drug trafficking in January 2009. He had exhausted his appeals by October, and can now escape execution only if the president grants clemency.
Yong Vui Kong was arrested in June 2007, when he was 19, by officers from the Central Narcotics Bureau. He was charged with trafficking 42.27 grams of heroin, and then sentenced to death in January 2009.
He had been working as a messenger for a man in Malaysia who often asked him to collect money from debtors or deliver packages as "gifts" to people in Singapore and Malaysia. At his trial, Yong Vui Kong said he had not known what was in the packages, and when he asked, he had simply been told not to open them. The judge, however, ruled that Yong must have been aware of their contents, saying in his written summation, "I found that the accused had failed to rebut the presumption against him. I am of the view that the prosecution had proved its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and I therefore found the accused guilty as charged and sentenced him to suffer death."
Yong was convicted under the Misuse of Drugs Act, which provides that anyone found guilty of illegally importing, exporting or trafficking more than 15 grams of heroin will automatically receive a mandatory death sentence.
Governments need to address crimes, including drug trafficking, but there is no clear evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other forms of punishment. The UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions stated in his 2005 report that the "mandatory death penalty, which precludes the possibility of a lesser sentence being imposed regardless of the circumstances, is inconsistent with the prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." To date, 139 countries have abolished death penalty in law or practice.
URGENT ACTION
22-YEAR-OLD DUE TO BE HANGED IN SINGAPORE
14 May 2010
A Malaysian man is at immediate risk of execution in Singapore. On 14 May, the Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal against a mandatory death sentence, which violates fair-trial rights.
Yong Vui Kong was sentenced to death in January 2009 for trafficking 47 grams of diamorphine (heroin), a crime committed when he was 19 years old.
Singapore's Misuse of Drugs Act makes the death penalty mandatory for trafficking more than 30 grams of heroin, leaving judges no discretion to consider issues such as mitigating circumstances or to hand down alternative sentences. The law presumes trafficking in all cases involving the possession of over 2 grams of heroin, which shifts the burden of proving that no trafficking was involved from the prosecution to the defendant. This violates the core human right to be presumed innocent of a crime until proven guilty.
The President of Singapore rejected Yong Vui Kong's petition for clemency on 1 December 2009. On 2 December 2009, the High Court postponed Yong Vui Kong’s execution (which had been set to take place on 4 December) to allow the Court of Appeal time to hear an application for a stay.
PLEASE WRITE IMMEDIATELY in English or your own language:
- Urging President Nathan to reconsider Yong Vui Kong's clemency petition and commute his death sentence;
- Calling on the president to introduce an immediate moratorium on all executions, with a view to complete abolition of the death penalty;
- Reminding Law Minister Shanmugam, that the Misuse of Drugs Act violates international human rights law and standards concerning fairness of prosecutions and trials;
- Urging the Law Minister to recommend that Parliament revoke the mandatory death penalty for drug-trafficking and all other offences.
PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 25 JUNE 2010 TO:
President
His Excellency SR Nathan
Office of the President
Orchard Road, Istana
Singapore 0922
Fax: +65 6735 3135
Email: s_r_nathan@istana.gov.sg
Salutation: Your Excellency
Minister for Law
The Honourable K Shanmugam
Ministry of Home Affairs
New Phoenix Park
28 Irrawaddy Road
Singapore 329560
Fax: +65 6258 0921
Email: k_shanmugam@mlaw.gov.sg
Salutation: Dear Mr Minister
And copies to:
Editor-in-Chief
The Straits Times
1000 Toa Payoh North
News Centre
Singapore 318994
Fax: +65 6319 8282
Email: stonline@sph.com.sg
Also please send copies to Singapore's diplomatic representatives in your country.
