[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

March 21



GLOBAL:

Amnesty International to release annual death penalty report on April 1



On April 1, Amnesty International will be lauching this 2014 report on death 
penalty developments and statistics from across the globe.

The report is likely to cover the key global trends in the use of the death 
penalty in the past year, and it will look at how executions and death 
sentences increased and decreased in all countries.

Amnesty International has been campaigning for the abolition of death penalty 
at global level.

(source: sikhsiyasat.net)








THAILAND:

Death penalty for son convicted for killing parents and brother



The Thonburi Criminal Court has sentenced the youngest son to death by 
execution following his conviction for the last year's murder of his father, 
mother and older brother.

The judicial ruling cited prosecution evidence to find Kittinan "Toei" 
Homchong, 23, guilty of hiring 4 accomplices to kill his entire family in order 
to become a sole heir to inherit his father's estate, including Bt100-million 
plot.

Kittinan recanted his confession given to police and denied all charges during 
trial.

He got the mandatory capital punishment for the premeditated murder of 
biological parents and sibling.

The 4 accomplices, including the gunman, also received death penalty before the 
court cited their confession as grounds for punishment reduction to life 
imprisonment.

The murder took place last April at the Homchong family's home in Bang Khae 
district.

The father, retired military officer Colonel Wichai, the mother, teacher Wanida 
and their oldest son, police officer Lieutenant Thammanat, were all shot in the 
head.

The scene was tampered with to make it appear like a break-in.

Kittinan said his brother's Bt53, 000 cash was missing. He also claimed to have 
an alibi for staying at his friend's home during the incident.

Police found his statement and that of his friend, Sakkarin "Golf" Phankul, 23 
to be suspicious and incoherent.

Confronted with his conflicting statements, Sakkarin admitted he wanted to help 
Kittinanto gain access to the inheritance. He said Kittinan gave the key for 
the gunman to get into his home.

His confession led to Kittinan's initial confession and the arrests of gunman 
Sirichai Permpoonsak, 43, taxi driver Chalard Thiangtham, 53 and look-out man 
Surapong Chuphan, 47.

(source: thaivisa.com)








INDONESIA:

Attorney general says no change in execution plan



The attorney general reaffirmed here Friday that a plan to execute drug 
convicts on death row has not been put on hold, although no exact date has been 
set for its implementation.

"I have said that judicially it was close to the final stage, but new 
developments have emerged after several of the death convicts directly or 
through lawyers filed for appeals," Attorney General HM Prasetyo noted.

5 convicts have filed suits for a judicial review. They include Martin Anderson 
from Ghana, Mary Jane from the Philippines, and Serge Areski Atlaoui from 
France.

2 Australian death convicts Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran are also appealing 
against the Presidential Decrees that rejected their clemency pleas.

Prasetyo remarked he should respect the ongoing legal processes, although they 
were already close to the final stage in terms of technical aspects.

"We have to be patient and wait for certain non-judicial processes," he added.

He pointed out he will not act arbitrarily and will still give an opportunity 
(for them to seek legal avenues), though their efforts are useless because 
their clemency requests have already been turned down.

"No other legal avenues can be taken. The only question is when to implement 
the death penalty," he noted.

The attorney general explained that similar to the 1st round, the executions 
will be carried out simultaneously as planned.(*)

(source: Antara News)

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

Brazilian death-row drug convict mentally fit for execution: Attorney General



Attorney General M. Prasetyo said on Friday that Brazilian death-row drug 
convict Rodrigo Gularte was mentally fit enough to be executed.

"According to testimonies from fellow inmates and doctors, Rodrigo is not sick 
at all. This means there's nothing stopping us from executing him," he said at 
the Attorney General's Office in South Jakarta.

Prasetyo repeated previous statements that the law only prohibited the 
government from executing pregnant women and children under 18 years of age.

Previously, Yeni Rosa Damayanti of the Association of Healthy Souls called on 
the government not to execute Gularte because his medical records showed that 
he had been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia back in 1996.

