[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

July 27



UNITED KINGDOM/INDONESIA:

Lindsay Sandiford: David Cameron's death row dilemma


Trade and counter-terrorism co-operation are officially at the top of David 
Cameron's agenda on a two-day visit to Indonesia as part of a tour of South 
East Asia.

But there's 1 issue the prime minister might be less keen to talk about.

Lindsay Sandiford, a 59-year-old grandmother, finds herself on death row in 
Indonesia's notorious Kerobokan Prison, not knowing when she might face a 
firing squad.

It's 2 1/2 years since the former legal secretary from Cheltenham was sentenced 
to death after being caught smuggling 4.8kg (10.6lb) of cocaine from Bangkok to 
Bali.

Her lawyers argued she was pressured into smuggling the drugs by a criminal 
gang.

She co-operated with the Indonesia police in a sting operation leading to the 
arrest of several members of that gang.

But at her sentencing hearing in 2013, that co-operation appeared to count for 
nothing as she was given the death sentence.

All appeal attempts have so far come to nothing.

'Delicate business'

It is a potentially awkward moment for Mr Cameron.

He is expected to announce hundreds of millions of pounds worth of trade deals 
with Indonesia.

At the same time a British citizen faces being lined up and shot.

Sandiford's legal team, which she is struggling to pay for, will be hoping Mr 
Cameron can exert some pressure on Indonesian President Joko Widodo when the 2 
men meet here in Jakarta.

But it is a delicate business.

In the past such pressure has not worked.

So far this year Indonesia has executed 12 foreigners for drugs offences.

Perhaps the highest profile of them were 2 Australians Andrew Chan and Myuran 
Sukumaran, the ringleaders of the Bali 9 drug ring.

They were executed in April after being caught trying to smuggling 8.3kg 
(18.2lb) of heroin from Bali to Australia in in 2005.

In their case the Australian government was publicly critical of Indonesia in 
an effort to get Jakarta to reverse the sentences.

Australian ministers even threatened to cut off foreign aid.

It didn't work.

Indonesia did not appear to like being told what to do.

'Risks well-known'

And the death penalty for drugs offences has broad public support in Indonesia.

"Take one life to save the lives of many," one Indonesian man, who didn't want 
to give his name, told us on the beach in Bali.

"Drugs ruin people's lives."

And there can be no doubt that smuggling drugs in Indonesia, a country whose 
harsh treatment of drug offenders is well known, is a very stupid thing to do.

The rewards may be great but so are the risks.

"Britain or Australia don't criticise the United States which has executed 
hundreds of people," the man added.

And there is an element of double standards here.

Nobody realistically expects Britain to jeopardise trade ties with the US where 
there are 3,000 people currently on death row, including British citizens.

Or with China, which executes thousands of people every year.

In the run-up to the execution of Chan and Sukumaran there were large public 
demonstrations in support of the Indonesian government.

The death penalty is a vote-winner here.

So Mr Cameron is likely to try to avoid talking publicly about Sandiford's 
case.

Any pressure will probably be applied discreetly and behind the scenes.

Certainly speaking to Sandiford's legal team, you get the impression they want 
to avoid any public criticism of the Indonesian government or justice system.

What they would like is for the British government to help fund Sandiford's 
legal costs, something it has so far refused to do despite numerous legal 
challenges.

So despite Mr Cameron's visit, Sandiford's fate remains very much uncertain.

For more than 2 1/2 years, she has sat on death row, not knowing how many days, 
weeks, months or years she has left to live.

(source: BBC news)






INDIA:

SC should reconsider validity of death penalty, says ex-judge----Court had 
earlier held that capital punishment can be awarded only if there are "zero 
mitigating circumstances"

The Supreme Court on Monday will hear an urgent and limited plea from Yakub 
Memon the sole death row convict in the 1993 Mumbai blasts case. Former Supreme 
Court judge Justice K.T. Thomas said it was time to re-consider the majority 
decision of the Supreme Court in the Bachan Singh case, which upheld the death 
penalty as constitutional.

In reconsidering Memon's death penalty, the Supreme Court has to also follow 
the principle set out in its April 2013 judgment in Shanker Kisan Rao Khade vs 
Maharashtra case that capital punishment can be awarded only if there are "zero 
mitigating circumstances" favouring the convict.

