[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

Sept. 5




BARBADOS:

Readers have say on crime and punishment


With Barbados recording 2 more murders in the past week and police talking 
about a breakthrough in last month’s St George double-murder, crime has 
understandably been the hot topic for our online readers.

While some called for the death penalty to be enforced, others questioned 
whether putting criminals to death was an appropriate punishment.

Many readers praised the Royal Barbados Police Force for its hard work in 
crime-solving.

Here are some of the edited comments made by our online readers:

Andrew Headley: Police said they made a breakthrough in the St George 
double-murder. Great job, guys! What will the system do? Mr Government, you say 
no hanging, so what is in store for those fellows? 10 years in prison with 
meals and CXC courses so you can say you put them out with a skill? Give the 
people some justice. Stop making the cops work in vain. People in Barbados want 
to be peaceful in the comfort of their own homes.

Leonard Bee: I also supported hanging and other forms of the death penalty for 
many years. However, as I became older (and hopefully wiser), I now question 
whether it is in fact the most effective deterrent . . . . When I think of the 
savage manner in which some murders are committed and compare that to the death 
penalty, I believe that the death penalty pales in comparison . . . . I am 
inclined to think that severe punishment and hard labour will hurt more. If I 
severely flog a person every morning and night, put them to work all day long, 
and subject them to no TV, access to friends and family and feed them less 
sumptuous food, I believe that they will suffer much more.

Claire Battershield: . . . . It infuriates me that you can take a man’s or 
woman’s life and then a lawyer will stand and defend a murderer. It’s amazing 
that we shun people that have HIV/AIDS but embrace these murderers . . . .

Our fete and get-rich mentality has to end. We as a people need to be educated 
and re-educated or else the tourist industry which we spend so heavily on will 
be no more. Our streets and homes will not be safe.

Some Barbadians also expressed alarm that more teens were eating at the 
Salvation Army (a report which THE NATION carried).

Here are some of their comments:

Kenneth King: I am always in favour of taking care of the needy but we have a 
trend with young people who just have no interest in work whatsoever. Things 
tight at the moment but still there are lots of alternatives where young men 
can make an honest living . . . .

Pan Wallie: The policy of the Salvation Army must include some sort of 
screening or means testing in conjunction with the social services.

Some of those who appear to be needy are a far cry from such and this relates 
to all ages, not only the youth. . . .

(source: Nation News)






INDIA:

Abolish death penalty, say rights groups


In the wake of a court stay on the execution of 3 convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi 
assassination case and the ongoing debate over the gains from capital 
punishment, rights organisations have demanded that death sentence should be 
abolished.

“It's high time that parliament takes appropriate steps to abolish such 
provision from our statute books," said a statement by People's Union for Civil 
Liberties (PUCL).

"The provision of death penalty was introduced by the British in the Indian 
Penal Code in 1860 but the same has been abolished by them from their own 
statute books - being incompatible with the values of a civilised society and 
as done by a large number of countries," the PUCL said Sunday.

“Judgments of the courts are not always correct. The Supreme Court itself has 
stated that its judgments are correct not because they always may be correct 
but because theyare final,” it said.

The Madras High Court on August 30 stayed for eight weeks the hanging of the 
three convicts sentenced to death for conspiring to assassinate former prime 
minister Rajiv Gandhi. The three were scheduled to be hanged on September 9.

According to international rights organisation, Amnesty International, the 
world is moving towards abolishing death penalty.

“Fewer countries than ever before are carrying out executions. As it did with 
slavery and apartheid, the world is rejecting this embarrassment to humanity,” 
said an official of Amnesty International.

“We are moving closer to a death penalty-free world, but until that day every 
execution must be opposed,” the official added.

In a comparative graph of countries which gave death penalties from 1991-2010, 
Amnesty said 23 countries carried out executions last year. Methods of 
execution in 2010 included beheading, electrocution, hanging, lethal injection 
and shooting.

In 2005, 22 countries had carried out executions, in 2006 it was 25, in 2007 it 
was 24, in 2008 it was 25 and in 2009 it was 19.

“One more country, Gabon, abolished the death penalty for all crimes and the 
president of Mongolia established an official moratorium on executions. For the 
third time, the UN General Assembly adopted with more support than ever before 
a resolution on a moratorium on the use of the death penalty,” Amnesty said.

“Countries that retain the death penalty defended their position by claiming 
that their use of the death penalty is consistent with international human 
rights law,” it added.

Among the countries which still carry out executions are the US, Japan, China, 
India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Singapore and Nigeria.

(source: Daily News & Analysis)

*********************************

Rajiv Gandhi case: Main investigator for commuting death penalty


Amid a raging debate on the issue of clemency for killers of Rajiv Gandhi, the 
main investigator in the 20-year-old case DR Karthikeyan says that he will be 
happy if the death penalty of the three accused is commuted to life sentence.