Medical reports obtained by The Jakarta Post reveal that Gularte attended 
psychiatric appointments from March to November 1996 at the Clinica Quinta do 
Sol in Brazil, where he was prescribed antidepressants, antipsychotics and mood 
stabilizers.

(source: asiaone.com)








PAKISTAN----executions

2 brothers among 4 hanged



4 more death-row prisoners, including 2 brothers, were executed in Rawalpindi 
and Mianwali on Thursday.

The authorities hanged 3 more murder convicts, including 2 brothers, at Adyala 
Jail.

Those sent to gallows were Ghulam Muhammad and Asghar Ali sons of Muhammad 
Hussain of Jalti and Gulistan Khan son of Muhammad Zaman, hails from Kallar 
Syedan.

Earlier, the jail authorities had arranged their last meetings with the family 
members and relatives after receiving the death warrants for the 3 murder 
convicts.

According to details, the jail authorities first sent the 2 real brothers 
Ghulam Muhammad and Asghar Ali to gallows at 5:30am and then the 3rd convict 
Gulistan Khan was hanged by jail authorities. Later, their bodies were handed 
over to the heirs who took them to their native towns for burial.

Tight security arrangements were made inside and outside the jail by the law 
enforcement agencies to avoid any untoward incident at the time of hangings.

Ghulam Muhammad and Asghar Ali were awarded capital punishment by a court of 
law for murdering 2 of their relatives in 1996 in Jalti whereas the Gulistan 
Khan committed murder of a man at Kallar Syedan in 1998 and was held by police.

So far, a total of 10 convicts including Khalid Mehmood, a former technician of 
Pakistan Air Force (PAF), have been executed in Adyala Jail since the Prime 
Minister of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif lifted the moratorium on the death penalty 
after armed attack by terrorists on a school in Peshawar. Another death row 
convict, Abdul Sattar, was executed in Mianwali Jail. Sattar was sentenced to 
death for killing a man over a personal feud in 1992.

The appeals of all convicts had been rejected by higher and superior courts and 
their mercy petitions were also rejected by President of Pakistan. With the 
recent hangings, so far 54 convicts have been hanged across the country, after 
the deadly attack on the Army Public School on December 16, 2014.

Some 8,000 convicted prisoners are in a death row in various jails across the 
country.

(source: The Nation)

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

The courtroom deaths.



Executions by hanging in Pakistan continue briskly. In the past 4 days around 
40 prisoners on death-row have been hanged in different jails of the country. 
On Monday, 12 death-row inmates across the country were sent to the gallows, 
the highest number of executions in a single day since the government lifted 
the 6-year moratorium on capital punishment last December, a day after the APS 
Peshawar attack.

A day later another 9 condemned prisoners were hanged, bringing the total of 
such state-sanctioned killings to 39 in the intervening period. The Pakistani 
government had initially maintained that the lifting of the moratorium would 
apply only to those sentenced to death under the Anti-Terrorism Act.

It is not difficult to understand that that the criminal justice system in 
Pakistan is deeply flawed and hence profoundly weighted against the poor and 
marginalised segments of society. From the filing of an FIR, the investigation 
of a crime, the trial and appeals process, to the conditions of incarceration - 
the outcome of every step is often directly co-related to the financial and/or 
political clout of the parties involved.

Take the case of Shafqat Hussain, an under-aged boy of a poor family from 
Pakistan Occupied Kashmir went Karachi in search of work in 2003.

Having struggled with a learning disability, Shafqat failed in school. He was 
13 years old when he dropped out, barely able to read or write. He sought 
refuge in a metropolis that had no space to give and was quickly relegated to 
the city's fringes. He never saw his parents again. When he was 14, still 4 
years under Pakistan's legal age of adulthood, Shafqat was detained illegally 
by the police and severely beaten.