This is the third update of UA 296/09. Further information:
www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA36/004/2009/en
www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA36/005/2009/en
www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA36/007/2009/en
Background - from Amnesty International Urgent Action appeal 269/09, 3 November 2009
Index: ASA 36/004/2009 Singapore
URGENT ACTION
malaysian man facing execution in singapore
Yong Vui Kong was sentenced to death for drug trafficking in January 2009. He had exhausted his appeals by October, and can now escape execution only if the president grants clemency.
Yong Vui Kong was arrested in June 2007, when he was 19, by officers from the Central Narcotics Bureau. He was charged with trafficking 42.27 grams of heroin, and then sentenced to death in January 2009.
He had been working as a messenger for a man in Malaysia who often asked him to collect money from debtors or deliver packages as "gifts" to people in Singapore and Malaysia. At his trial, Yong Vui Kong said he had not known what was in the packages, and when he asked, he had simply been told not to open them. The judge, however, ruled that Yong must have been aware of their contents, saying in his written summation, "I found that the accused had failed to rebut the presumption against him. I am of the view that the prosecution had proved its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and I therefore found the accused guilty as charged and sentenced him to suffer death."
Yong was convicted under the Misuse of Drugs Act, which provides that anyone found guilty of illegally importing, exporting or trafficking more than 15 grams of heroin will automatically receive a mandatory death sentence.
Governments need to address crimes, including drug trafficking, but there is no clear evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other forms of punishment. The UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions stated in his 2005 report that the "mandatory death penalty, which precludes the possibility of a lesser sentence being imposed regardless of the circumstances, is inconsistent with the prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." To date, 139 countries have abolished death penalty in law or practice.
Saturday, 8 May 2010
Taiwan: Asian human rights criticism
TAIWAN: ADPAN Appeals for Taiwan to continue to Take a Lead
Statement by ADPAN
The Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) joins others around the world in regretting that the Presidential Office of Taiwan accepted the resignation of former Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng on 11 March amid political pressure against the moratorium of the death penalty. ADPAN urges the Taiwanese government to maintain the moratorium and to take a lead towards abolition among Asian countries.
In 2001, the Taiwanese Government announced a policy to gradually abolish the death penalty. The number of executions every year since then had been on the decline. In 2006, mandatory death sentences were eliminated, and no executions have been carried out since the same year. This is in keeping with the global trend toward abolition evident in UN General Assembly resolutions in 2007 and 2008 calling for a global moratorium on executions as a first step toward abolition.
On 14 March, President Ma Ying-jeou pointed out that the general public of Taiwan needs to engage in open discussion on the death penalty and that Taiwan cannot afford to ignore this international trend toward abolition.
ADPAN appeals to the Taiwanese government to do everything within its power to continue its efforts toward abolition, and that any future Minister of Justice shall take all necessary measures to lead Taiwan towards abolition, including ensuring the life of all 44 prisoners currently on death row.
More than two-thirds of the countries of the world have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. World opinion and practice is shifting inexorably towards abolition.
Representing a regional voice for abolition, ADPAN welcomes the steps taken thus far by the Taiwanese government towards abolition, but urges the Taiwan government to ensure that it does not fall behind other countries in the region that have abolished or are restricting the use of the death penalty: Mongolia’s president announced an official moratorium in January, South Korea has not executed anyone for over 12 years, the Philippines and the Cook Islands respectively abolished the death penalty in 2006 and 2007.
ADPAN is a cross-regional network made up of over 40 members including lawyers, NGOs and human rights activists from 22 countries mainly from Asia and the Pacific.
Statement by ADPAN
The Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) joins others around the world in regretting that the Presidential Office of Taiwan accepted the resignation of former Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng on 11 March amid political pressure against the moratorium of the death penalty. ADPAN urges the Taiwanese government to maintain the moratorium and to take a lead towards abolition among Asian countries.
In 2001, the Taiwanese Government announced a policy to gradually abolish the death penalty. The number of executions every year since then had been on the decline. In 2006, mandatory death sentences were eliminated, and no executions have been carried out since the same year. This is in keeping with the global trend toward abolition evident in UN General Assembly resolutions in 2007 and 2008 calling for a global moratorium on executions as a first step toward abolition.