With the demand for commuting their death sentence becoming an emotive issue in 
Tamil Nadu, he suggested that Parliament should convene a special session to 
discuss the policy with regard to capital punishment as decisions taken on 
regional basis would set a dangerous precedent.

"I have nothing personal against them. I did my duty, let the government do 
their duty now. I will be happy if their death sentence is reduced to life 
imprisonment," Karthikeyan said.

Karthikeyan was asked to take charge of the Special Investigation Team, a day 
after Rajiv Gandhi's assassination on May 21, 1991. Within a year on May 20, 
1992, a day before the 1st anniversary of the assassination, his team filed the 
charge-sheet naming 41 people as accused.

The former IPS officer said the commutation of Nalini Sreeharan's death 
sentence may help the other three accused, whose mercy petition has been 
rejected by President Pratibha Patil. The Supreme Court had sentenced Murugan, 
Santhan, Perarivalan and Nalini to death in 1999.

The Madras high court had recently granted an eight-week interim stay on the 
execution of the convicts which was scheduled for September 9.

"They have got a case, as one of the condemned prisoners' death sentence has 
been commuted to life. Moreover, they have been in jail for 20 years, and their 
mercy petitions have taken 11 years, which was a long period of uncertainty," 
he said.

(source: The Times of India)

**********************************

SC allows Bhullar to amend his mercy plea


The Supreme Court has allowed Devender Pal Bhullar, who has been given a death 
sentence, to amend his clemency petition. Bhullar was convicted in a Delhi car 
bomb blast case and sentenced to death. Bhullar's counsel has been allowed to 
plead that the death penalty should only be handed out by a constitution bench 
of the apex court and there should be no death penalty if there is a split 
verdict between the judges.

Bhullar was sentenced to death by a designated TADA court on August 25, 2001 
for his role in the September 10, 1993 bomb blast in Delhi targeting the 
cavalcade of then AIYC president Maninderjit Singh Bitta, who escaped with 
serious injuries, though nine security personnel were killed.

The Supreme Court had earlier dismissed his appeal, review and also the 
curative petition on March 12, 2003.

Devender Pal Bhullar was convicted in a Delhi car bomb blast case and sentenced 
to death.

President Pratibha Patil had on May 25 rejected his mercy plea, 2 days after 
the Supreme Court sought response from the Centre and the Delhi government on 
the 5,700 days of delay in deciding on the plea.

(source: IBN)






UGANDA:

How Draru Escaped Hanging


Lydia Draru, who confessed to killing former army commander Maj. Gen. James 
Kazini, had earlier been arraigned for murder whose maximum penalty is death by 
hanging, but on Thursday she survived the noose, due to prosecution's loopholes 
that were never filled during the trial though convicted of manslaughter, a 
lesser offense of killing a person unintentionally.

Saturday Monitor brings you some of the loopholes.

1. How Kazini sustained the deep injuries

The medical evidence adduced by the prosecution failed to establish the actual 
cause of the deep cut wounds found on Kazini's head as there were different 
accounts to that which was resolved in Draru's favour.

During the trial, Draru's niece Toboru, told court that her aunt hit the 
deceased once on the back, and once again on the head. This account was similar 
to Draru's, who said she hit the deceased once on the back and, when he turned, 
hit him on the head. The pathologist in his testimony stated that each of the 
deceased's injuries represented a blow and the deceased could have received a 
total of 5 blows to the head.

In her defence, Draru told court that the deep cuts to the deceased's head 
could be attributed to his falling down on pieces of broken glass that was 
strewn on the sitting room during the brawl. Her testimony corroborated with 
the testimony of her niece and the scene of crimes officer. The prosecution 
failed to present any evidence that proved whether the deep cuts observed were 
directly caused by repeated blows to the deceased's head so as to impute malice 
aforethought on her part. According to the judge the probability of the hollow 
metallic found at the scene of crime for causing the deep cut wounds on 
Kazini's head that led to his death was remote.

2. Faulty forensic expert evidence

The prosecution failed to prove that blood droplets on a green blouse recovered 
at the scene of crime, belonged to Draru. Draru rebutted this evidence when she 
stated that as soon as she got home after a night out with Maj. Gen. Kazini, 
she changed the clothes and wore a black and white T-shirt. Her evidence was 
corroborated by her niece's testimony who testified that she wore a black 
blouse with white writings on it at the time she committed the offence.

According to the judge, at the time the crime was committed, Draru was dressed 
in a black but not a green T-shirt as stated by prosecution. And this piece of 
evidence casts doubt on forensic expert's explanation that the blood stains 
found on the green T-shirt were caused by Draru hitting a bleeding Kazini.