The boy was held in solitary confinement, his genitals were electrocuted and he 
was burned with cigarette butts. The policemen interrogating him removed 3 of 
his fingernails. Sadly, Shafqat's case was not the exception. It was the rule. 
He was told that he would never escape police custody or his torturers until he 
confessed to a crime he did not commit, the murder of a 7-year-old boy.

Shafqat was then falsely convicted on charges of kidnapping and murder, and 
sentenced to death. The only evidence the courts had against him was a 
confession he made after 9 days of being tortured in a police cell.

Shafqat was not tried as a juvenile. Nor was he given access to a lawyer when 
presented with the charges against him. His mother hasn't seen her son in 10 
years. She cannot afford to travel to Karachi to see Shafqat now, before he is 
to be killed. There was no moment of reflection, no introspection, only a 
knee-jerk call for vengeance.

In Pakistan, blood will always have blood.

The state lifted the moratorium on the death penalty and introduced military 
courts - neither of which are known to be great deterrents to crime.

There are currently more than 8,000 people on death row in Pakistan. Close to 
1,000 convicts who have exhausted their appeals are set to face the gallows.

39 people have already been executed. Shafqat was scheduled to be hanged on 
Thursday. But a sustained campaign by media, social and civil activists and by 
many other people on social networking websites like FaceBook and Twitter has 
finally forced Pakistan government to postpone his hanging.

Shafqat Hussain has now spent 11 years on death row on charges that have 
nothing to do with terrorism. He was not a militant; he worked, during his 
brief spell of freedom in Karachi, as a caretaker at an apartment building.

It is no less than nonsense to claim that he is threat to national security. 
Pakistan government should revisit and reinvestigate cases like that of Shafqat 
and others to look its justice system works in tune with credible human 
standards.

(source: The Kashmir Monitor)

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

Interior Ministry requests halting executions for Saulat, Shafqat



The Interior Ministry on Friday sent a request pertaining to a stay on Saulat 
Mirza's execution and pushed for another 90 days.

On Thursday, the government decided to re-open the murder case of former KESC 
Managing Director Shahid Hamid, a day after Mirza hurled serious allegations at 
Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), hours before his hanging on Thursday.

Saulat Mirza's execution was postponed shortly after his statement from a 
prison cell appeared on electronic media in which the convict accused Altaf 
Hussain of issuing orders for the killing of Shahid Hamid.

Sources told Geo News that Interior Secretary Ashtar Ausaf called on Prime 
Minister Nawaz Sharif's special advisor to discuss the Saulat Mirza case.

Sources in the Interior Ministry said the government would re-open the murder 
case on a formal request of the Sindh government.

Meanwhile, the Interior Ministry also sent a request today to halt underage 
convict Shafqat Hussain's death penalty for 30 days.

(source: geo.tv)

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

Pakistan Reintroduced Death Penalty: Trade Deal with the EU Endangered



Pakistan said yesterday (19 March) that its decision to lift the 6-year-old ban 
on the capital punishment would have no impact on the trade deal with the 
European Union. The death penalty was introduced again in December last year as 
part of Pakistan's struggle to fight against extremism that has soared after a 
Taliban massacre at a school in the city of Peshawar. The 28-country block has 
condemned this move. Since the re-introduction of the capital punishment, 52 
individuals have been sent to the gallows.

Referring to the EU-Pakistan agreement that makes it possible for firms to pay 
no tax on certain categories of goods exported to the EU, the country's foreign 
ministry spokesperson, Tasnim Aslam, commented that "we do not expect that this 
issue will impact Pakistan's GSP plus status". According to Pakistani data, 
GSP+ has helped to make the country's products more competitive, which has 
increased the country's exports to the European Union by more than a billion 
dollars. "It is a question of domestic law and legislation and we are engaged 
with European Union. We have told them clearly our perspective," Ms Aslam 
added.

The GSP, EU Generalized Scheme of Preferences, has offered Pakistan generous 
tariff preferences under so-called GSP+ arrangement that seeks to support the 
country's sustainable development and good governance. In order to maintain 
GSP+, Karachi has to implement 27 core international conventions on human 
rights and labor right, good governance and environmental protection.