On 14 March, President Ma Ying-jeou pointed out that the general public of Taiwan needs to engage in open discussion on the death penalty and that Taiwan cannot afford to ignore this international trend toward abolition.
ADPAN appeals to the Taiwanese government to do everything within its power to continue its efforts toward abolition, and that any future Minister of Justice shall take all necessary measures to lead Taiwan towards abolition, including ensuring the life of all 44 prisoners currently on death row.
More than two-thirds of the countries of the world have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. World opinion and practice is shifting inexorably towards abolition.
Representing a regional voice for abolition, ADPAN welcomes the steps taken thus far by the Taiwanese government towards abolition, but urges the Taiwan government to ensure that it does not fall behind other countries in the region that have abolished or are restricting the use of the death penalty: Mongolia’s president announced an official moratorium in January, South Korea has not executed anyone for over 12 years, the Philippines and the Cook Islands respectively abolished the death penalty in 2006 and 2007.
ADPAN is a cross-regional network made up of over 40 members including lawyers, NGOs and human rights activists from 22 countries mainly from Asia and the Pacific.
Taiwan: International condemnation for hangings
Taiwan carries out first executions in five years
Statement by Amnesty International, 4 May 2010
Amnesty International has condemned the execution of four prisoners by the Taiwanese authorities, the first since December 2005.
Chang Chun-hung, Hung Chen-yao, Ko Shih-ming and Chang Wen-wei were executed in prisons in Taipei, Tainan and Taichun on the evening of 30 April.
The executions come just two weeks after new Minister of Justice Tseng Yung-fu was reported as saying that his ultimate goal is the abolition of the death penalty.
"These executions cast a dark shadow on the country's human rights record, and blatantly contradict the Justice Minister's previously declared intention to abolish the death penalty," said Catherine Baber, deputy director of Amnesty International's Asia-Pacific programme.
The resignation of Wang Ching-feng as Minister of Justice last March sparked international attention over the issue of the death penalty in Taiwan. Wang Ching-feng had refused to sign execution orders because of her opposition to the death penalty.
"The world was looking to the Taiwanese authorities to choose human rights, and to show leadership on the path towards abolishing the death penalty in the Asia-Pacific. Today's executions extinguished that hope," said Catherine Baber.
The Taiwanese Alliance to End the Death Penalty has raised concerns over the legality of the executions.
The Taiwanese authorities stated today that they are still considering alternatives to the death penalty, but such commitments are of little value while executions continue.
139 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice. Amnesty International calls upon the Taiwanese authorities to immediately establish a moratorium on executions and take all the necessary steps to abolish the death penalty in the country.
Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases, as a violation of the right to life and the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.
Amnesty International believes that the death penalty legitimizes an irreversible act of violence by the state.
Research demonstrates that the death penalty is often applied in a discriminatory manner, being used disproportionately against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic and religious communities. The death penalty is often imposed after a grossly unfair trial.
But even when trials respect international standards of fairness, the risk of executing the innocent can never be fully eliminated – the death penalty will inevitably claim innocent victims, as has been persistently demonstrated.
Scientific studies have consistently failed to find convincing evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments.
Two resolutions, calling for a worldwide moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty, were adopted at the United Nations General Assembly in December 2007 and 2008 by an overwhelming majority of states.
Statement by Amnesty International, 4 May 2010
Amnesty International has condemned the execution of four prisoners by the Taiwanese authorities, the first since December 2005.
Chang Chun-hung, Hung Chen-yao, Ko Shih-ming and Chang Wen-wei were executed in prisons in Taipei, Tainan and Taichun on the evening of 30 April.
The executions come just two weeks after new Minister of Justice Tseng Yung-fu was reported as saying that his ultimate goal is the abolition of the death penalty.