Turning to the pair of dark blue jeans recovered at the scene of crime, the 
forensic expert in his account to court said the pattern of 5 blood droplets at 
the front of the jeans suggested that the wearer thereof was standing offside 
and not in front of a gushing artery. The judge held that this evidence does 
not prove that Draru hit the bleeding person, neither was it proved that she 
wore blue jeans.

3. Testimony of Draru's neighbour Tereza Irawo

There were also loopholes in the testimony of Draru's neighbour, Tereza Irawo, 
who testified that at about 6am on the fateful day, as she prepared to start 
her morning prayers she heard three loud bangs coming from the direction of 
Draru's house across the road from her house. She did not see what exactly 
caused them. The bangs heard by Ms Irawo were speculated to be among others, 
further beatings by Draru ; sounds of Kazini falling repeatedly, suggesting 
that after the initial blows he got up but was hit repeatedly.

4. Draru's conduct.

Having found that the manner in which the lethal weapon was used was not proven 
to connote malice aforethought, the judge now addressed her mind on the conduct 
of Draru, before, during and after the murder was committed.

During the trial, the testimonies of both Draru and her niece stated that 
Kazini assaulted her aunt but she did not retaliate. Draru reaffirmed to her 
earlier confession to killing Gen. Kazini and making calls to the area Chairman 
and her sister, informing them of the deceased's death. Throughout her trial, 
Draru also maintained she was guilty. Such conduct according to the Judge does 
not commensurate malice aforethought inherent in an indictment of murder.

5.Mysterious pistol

The prosecution in their case did not mention the existence of a fully loaded 
pistol recovered in Kazini's car that was parked outside Draru's home on the 
fateful day; yet he had drawn the same pistol at Draru threatening to kill her 
after accusing her of theft and infidelity. The judge noted in her judgment 
that Draru was very well aware that Kazini was armed and acted in the best way 
she could though used excessive force.

(source: All Africa News)






RWANDA:

Death Penalty Has No Place in Society-State Attorney


The Principal State Attorney, Frank Mwine Mugisha, has described the death 
penalty as a horrible punishment that should not be applied in any African 
society that values human rights.

He petitoned all countries to repeal it.

In an interview with The New Times, Mugisha described the sentence as 
miscarriage of justice, saying that this was the reason behind its retraction 
in the judicial systems of some countries.

Rwanda is among the countries that repealed the capital sentence from her penal 
code.

"Death penalty is a door of no return and one of the reasons why many countries 
are against it, is the possibility of miscarriage of justice which can lead to 
the end of an innocent human life," he said.

"Any single life is invaluable, yet the death penalty is nothing less than 
murder carried out in a cruel and calculated manner by the state. Indeed, death 
penalty is contrary and in violation of human rights norms."

After the Second World War, a new era of human rights and international law 
first sought to lay down the foundations of human rights(UDHR 1948), to move 
towards country by country to introduce suspension and later to universally 
abolish the death penalty.

International experts from various countries, including 25 from Africa, will 
meet in Kigali next month to discuss the elimination of the death penalty.

The conference is organised by the government in conjunction with "HANDS OFF 
CAIN", an Italian organisation committed to the fight against the application 
of the death penalty with support from European Union, African Union and the 
World Coalition Against the Death Penalty.

"Some countries still retain death penalty in their books arguing that, it is 
constructional to take life for greater good and justice demands that criminals 
receive punishment in keeping with their offence," Mugisha noted.

The principal state Attorney added having gone through the worst human 
catastrophe and managed to cope up with the aftermath of the Genocide, and 
having reconciled her communities which were torn apart by genocide, Rwanda 
decided to abolish the penalty in 2008.

The head of Kigali Bar Association, Athanase Rutabingwa acknowledged that there 
should not be death penalty not only in Africa but in the entire world.

"We punish people to rehabilitate them to come back to their normal life. So 
how do you expect him to learn if you have killed him," Rutabingwa, a criminal 
lawyer, said .

(source: All Africa News)






MAURITIUS:

Death penalty is no solution to combating crime. But education is.


With the recent rise in the rate of crimes, the question as to whether death 
penalty should be introduced in combating crimes has resurfaced and not 
surprisingly, there are those who are for and against the introduction and 
implementation of death penalty.

For a number of politicians, people committing serious crimes do not have the 
right to live in this world whilst others want to introduce the death penalty 
which they themselves have not always believed in. But then who knows what 
politicians really believe in!

Debates as to whether or not it is morally and ethically acceptable for the 
state to execute people and if so under what circumstances and for which 
crimes, have been going on for many centuries around the globe.

At the heart of the debate are some very simple questions: (i) Do we have the 
right to take the life of another human being and (ii) will the introduction of 
death penalty reduce crimes in Mauritius? Is there a strong correlation between 
death penalty and reduction in crime? Should we not investigate the reasons why 
people commit crimes and deal with the source of the problems rather than 
offering palliative solutions? According to Amnesty International, around 58 
countries and territories retain the death penalty, although many never 
actually use it probably because it has been found to be inefficient as a 
deterrent. The United Nations adopted a resolution which reaffirmed its call 
for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty. The resolution calls for 
countries to freeze executions with a view to eventual abolition.