The EU is Pakistan's most important trading partner, taking more than 21 % of 
the country's total exports. Pakistan mainly exports textiles, clothing, and 
leather products to the block. Textiles and clothing account for almost 3/4 of 
Pakistan's total exports to the EU. In contrast, the EU exports to Pakistan 
mostly mechanical and electrical machinery as well as chemical and 
pharmaceutical products. EU-Pakistan trade has gone up by about 4.7 % annually 
between 2007 and 2011.

(source: eubulletin.com)

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

The hanging fields----The state trying to live by creating fear syndrome

"An execution is not simply death. It is just as different from the privation 
of life as a concentration camp is from prison. For there to be an equivalency, 
the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of 
the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that 
moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months. Such a monster is not 
encountered in private life."----Albert Camus, Reflections on the Guillotine, 
Resistance, Rebellion & Death



These days, the morning welcome on television is reading the count of people 
hanged in various jails across the country. The spectacle is enacted in all its 
gory details making one wonder how low have we sunk in reporting matters 
concerning human sentiments and pain.

This article is not a defence of crime. It, instead, is meant to spur a 
rational discourse with regard to the possible effectiveness or otherwise of 
the death penalty being a deterrent to crime.

The European Union, in a strong-worded statement released on March 18 has asked 
the Pakistan government to restore the moratorium on death penalty. The 
statement said: "At least 39 people have been executed in Pakistan since 
December 2014 when the government lifted a moratorium on executions in place 
since 2008. Contrary to the government of Pakistan's stated policy that only 
clearly identified terrorists would be executed, convicts not sentenced on 
terrorist charges are now being executed". The statement concluded by "calling 
on Pakistan to reinstitute the moratorium and to respectfully all its 
international obligations, in particular the principle of fair trial".

There are 2 distinct aspects of the case: capital punishment as an instrument 
of deterrence against crime after completing due process of a fair trial, and 
administering death penalty to those below 18 years of age at the time of 
occurrence of a crime. Pakistan exercised moratorium for over 6 years, but 
lifted it in the wake of the approval of 21st amendment in the constitution 
with the predominant intent of using it as a potent weapon in its war against 
terror.

It also highlighted that article 6(5) of the International Covenant on Civil 
and Political Rights, to which Pakistan is a party, specifically prohibits the 
use of death sentence for crimes committed by persons below 18 years of age.

The United Nations has also reminded Pakistan of its international obligations 
to ban capital punishment. In a statement released it said that, under the 
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as well as the Convention 
on the Rights of the Child, Pakistan was legally committed to ensuring due 
process and not imposing the death penalty. It further stated that, moving away 
from death penalty will contribute to human development, dignity and rights.

The government of Pakistan, on the other hand, has defended the capital 
punishment saying that it was not violating any international law: "Our 
constitution and legal system allow death penalty within legal parameters and 
the condition of a fair trial".

In December, 2014 when the moratorium was initially lifted, the government had 
stated that criminals awarded death sentence for involvement in heinous acts of 
terrorism only would be executed, but death penalty has now been restored 
encompassing all crimes.

While the government was quick to lift the moratorium on capital punishment and 
start sending convicts to the gallows, even some necessary initial work on the 
envisaged initiatives to secure long-term gains and control the nurseries of 
indoctrination and extremism has not started yet, this because of a combination 
of factors including the oft-advertised paucity of resources and lack of moral 
authority and political will on the part of the ruling elite.

According to updated figures, 58 countries of the world practice capital 
punishment, Pakistan being one of them, 98 have abolished it de jure for all 
times, 7 have abolished it for ordinary crimes only and 35 have abolished it de 
facto for not having used it for at least 10 years and/or are under moratorium. 
Amnesty International considers most countries abolitionist. Overall, it 
considers 140 countries to be so either in law or practice. Practically all 
countries of the world except Saudi Arabia, Iran and Sudan prohibit the 
execution of individuals who are under the age of eighteen at the time of 
committing a crime. Executions of this kind are prohibited under the 
international law.