"These executions cast a dark shadow on the country's human rights record, and blatantly contradict the Justice Minister's previously declared intention to abolish the death penalty," said Catherine Baber, deputy director of Amnesty International's Asia-Pacific programme.
The resignation of Wang Ching-feng as Minister of Justice last March sparked international attention over the issue of the death penalty in Taiwan. Wang Ching-feng had refused to sign execution orders because of her opposition to the death penalty.
"The world was looking to the Taiwanese authorities to choose human rights, and to show leadership on the path towards abolishing the death penalty in the Asia-Pacific. Today's executions extinguished that hope," said Catherine Baber.
The Taiwanese Alliance to End the Death Penalty has raised concerns over the legality of the executions.
The Taiwanese authorities stated today that they are still considering alternatives to the death penalty, but such commitments are of little value while executions continue.
139 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice. Amnesty International calls upon the Taiwanese authorities to immediately establish a moratorium on executions and take all the necessary steps to abolish the death penalty in the country.
Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases, as a violation of the right to life and the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.
Amnesty International believes that the death penalty legitimizes an irreversible act of violence by the state.
Research demonstrates that the death penalty is often applied in a discriminatory manner, being used disproportionately against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic and religious communities. The death penalty is often imposed after a grossly unfair trial.
But even when trials respect international standards of fairness, the risk of executing the innocent can never be fully eliminated – the death penalty will inevitably claim innocent victims, as has been persistently demonstrated.
Scientific studies have consistently failed to find convincing evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments.
Two resolutions, calling for a worldwide moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty, were adopted at the United Nations General Assembly in December 2007 and 2008 by an overwhelming majority of states.
Taiwan: Human rights protest over executions
Protest Against The Ministry of Justice’s Illegal Executions
Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP) Press Release May, 1st, 2010
Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP), Judicial Reform Foundation (JRF), Taiwan Association for Human Rights (TAHR), Amnesty International Taiwan (AI Taiwan), Taiwan Labor Front, Human Rights Committee of the Taipei Bar Association, Regional Tibetan Youth Congress Taiwan, Taiwan Green Party and Humanistic Education Foundation together handed a letter of protest to the Ministry of Justice on May, 1st to remonstrate with the Minister of Justice, Tseng Yung- Fu, about the cursory order to execute four death row prisoners. Amnesty International (AI) published a news release to denounce the Taiwanese government for resuming executions and stated that this move has seriously damaged Taiwan’s human rights record.
The Minster of Justice, Tseng Yung-Fu, signed the orders for the executions, killing the four death row inmates, Chang Chun-Hong, Chang Wen-Wei, Hong Chen Yeow, and Ke Shi-Ming, in the space of just over an hour on April 30th. Their families weren’t informed and they were not able to meet the four men for the last time before they died.
We are shocked and enraged at these so-called "executions according to law". Below are our responses to the reasons for the executions given by the Ministry of Justice:
Illegal Execution of Chang Chun-Hong
On behalf of the 44 death row inmates, TAEDP asked 7 lawyers to demand a constitutional interpretation from the Grand Justices of the Judicial Yuan. But due to time constraints, legal letters of authorization were not obtained in time from Chang Chun-Hong, Chang Wen-Wei, Hong Chen Yeow, and Ke Shi-Ming. Nevertheless, concerning the procedural items, the Department of Clerks for the Justices of the Constitutional Court sent letters to the 7 lawyers to asking them to provide these document within ten days (up to May 3rd, 2010). Besides, at the same time, it also tried to reach the four death row inmates in different prisons to learn their wills regarding the constitutional interpretation.
TAEDP contacted the four death row inmates after receiving the letter. Chang Chun-Hong then sent the letter of authorization with his signature on April 26th. He showed his willingness to appoint TAEDP’s lawyers to demand a constitutional interpretation. Therefore, Chang’s demand was without question totally legal.