The litmus test

The judgment held that the death penalty should not be given merely because the 
judge concerned thinks it fit. The award of death penalty should be 
"society-centric" and the litmus test is whether society will approve the 
awarding of death sentence or not. To accomplish this, the court has to look 
into a variety of factors like society's abhorrence, extreme indignation and 
antipathy to the crime.

"Courts award death sentence since situation demands so, due to constitutional 
compulsion, reflected by the will of the people and not the will of the 
judges," the Supreme Court held.

Raman article

The apex court could take a re-look at the sentencing in the light of the new 
circumstances - namely the article by former R&AW officer B. Raman favouring 
clemency to Memon, and consider commuting his death sentence to life.

"The article is in public domain, and so the court under Article 32 can suo 
motu take cognisance of a document of that nature. Without discounting the 
tragedy of the blasts, Memon did provide valuable information about Pakistan 
involvement in the blasts, in the training and handling of explosives. Evidence 
was collected on the basis of information given by him. He performed valuable 
services to the nation, and if we had promised him that this would be taken as 
a mitigating factor in court, we as a nation should keep our promises," senior 
advocate and Rajya Sabha MP K.T.S Tulsi said.

Mr. Tulsi is one of the signatories to a petition submitted by eminent citizens 
to the President to reconsider the death penalty to Memon.

Memon unaware

But strangely, Memon himself has been singularly quiet about these 
circumstances and not sought clemency on their strength even as successive 
courts dismissed his appeals, review and curative petitions.

"May be he did not know the implication of the fact that his help to the 
agencies would be a mitigating circumstance in court for commuting the death 
penalty. May be he was precluded from saying anything. May be his lawyer did 
not present it in courts ... There are many points which the apex court should 
consider now," a legal expert said on condition of anonymity.

(source: The Hindu)

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

Schizophrenia to B Raman's letter: 6 arguments Yakub Memon may make in his plea 
to SC


The Supreme Court on Monday will hear a plea from Yakub Memon, the sole convict 
facing the death penalty for his involvement in the 1993 serial blasts in 
Mumbai which killed 257 people. Memon's execution is presently scheduled to be 
held on 30 July.

A bench of Justices AR Dave, Amitava Roy and Arun Mishra will be hearing the 
plea against the death sentence. Here's a quick roundup of the arguments that 
the former chartered accountant could present in front of the court:

The breaking of procedure to hang him

In his petition, Memon has argued that there is undue haste being shown to 
carry out his execution even as he is to run out of legal options to prevent 
it.

Memon alleged that "death warrant proceedings were carried out in Mumbai" while 
he is in jail in Nagpur, and therfore he was not represented by his lawyer.

The petition also said the death warrant was issued by the TADA court in Mumbai 
when his curative petition was already pending in the apex court, "thereby 
presumptuously pre-determining its negative outcome." A death warrant was 
therefore issued against him even before he could exhaust his last legal remedy 
- a curative petition.

Memon is likely to argue that the warrant for the execution needed to issued 14 
days before it was to be carried out, and its date couldn't have be fixed 
before his curative petition was considered by the Supreme Court, reports the 
Times of India. Memon's curative petition was dismissed by the apex court on 21 
July.

Memon could be holding out hope is because the apex court in a Uttar Pradesh 
murder case had earlier said that such warrants cannot be issued just because 
the death sentence has been confirmed, unless the convict has exhausted all 
legal options.

The anti-death penalty argument

The Death Penalty Litigation Clinic, associated with the National Law 
University in Delhi, is also going to be arguing against the execution.

Senior counsel T R Andhyarujina had appeared for the clinic, which has been 
filing petitions in apex court against the execution of death penalty in 
different cases.

Andhyarujina, if he appears today as well, is likely to argue that Memon wasn't 
given proper notice of the death warrant proceedings so that he could seek 
appropriate legal counsel.

The B Raman argument

The publication of a letter by former RAW official B Raman in which he argued 
against Memon's death penalty is also likely to be brought up before the apex 
court. Raman in a piece written for Rediff in 2007, had argued that Memon 
deserved leniency in sentencing on account of the assistance he provided to 
investigating agencies and bringing his family back from Pakistan.