There are 2 distinct aspects of the case: capital punishment as an instrument 
of deterrence against crime after completing due process of a fair trial, and 
administering death penalty to those below 18 years of age at the time of 
occurrence of a crime. Pakistan exercised moratorium for over 6 years, but 
lifted it in the wake of the approval of 21stamendment in the constitution with 
the predominant intent of using it as a potent weapon in its war against 
terror.

The National Action Plan (NAP) listed twenty points that the government 
resolved to cover as part of this effort. Some of the envisaged steps including 
the lifting of moratorium on death penalty and the ongoing Zarb-e-Azb operation 
in the North Waziristan Agency were for securing immediate results, while some 
others were for addressing the nurseries of terror for long-term consolidation 
of benefits. These steps included:

1. Not allowing any armed organisation to operate;

2. Registering and regulating seminaries;

3. Eliminating of all sources of funding for terrorists and terrorist 
organisations;

4. Initiating action to stop religious extremism and protect religious 
minorities;

5. Stopping the banned organisations from operating under any other name;

6. Acting against literature, newspapers and magazines that are spreading hate, 
ideas of beheading people, sectarianism, extremism and intolerance;

7. Banning the airing of views of terrorists and terrorist organisations in the 
print and electronic media, and

8. Creating a special anti-terrorist force in the country.

While the government was quick to lift the moratorium on capital punishment and 
start sending convicts to the gallows, even some necessary initial work on the 
envisaged initiatives to secure long-term gains and control the nurseries of 
indoctrination and extremism has not started yet, this because of a combination 
of factors including the oft-advertised paucity of resources and lack of moral 
authority and political will on the part of the ruling elite.

Among the innumerable defences put forward to abolish the death penalty, the 
lack of equivalency factor is the most telling. In Pakistan, award of death 
penalty is also based on what are generally perceived to be flawed laws. The 
blasphemy law is one such aberration which has been responsible for the killing 
of scores of the accused at the hands of the religious fanatics, even inside 
prison houses. The state has failed to impose its writ to ensure provision of 
equitable justice to its citizens, most importantly those hailing from the 
impoverished and the underprivileged segments of the society. The criminal 
justice system of the state has practically collapsed.

There are 2 examples that would amplify the forfeiture of responsibility within 
the state and the ruling elite. The first is the case of Mumtaz Qadri. The man 
was accused of murdering the former governor of Punjab Salman Taseer in cold 
blood. He even confessed to his crime. He was awarded the death penalty at the 
lower court level. The judgement given in the high court upheld the death 
penalty, but removed the anti-terrorism clause, thus freeing the state of any 
responsibility with regard to guiding the case to its logical end. It is now 
like another simple matter to be sorted out between the 2 concerned parties. 
But, there is another factor that needs consideration: that of the growing, and 
often violent pressure by the mostly proscribed religious organisations to 
force the aggrieved party to come to a settlement under the diyat law, thus 
allowing the killer to walk away a free man. Refusal by the aggrieved party to 
comply usually has a violent ending, the state again remaining an uncaring and 
unconcerned spectator.

The other case concerns Shafqat Hussain who was allegedly a minor at the time 
when he is accused of having killed a child. Shafqat is a poor person who could 
not afford to hire a lawyer. During the process of hearing the case, the 
concerned judge is reported to have pointed out the aberration and, from among 
those present in the courtroom at that instant, asked one of the lawyers to 
represent him. This particular lawyer, though having agreed to do the needful, 
is reported to have taken no interest in the case. When he did not appear on 
behalf of the accused child on three consecutive appearances, he was sent a 
notice. The lawyer appeared before the judge and excused himself from the case. 
So, the poor child, having had to go through the motions of the case without 
any legal support, was sentenced to death for the alleged crime. It is, 
therefore, obvious that there was a dereliction of duty by the state in this 
matter and the process of law was not duly followed. It was a simple case of 
miscarriage of justice and the state alone bears the responsibility.