In accordance with the Ministry of Justice’s "Implementation Guidelines of The Review of Death Penalty Cases," the first rule of the first item of the second article states that, for cases pending constitutional interpretation, the highest court cannot send the orders of executions to the Minister of Justice. It is a shame that the Minister, however, ignored the demand, signing the orders for the executions illegally and said that they acted in accordance with the law.
Unknown Will of Ke
While Chang Wen-Wei and Hong Chen Yeow directly refused to approve the demand for constitutional interpretations, the fourth death row inmates Ke Shi-Ming didn’t actually reply. TAEDP sent representatives to the Tainan prison to meet Ke in person, but the staff replied that Ke was banned from meeting anyone. They could not tell the representatives of TAEDP if Ke received TAEDP’s letter and if he was able to write letters freely. Thus, we had no idea whether Ke refused to approve the demand for constitutional interpretations.
No Fair Trial
Three of the death row inmates executed didn’t have any defense lawyers when they receiving the final rulings upholding the death penalty from the highest court. According to the International Covenant of the Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) ratified by President Ma, any death row inmates should have defense lawyers in any stage of the trial as legitimate legal procedures. However, Article 388 of the Criminal Procedure Law in Taiwan violates the ICCPR. Given the opportunity, the Grand Justices might have a chance to uphold this basic right recognized by the international society and might rule the death penalty unconstitutional. The Minster of Justice Tseng, nonetheless, intentionally and recklessly ignored this and acted before the decisions of the Grand Justices. The Ministry of Justice exceeded its powers over the mandates of the Judicial Yuan, claiming its action was "in accordance with the law," treating human life as if it were worthless. It proves that the Ministry of Justice’s promises to be cautious regarding execution were nothing but lies. Therefore, the Minister of Justice needs to shoulder the political responsibility.
Blindness to the ICCPR
On March, 29th, TAEDP also helped the 44 death row inmates demand pardons (the commutation of the penalty) from the President. President Ma didn’t refuse and stated that he had received the demand and asked the Ministry of Justice for further discussions. Nothing about this was mentioned in the press release of the Ministry of Justice. It could be seen as blindness to the ICCPR and overstepping its authority. If the government really wants to "administer in accordance with the law," it should make it clear how they processed the demand for commutation of the death penalty.
The Indignation of Men and Gods?
The Minister of Justice claimed that he would exercise his power carefully. Beside the original procedures, Tseng said another consultative group would be formed for circumspect consideration of the cases "arousing the indignation of men and gods." But now the only standard we can see is "the right to seal and authorize." After the handling of the letter of authorization in this case, the Minister of Justice should announce the names of the members of this consultative group and related information for public scrutiny.
The TAEDP feels deeply distressed that the 4 year and half moratorium on the death penalty was destroyed in one day and firmly appeals to the general public to rethink the death penalty. While there is still controversy over the death penalty, without careful procedures, the Ministry of Justice speeded up the executions instead of reexamining related laws and rules. It is again another manifestation of how the government signed the ICCPR with one hand and broke it with the other.
In the press release of the Ministry of Justice, it was said that "as for the 40 people demanding constitutional interpretations, the Ministry of Justice would see how it develops and act in accordance with the law." Consequently, we request the passage of legislation concerning commutation and an immediate stop to executions.
Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP) Press Release May, 1st, 2010
Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP), Judicial Reform Foundation (JRF), Taiwan Association for Human Rights (TAHR), Amnesty International Taiwan (AI Taiwan), Taiwan Labor Front, Human Rights Committee of the Taipei Bar Association, Regional Tibetan Youth Congress Taiwan, Taiwan Green Party and Humanistic Education Foundation together handed a letter of protest to the Ministry of Justice on May, 1st to remonstrate with the Minister of Justice, Tseng Yung- Fu, about the cursory order to execute four death row prisoners. Amnesty International (AI) published a news release to denounce the Taiwanese government for resuming executions and stated that this move has seriously damaged Taiwan’s human rights record.