The Indian Express reports that former Supreme Court judge HS Bedi has argued 
that the piece should be considered suo motu by the apex court. Bedi has asked 
that the Supreme Court bench consider reconsider the execution by either 
sending it back to the trial court or using its own powers under the 
Constitution of India.

However, as we've pointed out earlier, the apex court had already considered 
the argument that Memon's role in aiding the investigating agencies but had 
refused to commute the death sentence on account of it.

The schizophrenia argument

Memon, in his plea, has claimed he has been suffering from schizophrenia since 
1996 and remained behind the bars for nearly 20 years. While seeking the 
commutation of the death penalty earlier, he had argued that a convict cannot 
be awarded life term and the extreme penalty simultaneously for the same 
offence.

Memon will be hoping to get a commuting of sentence much like Devinder Singh 
Bhullar, who was to be hanged, but his execution was put off on the grounds 
that there had been inordinate time taken in considering his mercy pleas and 
the fact that he was suffering from schizophrenia.

"Mental illness, schizophrenia and insanity are grounds for commuting the death 
penalty in Devinder Pal Singh Bhullar's case," the then Chief Justice P 
Sathasivam had said in March 2014.

The plea before the President

A group of prominent citizens has written to the President seeking a 
commutation of his sentence and Memon is likely to cite it as a reason to stall 
his execution. Eminent lawyer Ram Jethmalani and leaders from four political 
parties were among around 300 people who on Sunday urged President Pranab 
Mukherjee to reconsider Memon's mercy plea.

Those who endorsed the petition included BJP's Shatrughan Sinha, Congress' Mani 
Shankar Aiyer, CPI-M leader Sitaram Yechury, CPI's D. Raja, actor Naseeruddin 
Shah, filmmaker Mahesh Bhatt, activist Tushar Gandhi, lawyer Vrinda Grover and 
economist Jean Dreze.

The 15-page petition submitted to the President claimed there are "substantive 
and fresh grounds" that can be considered on merits to give reprieve to 
Memon's.

The President had earlier dismissed Memon's plea for mercy that had been filed 
by his brother Suleiman.

The plea before the governor

In his petition, Memon has argued that he has already approached the Maharastra 
Governor with a plea for mercy. Memon had filed the mercy plea immediately 
after the Supreme Court dismissed his curative petition.

There has been no decision from the Maharashtra Governor on the plea so far as 
it considers the 2000-page document submitted by Memon.

While there has been an impressive groundswell of support for clemency over the 
past week, and spanning all political quarters, it remains to be seen if any of 
it will force the Supreme Court to reconsider its judgement.

(source: firstpost.com)

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

No closure in hanging Yakub Memon


There is something prima facie obnoxious about the death penalty. It turns the 
state into a killer by the force of law, whereas its primary responsibility is 
to act as the protector of the life and limbs of all its citizens. Yes, it can 
be argued that the exception is to be made in case of criminals who commit such 
heinous crimes that they deserve to die. Moreover it can be argued further that 
in our country, we have a judicial system and questioning the death penalty in 
any case is like expressing a vote of no confidence in the Supreme Court, and 
this is akin to blasphemy.

But the moral argument against death penalty simply does not leave any scope 
for this final form of punishment. Whatever be the legal sanctity and 
collective judicial wisdom, the Supreme Court is ultimately manned by humans. 
Now humans, even if they are mighty judges of the Supreme Court cannot give 
life to anyone, so it stands to reason that they should not have the power to 
take anyone's life. Thus rests the case against death penalty. The sooner we 
abolish it from our legal system, the better it will be for us to become a more 
civilized country. There are other aspects to the entire debate about death 
penalty like its futility in checking crime, but this moral element is the 
strongest factor against it.

The debate has come alive after it has been decided that Yakub the chartered 
accountant from the jointly family of Memons charged with the conspiracy to 
engineer the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts that claimed 257 lives should be hanged. 
Among the many arguments for hanging Yakub is the proposition that it shall 
bring closure to the victims of the serial blasts. This of course is apart from 
the judicial verdict that has pronounced him guilty of engineering those 
blasts. In the last few days, we have heard arguments from politicians and 
celebrities alike that Yakub is being hanged for being a Muslim. But this is 
the season of disclosures from spooks. An entire book devoted to such 
disclosures by a former IB and RAW chief Amarjit Singh Dulat is in the public 
domain, and after the Yakub hanging was announced there is another article by a 
respected ex- IB and RAW chief B Raman doing the rounds which points to the 
mitigating circumstances that go against a death penalty for him. 
Interestingly, another article in the same context by a journalist shows that 
as Yakub had told the courts, his brother Tiger's (the mastermind of the blasts 
and still in Pakistan under ISI protection) assessment of the situation has 
proved very accurate: "Tum Gandhiwadi ban ke ja rahe ho, lekin wahan atankwadi 
qarar kiye jaoge (You are going as a Gandhian, but over there you will be 
labelled a terrorist)."