As long as the state cannot ensure, without a shadow of doubt, the impartiality 
of its legal institutions and machinery in the matter of handling criminal 
cases transparently and justly and, as long as it cannot ensure provision of 
compatible aids to those who cannot afford these on their own, it loses the 
legal and moral right to inflict capital punishment. Unfortunately, the state 
of Pakistan has been recurrently guilty of this crime, and there does not 
appear a prospect for it to remodel its approach. That does not mean that it 
should virtually reduce the vast swathes of the country into insensate hanging 
fields.

The interior minister's statement on the floor of the national assembly further 
perpetuates this dereliction of responsibility. He said that the government had 
made every endeavour to establish the age of the accused, but the provincial 
government in Sindh had not extended any help. Now, irrespective of who is to 
blame for the government's inability to establish key facts regarding the case, 
it defeats the very basis of the award of the death penalty. Even if there 
remains an iota of doubt with regard to the age of Shafqat, its benefit must go 
to the accused which should result in postponing the execution and initiating 
credible steps for a transparent ascertainment of age. But there is more. If, 
even after all its efforts, the government cannot establish Shafqat's age, it 
cannot execute him as that would be tantamount to judicial murder. Capital 
punishment, if at all, can only be administered when there is not even a shadow 
of doubt remaining in the award of the extreme punishment.

Among the innumerable defences put forward to abolish the death penalty, the 
lack of equivalency factor is the most telling. In Pakistan, award of death 
penalty is also based on what are generally perceived to be flawed laws. The 
blasphemy law is one such aberration which has been responsible for the killing 
of scores of the accused at the hands of the religious fanatics, even inside 
prison houses. The state has failed to impose its writ to ensure provision of 
equitable justice to its citizens, most importantly those hailing from the 
impoverished and the underprivileged segments of the society. The criminal 
justice system of the state has practically collapsed.

As long as the state cannot ensure, without a shadow of doubt, the impartiality 
of its legal institutions and machinery in the matter of handling criminal 
cases transparently and justly and, as long as it cannot ensure provision of 
compatible aids to those who cannot afford these on their own, it loses the 
legal and moral right to inflict capital punishment. Unfortunately, the state 
of Pakistan has been recurrently guilty of this crime, and there does not 
appear a prospect for it to remodel its approach. That does not mean that it 
should virtually reduce the vast swathes of the country into insensate hanging 
fields.

(source: Pakistan Today)








MALAYSIA:

Why hudud law cannot be enforced----An analysis of state and federal powers on 
Islam and criminal justice



I once asked my students "How many states in Malaysia enforces Islamic criminal 
law?" Some of them had no idea what I was asking and kept quiet but others, 
referring to the recent development in Kelantan, enthusiastically answered "1". 
I do not blame my students for their ignorance since many people in Malaysia 
are of the same opinion too.

Every state in Malaysia enforces Islamic criminal law, not just Kelantan. In 
Penang, there are at least 40 offences listed in the Syariah Criminal Offences 
(State of Penang) Enactment 1996. Among them are:

(a) sexual intercourse out of wedlock

(b) male person posing as a woman for immoral purposes

(c) indecent act in a public place

Although criminal law is listed in the Federal List of the Federal 
Constitution, a state assembly is empowered to enact Islamic criminal law by 
the State List.

Syariah courts are conferred with the jurisdiction to punish offences by virtue 
of the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965, extended to Sabah and 
Sarawak in 1989.

Nevertheless, section 2 provides two limitations: (i) that Islamic criminal law 
shall only be enforceable on persons professing the religion of Islam and (ii) 
that such jurisdiction shall not be exercised in respect of any offence 
punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding 3 years or with any fine 
exceeding MR5,000 or with whipping exceeding 6 strokes or exceeding any 
combination thereof.