The Minster of Justice, Tseng Yung-Fu, signed the orders for the executions, killing the four death row inmates, Chang Chun-Hong, Chang Wen-Wei, Hong Chen Yeow, and Ke Shi-Ming, in the space of just over an hour on April 30th. Their families weren’t informed and they were not able to meet the four men for the last time before they died.
We are shocked and enraged at these so-called "executions according to law". Below are our responses to the reasons for the executions given by the Ministry of Justice:
Illegal Execution of Chang Chun-Hong
On behalf of the 44 death row inmates, TAEDP asked 7 lawyers to demand a constitutional interpretation from the Grand Justices of the Judicial Yuan. But due to time constraints, legal letters of authorization were not obtained in time from Chang Chun-Hong, Chang Wen-Wei, Hong Chen Yeow, and Ke Shi-Ming. Nevertheless, concerning the procedural items, the Department of Clerks for the Justices of the Constitutional Court sent letters to the 7 lawyers to asking them to provide these document within ten days (up to May 3rd, 2010). Besides, at the same time, it also tried to reach the four death row inmates in different prisons to learn their wills regarding the constitutional interpretation.
TAEDP contacted the four death row inmates after receiving the letter. Chang Chun-Hong then sent the letter of authorization with his signature on April 26th. He showed his willingness to appoint TAEDP’s lawyers to demand a constitutional interpretation. Therefore, Chang’s demand was without question totally legal.
In accordance with the Ministry of Justice’s "Implementation Guidelines of The Review of Death Penalty Cases," the first rule of the first item of the second article states that, for cases pending constitutional interpretation, the highest court cannot send the orders of executions to the Minister of Justice. It is a shame that the Minister, however, ignored the demand, signing the orders for the executions illegally and said that they acted in accordance with the law.
Unknown Will of Ke
While Chang Wen-Wei and Hong Chen Yeow directly refused to approve the demand for constitutional interpretations, the fourth death row inmates Ke Shi-Ming didn’t actually reply. TAEDP sent representatives to the Tainan prison to meet Ke in person, but the staff replied that Ke was banned from meeting anyone. They could not tell the representatives of TAEDP if Ke received TAEDP’s letter and if he was able to write letters freely. Thus, we had no idea whether Ke refused to approve the demand for constitutional interpretations.
No Fair Trial
Three of the death row inmates executed didn’t have any defense lawyers when they receiving the final rulings upholding the death penalty from the highest court. According to the International Covenant of the Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) ratified by President Ma, any death row inmates should have defense lawyers in any stage of the trial as legitimate legal procedures. However, Article 388 of the Criminal Procedure Law in Taiwan violates the ICCPR. Given the opportunity, the Grand Justices might have a chance to uphold this basic right recognized by the international society and might rule the death penalty unconstitutional. The Minster of Justice Tseng, nonetheless, intentionally and recklessly ignored this and acted before the decisions of the Grand Justices. The Ministry of Justice exceeded its powers over the mandates of the Judicial Yuan, claiming its action was "in accordance with the law," treating human life as if it were worthless. It proves that the Ministry of Justice’s promises to be cautious regarding execution were nothing but lies. Therefore, the Minister of Justice needs to shoulder the political responsibility.
Blindness to the ICCPR
On March, 29th, TAEDP also helped the 44 death row inmates demand pardons (the commutation of the penalty) from the President. President Ma didn’t refuse and stated that he had received the demand and asked the Ministry of Justice for further discussions. Nothing about this was mentioned in the press release of the Ministry of Justice. It could be seen as blindness to the ICCPR and overstepping its authority. If the government really wants to "administer in accordance with the law," it should make it clear how they processed the demand for commutation of the death penalty.
The Indignation of Men and Gods?
The Minister of Justice claimed that he would exercise his power carefully. Beside the original procedures, Tseng said another consultative group would be formed for circumspect consideration of the cases "arousing the indignation of men and gods." But now the only standard we can see is "the right to seal and authorize." After the handling of the letter of authorization in this case, the Minister of Justice should announce the names of the members of this consultative group and related information for public scrutiny.