Simply put if Yakub was expecting that at least his life would be spared for 
cooperating with the Indian authorities in coming back from Pakistan, where 
along with his entire family he was under the protection of the ISI, then his 
hopes have been dashed. Unable to get his brother Tiger and Ayub, the 2 persons 
who actually masterminded the crime, the authorities seem content with hanging. 
They have no time for such niceties as the supposed promise at the time of his 
'surrender' in Kathmandu that his role in exposing the ISI's involvement in the 
serial blasts would be rewarded. It is a matter of relief that Raman, the man 
who played a major role in getting the Memons from the clutches of the ISI, and 
helped to nail the role of the Pakistani agency in this act of terror is no 
longer alive. Or else, he would be a troubled man. His word given on behalf of 
the sovereign Indian state has been clearly betrayed.

The emerging Indian state is too keen to display its strength. It has an 
abhorrence to be even being perceived as a soft state, more so in the context 
of Pakistan. So whatever be his role, in this case Yakub is seen as the 
'driving spirit' behind the crime and the person has to be punished to the 
fullest possible extent. This was the case with Afzal Guru who was nowhere near 
Parliament when it was attacked in December 2001, but was sentenced to death 
and hanged. In handing out such death penalty, the Supreme Court also does not 
insist that the actual 'murder' be committed by the person. Perhaps, the sense 
of public outrage associated with the crime is more of a compelling reason than 
actual use of the weapon to kill by the accused. But what kind of closure will 
Yakub's death by hanging mean when his brother Tiger and Ayub are out of the 
reach of our authorities? What kind of show of strength would it amount to, 
when the main culprits are free? Would it mean that the Indian state is now 
more empowered to fight the terror battles? Would it any way persuade the 
Pakistanis to cooperate in the trial of the accused in Mumbai 26/11 terror 
attacks? Or would it help us get Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi who is now in ISI's safe 
house?

If hanging Yakub is expected to provide closure for the victims of the 93 
riots, it can be seen as a mitigating cause in favour death penalty, without 
compromising on the basic opposition to that idea itself, in the sense that it 
serves the cause of the wider community coming to terms with that tragedy. But 
then it is seldom that other person's death serves as a consolation for the 
loss of your own loved ones. This is essentially an argument that comes from 
those arm chair moralists and preachers on television debates who have never 
suffered such loss. Grief at the death of a loved one is very personal, as poet 
Sahir Ludhianvi once put it so eloquently in Mohammad Rafi's Hum Dono song: 
"Kaun rota hai kisi aur ki baat pe ai dost, sabko apni hi kisi baat pe rona 
aaya"...

(source: Free Press Journal)

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

Shouldn't Perpetrators Of Riots Get Sentenced to Death?: Owaisi


AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi has alleged that the then Narendra Modi government 
in Gujarat had asked the prosecution not to press for death sentence to former 
minister Mayaben Kodnani and Bajrang Dal leader Babu Bajrangi, convicted in 
2002 post-Godhra riot case.

The Hyderabad Lok Sabha MP questioned whether those responsible for killing 
people during riots should get death penalty.

"Kodnani and Babu Bajrangi were convicted by a Court, which sentenced them to 
life imprisonment in connection with the killing of 92 persons. The prosecution 
wanted capital punishment. But Modi, who was then Gujarat Chief Minister, asked 
prosecution not to appeal against the ruling (in HC) and let the punishment be 
life sentence," the All-India Majlis-e- Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) leader 
alleged.

"Shouldn't those who killed 92 persons get death sentence?...When should 
capital punishment be awarded?," the 46-year-old controversial politician 
asked.

He was addressing a public meeting here last night on the occasion of 7th death 
anniversary of Sultan Salahuddin Owaisi, a former President AIMIM.