The measure of punishment

As always, there are arguments for and against death penalty. Proponents of 
death penalty argue that all those who are guilty deserve to be not only 
punished but punished in proportion to the severity of their crime. In a 
nutshell, real justice requires people to suffer for their wrongdoing, and to 
suffer in a way appropriate for the crime. Each criminal should get what their 
crime deserves and in the case of a murderer what their crime deserves is 
death. The measure of punishment in a given case must depend upon the atrocity 
of the crime, the conduct of the criminal and the defenceless and unprotected 
state of the victim.

To many people the above argument fits with their inherent sense of justice in 
supporting the argument ‘An eye for an eye’ which could be translated as 
vengeance. Taken literally, an eye for an eye should mean only the guilty 
should be punished and they should be done so neither too leniently nor too 
severely. So, how can the system make sure that the guilty is punished fairly 
and squarely when there is anticipatory suffering of the criminal who may be 
kept in jail for many years? Does it not make the punishment more severe than 
just depriving the criminal of life?

Another argument used to justify death penalty is the fact that by executing 
convicted murderers, would-be murderers will be deterred from killing people. 
Among social scientists and psychologists, there is no such research or 
statistical evidence to confirm or inform that death penalty works as a 
deterrent.

There is no denying that those who are executed cannot commit further crimes. 
But is it a sufficient justification for taking human lives? Surely, there are 
other ways to ensure the offenders do not re-offend, such as imprisonment for 
life without possibility of parole.

Those who are against death penalty argue that everyone has an inalienable 
human right to life, even those who commit murder. Sentencing a person to death 
and executing them violates that human right.

One of the most fundamental and compelling arguments against death penalty is 
that innocent people may get executed because of mistakes or flaws in the 
judicial system. Judges, witnesses, prosecutors and jurors can all make 
mistakes and these do happen. There is agreement among the legal circle that 
miscarriages of justice do exist resulting in the conviction of innocent 
people. This is the very reason why there are courts of appeal or judgements 
allowed to be appealed. Where death penalty is implemented such mistakes cannot 
be put right.

The risk of executing the innocent

According to Amnesty International, as long as human justice remains fallible, 
controversial and weak, the risk of executing the innocent can never be 
eliminated.

As yet, there are no evidence that death penalty is a deterrent. In fact, where 
death penalty exists, an increase in murder rate is the norm. USA can be cited 
as a classic example. While many countries are moving away from death penalty, 
politicians at home are discussing the possibility of reintroducing it not it 
seems, for the benefit of the population at large but purely for their own 
political survival and political gain to enable them to “serve” another 5 
years. With the introduction of death penalty, there will be only one group of 
winners: politicians.

Is it not high time to ask why do we have so many crimes in a small island like 
Mauritius? Should we not attempt to find out the root of these social problems 
and provide appropriate and workable solutions rather than hastily come up with 
palliative solutions which are short term?

Should we not re-examine an education system which encourages fierce 
competition at a tender age not collaboration, which sacrifices moral and civic 
education to academic learning? Should our leaders in all walks of life not 
re-examine the example they are setting by their own behaviour and ways? Should 
we not reexamine our police force and our judiciary system so often accused of 
corruption, of complicity, of lack of professionalism and efficiency?

But before we find the cause of our problems, we must admit that there is a 
problem. There will never be any solution if we keep saying nothing is really 
wrong. Our island is screaming for help. But it does not look as if it will 
come from our elected leaders.

(source: Le Mauricien)






IRAN----executions

Iran hangs 6 convicts in prison


Iran on Sunday hanged 3 people found guilty of "forbidden acts" as well as 2 
convicted rapists and a drug trafficker in a prison of the southwestern city of 
Ahvaz, ISNA news agency reported.

3 of the prisoners were hanged for committing "forbidden acts against 
religion," the report said, without elaborating.

Other charges against the 3 included kidnapping and theft, Khuzestan provincial 
judiciary spokesman Hojjatoleslam Abdolhamid Amanat was quoted as saying.

2 convicted rapists and a drug smuggler were sent to the gallows in the same 
prison.

The latest hangings bring to 180 the number of executions reported in Iran so 
far this year, according to an AFP tally based on media and official reports.

Iranian media reported 179 hangings last year but international human rights 
groups say the actual number was much higher, ranking the Islamic republic 
second only to China in the number of people it executed in 2010.

Tehran says the death penalty is essential to maintain law and order, and it is 
applied only after exhaustive judicial proceedings.

Murder, rape, armed robbery, drug trafficking and adultery are among the crimes 
punishable by death in Iran.

(source: Agence France-Presse)