The TAEDP feels deeply distressed that the 4 year and half moratorium on the death penalty was destroyed in one day and firmly appeals to the general public to rethink the death penalty. While there is still controversy over the death penalty, without careful procedures, the Ministry of Justice speeded up the executions instead of reexamining related laws and rules. It is again another manifestation of how the government signed the ICCPR with one hand and broke it with the other.
In the press release of the Ministry of Justice, it was said that "as for the 40 people demanding constitutional interpretations, the Ministry of Justice would see how it develops and act in accordance with the law." Consequently, we request the passage of legislation concerning commutation and an immediate stop to executions.
Saturday, 3 April 2010
Amnesty appeal to Taiwan
Amnesty renews its call for Ma to end capital punishment
By Shelley Huang
STAFF REPORTER
31 March, 2010, Page 3
Taipei Times
Amnesty International yesterday renewed its call on President Ma Ying-jeou to abolish the death penalty.
Speaking at a press conference in Taipei to mark the group’s annual report on executions, Roseann Rife, deputy program director for Amnesty’s Asia-Pacific office, said: "Amnesty International reiterated to President Ma Ying-jeou that we look to Taiwan to also be a leader in the region and help influence China and Japan to take similar steps."
Amnesty International secretary-general Claudio Cordone wrote to Ma earlier this month to make a similar appeal.
Rife’s appeal came as the nation looks likely to execute the first of its 44 inmates on death row later this year. There has not been an execution since late 2005.
The issue of whether to abolish the death penalty resurfaced recently after minister of justice Wang Ching-feng was forced to resign because of reactions to a statement in which she made clear her support for the abolition of the death penalty and refused to sign off on outstanding execution orders.
Her successor, Tseng Yung-fu, said he would have no problem signing execution orders once all procedures have been completed.
At the press conference yesterday, Rife said that in many countries, death sentences are often the result of flawed legal procedures.
Many defendants are too poor to hire attorneys and court-appointed lawyers are often inexperienced or have heavy workloads, which is unfair to the defendants.
The rights group also urged Ma to follow the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights — which was signed by him last year and is now in force — to protect human rights by abolishing the death penalty.
In its annual report, Amnesty said that China, which uses the death penalty as a political weapon, had the highest number of executions last year.
The report shows that as of last year, 95 countries abolished the death penalty.
Although 58 countries have yet to abolish the death penalty, only 18 performed executions last year.
This was the first year Amnesty disregarded official information published by the Chinese government, which does not release exact figures because "executions are still kept as state secrets in China," Rife said.
The rights group alleges that the actual number of executions in China last year — estimated to be in the thousands — far exceeds the official figures released by Beijing.
ADDITIONAL REPORTING BY CNA
By Shelley Huang
STAFF REPORTER
31 March, 2010, Page 3
Taipei Times
Amnesty International yesterday renewed its call on President Ma Ying-jeou to abolish the death penalty.
Speaking at a press conference in Taipei to mark the group’s annual report on executions, Roseann Rife, deputy program director for Amnesty’s Asia-Pacific office, said: "Amnesty International reiterated to President Ma Ying-jeou that we look to Taiwan to also be a leader in the region and help influence China and Japan to take similar steps."
Amnesty International secretary-general Claudio Cordone wrote to Ma earlier this month to make a similar appeal.
Rife’s appeal came as the nation looks likely to execute the first of its 44 inmates on death row later this year. There has not been an execution since late 2005.
The issue of whether to abolish the death penalty resurfaced recently after minister of justice Wang Ching-feng was forced to resign because of reactions to a statement in which she made clear her support for the abolition of the death penalty and refused to sign off on outstanding execution orders.
Her successor, Tseng Yung-fu, said he would have no problem signing execution orders once all procedures have been completed.
At the press conference yesterday, Rife said that in many countries, death sentences are often the result of flawed legal procedures.