In August 2012, a court in Gujarat had awarded life term to Kodnani, a former 
BJP Minister and Bajrangi in the Naroda-Patiya massacre case.

During his speech, Asaduddin, who had recently suggested that 1993 Mumbai 
blasts convict Yakub Memon was awarded capital punishment because of his 
religion, read out a media report against the death penalty.

"...Is it not true that Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal had met then 
President Pratibha Patil with a mercy petition seeking clemency for Rajoana 
(assassin of former Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh)?" he said.

Asaduddin challenged the BJP, which shares power in Punjab with Shiromani Akali 
Dal, to hang the killers of Beant Singh.

"If you have zero tolerance towards terrorism then prove it. I am challenging 
BJP to demand that the killers of Beant Singh be hanged...But they will not do 
so," he said.

The AIMIM leader said Babri Masjid was demolished in 1992 but that case is 
still dragging on.

Senior BJP leader L K Advani is an accused in the Babri case, but he has been 
honoured with Padma Vibhushan, he said, adding if there is a case against him 
he will be treated differently.

"If there is a criminal case on me, I will not get passport...Is this 
justice?," he asked.

Babri Masjid is a matter of getting justice. Gujarat riots and massacre of 
Sikhs in 1984 in Delhi are also issues related to getting justice, the AIMIM 
leader said.

On Babri Masjid issue, he said "we will abide by the Supreme Court order."

The apex court earlier this year had sought responses from senior BJP leader L 
K Advani and others on a plea against dropping of criminal conspiracy charge 
against them in the Babri mosque demolition case.

(source: outlookindia.com)

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

Retd K'taka HC judge wants Yakub's death penalty waived


Retired Karnataka High Court judge Justice H N Nagmohan Das said his firm 
conviction that death penalty should be abolished was the primary reason he 
signed a petition submitted by prominent people from various walks of life to 
President Pranab Mukherjee on Sunday to waive the death sentence awarded to 
Mumbai blasts convict Yakub Memon.

"I am against death penalty and for reformation. I want Memon's death penalty 
be waived not as a retired high court judge or a senior advocate but as a human 
being," Das, a native of Mulbagal in the Kolar district of Karnataka, told 
Deccan Herald.

He currently practises as designated senior advocate in the Supreme Court in 
New Delhi. "There was talk in the Supreme Court corridors on a draft of the 
mercy petition to be submitted to the President about a week ago. The draft, 
finalised by about 5 retired high court judges, came to me and I decided to 
sign it as I firmly oppose capital punishment," said Das.

"We should condemn any acts of terrorism, but the death penalty awarded to 
Memon will not serve any purpose," he said, adding: "We can still reform a 
convict however cruel he may be, and there is scope for this in the judicial 
system. We are a civilised society, and have marched forward. We are 
progressing day by day, and hence the existence of death penalty means a 
civilised society marching backward."

(soruce: Deccan Herald)

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

Yakub's death penalty sends message 'India is not soft on terror': BJP


Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Shaina NC on Sunday said that the death 
penalty for 1993 Bombay blasts accused Yakub Memon would send a message to the 
terrorists' world over that India is not soft on terror.

She said that the victims of the blast have been waiting since long for this 
trial.

"1993 blast victims have been waiting for so many years for this trial. There 
are the conspirators and there are the masterminds. We will get to the 
masterminds, but right now it's imperative that this conspirator is hung to 
death. So, it sends a message to the terrorists world over that India is not 
soft on terror," NC told ANI here.

2 senior bureaucrats of Maharashtra had yesterday met Governor C. Vidyasagar 
Rao to discuss the mercy petition moved by Yakub Memon, who is to be executed 
on July 30.

Additional Chief Secretary (Home) K.P. Bakshi and Principal Secretary (Law and 
Judiciary) M.A. Sayeed had an hour-long meeting with the Governor in this 
regard.

Memon has been sentenced to death for his role in the 1993 Mumbai blasts.

The Supreme Court had earlier this week rejected his last-minute appeal and 
upheld his hanging for July 30.

Memon had challenged the apex court's order arguing that legal procedure was 
overlooked in awarding him death penalty. He said that the special TADA 
(Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention)) court, which ordered him 
death warrant in 2007, did so before he could exhaust all his legal options.

(source: ANI news)