Many defendants are too poor to hire attorneys and court-appointed lawyers are often inexperienced or have heavy workloads, which is unfair to the defendants.
The rights group also urged Ma to follow the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights — which was signed by him last year and is now in force — to protect human rights by abolishing the death penalty.
In its annual report, Amnesty said that China, which uses the death penalty as a political weapon, had the highest number of executions last year.
The report shows that as of last year, 95 countries abolished the death penalty.
Although 58 countries have yet to abolish the death penalty, only 18 performed executions last year.
This was the first year Amnesty disregarded official information published by the Chinese government, which does not release exact figures because "executions are still kept as state secrets in China," Rife said.
The rights group alleges that the actual number of executions in China last year — estimated to be in the thousands — far exceeds the official figures released by Beijing.
ADDITIONAL REPORTING BY CNA
How many does China execute?
The details of the executions of thousands of people a year is a state secret – and it could be worse than Amnesty fears
30 March 2010
The Guardian - Comment is free
You might have heard it said that China executes more people than all other countries in the world put together. Not just a handful, but thousands and thousands of people every single year. This, broadly, is true.
But suppose you actually wanted to find out exactly how many people the People's Republic executes annually. Any chance of getting this information? No. Try asking the Chinese authorities, and you'll get a stern "it's a state secret" rebuff. If you happened to get hold of some solid information (from lawyers in China, for example) you'd then be in possession of a state secret which it would be illegal to make public. It's basically as if there's a super-injunction on the information – not just on the actual information, but anything relating to it.
Amnesty's new report on the death penalty worldwide does its best to cut through the secrecy by estimating that there were "thousands" of executions in China in 2009. Based on sources – which we can't, for safety's sake, reveal – this seems reasonable. But it's still a rough and ready guesstimate. Amazing, given the seriousness of the topic.
China likes to have it both ways. It's been boasting that it has reformed its capital punishment system and that execution numbers are down. But it won't give any figures.
30 March 2010
The Guardian - Comment is free
You might have heard it said that China executes more people than all other countries in the world put together. Not just a handful, but thousands and thousands of people every single year. This, broadly, is true.
But suppose you actually wanted to find out exactly how many people the People's Republic executes annually. Any chance of getting this information? No. Try asking the Chinese authorities, and you'll get a stern "it's a state secret" rebuff. If you happened to get hold of some solid information (from lawyers in China, for example) you'd then be in possession of a state secret which it would be illegal to make public. It's basically as if there's a super-injunction on the information – not just on the actual information, but anything relating to it.
Amnesty's new report on the death penalty worldwide does its best to cut through the secrecy by estimating that there were "thousands" of executions in China in 2009. Based on sources – which we can't, for safety's sake, reveal – this seems reasonable. But it's still a rough and ready guesstimate. Amazing, given the seriousness of the topic.
China likes to have it both ways. It's been boasting that it has reformed its capital punishment system and that execution numbers are down. But it won't give any figures.
One thing we know – more or less – is that there are approximately 68 offences in China for which you can receive a death sentence. Many are not for lethal crimes – as we saw with the shocking execution of the British man Akmal Shaikh in December for alleged drugs offences. China's capital crimes reportedly include reselling forged VAT receipts, causing damage to public property, and cattle rustling. Three years ago a man was sentenced to death for selling overpriced ants.
However, I don't think a full list exists. That would be far too open for the Chinese authorities. If a proper source ever comes to light, it will be interesting to see if "revealing a state secret, including information about the People's Republic of China's use of capital punishment" is included as a capital crime. It wouldn't surprise me – this Catch 22-like paradox would suit China's secretive use of the death penalty down to the ground.
But here's an ominous thought. State secrets are normally things like defence matters or intelligence issues. What, then, is China so keen to hide on the death penalty?
Could it be that the numbers of people in China going to their deaths before firing squads and in mobile lethal injection chambers is actually far higher than we already feared?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