Neither Barisan Nasional nor Pakatan Rakyat component parties have any problem 
with such enforceability of Islamic criminal law. However, all hell broke loose 
when Kelantan, led by PAS, recently amended the Syariah Criminal Code (II) 
Enactment 1993.

The 1993 Enactment was a controversial piece of legislation for introducing 
additional punishments like amputation of limbs and death penalty by stoning!

Unlike other Islamic criminal law, the 1993 Enactment cannot be enforced even 
after the recent amendment: it goes against the provisions of the 1965 Act.

The State List clearly provides that although state assemblies may create 
offences against Islamic precepts, Syariah courts shall only be conferred with 
the jurisdiction to pass sentences by federal laws, like the 1965 Act.

For the same reason, Terengganu's equally controversial Syariah Criminal 
Offence (Hudud and Qisas) Enactment 2002, also remains unenforceable.

Obviously, I am against death penalty by stoning in broad daylight. Crimes 
should be proved in accordance with modern methods of evidence, and punishments 
carried out behind closed doors. However, my opinion on hudud is simply 
irrelevant!

Hudud means offences for which the punishments are fixed by Allah as stated in 
the Qur'an. No Muslim worth his salt will thus oppose hudud. If any non-Muslim 
opposes hudud, this act may be deemed as interference into the religious 
practice of another.

If it was wrong for Ridhuan Tee Abdullah to condemn the erection of Lord 
Murugan's statue in Batu Caves, then it is also wrong for non-Muslims to tell 
Muslims to disregard what has been made mandatory by Allah in the Qur'an.

Since law on hudud is an integral part of the Islamic religion, it is better 
for non-Muslims not to make any comments. There are some Muslim scholars with a 
different view on hudud. Even then, it is for the Muslims to debate and sort 
out their religious differences.

If PAS wants to enforce the 1993 Enactment in Kelantan, then the 1965 Act has 
to be amended by removing the limitation and conferring extended criminal 
jurisdiction on Syariah courts to pass sentences like amputation of limbs and 
death penalty by stoning.

This can only be done in the Parliament, and not in the Kelantan state 
assembly.

I have a few concerns.

First, only those who profess the religion of Islam may be subjected to Islamic 
criminal law and not all Muslims. Yet Penang's 2004 Enactment provides that a 
Muslim is not only a person who professes the religion of Islam but also any 
person:

(a) whose either parent at the time of his birth was a Muslim;

(b) whose upbringing was conducted on the basis that he is a Muslim;

(c) who is commonly reputed to be a Muslim;

(d) who has converted to the religion of Islam; and

(e) who is shown to have stated, in circumstances in which he was bound by law 
to state the truth, that he was a Muslim, whether the statement be oral or 
written.

In other words, a person who does not profess the religion of Islam (say, a 
child of a Muslim who has been brought up as a Christian all his entire life) 
can still be regarded as a Muslim by law. In my judgment, Islamic criminal law 
(hudud or otherwise) should not be applicable to him.

1nd, a Muslim person who commits any crime against a non-Muslim should not be 
charged under Islamic criminal law but under the Penal Code or other federal 
laws. This is to ensure that a non-Muslim does not have to go to Syariah courts 
to seek justice.

3rd, Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution must be amended so that only 
the High Courts shall have jurisdiction to decide whether or not a person 
professes the religion of Islam before he is charged in a Syariah court. This 
is important so that Syariah courts will remain inferior to such High Court.

It is much better for all concerned parties to work together and find ways to 
resolve issues than to blindly support or object any motion pertaining to the 
enforceability of Islamic criminal law.

Some members of the DAP are now urging the coalition to sever ties with PAS. 
Even though the 1993 Enactment has been there all along, yet the DAP had no 
problem in forming an alliance with PAS before the 2008 general election.

Prior to the recent development in Kelantan, DAP had never asked PAS even once 
to repeal the 1993 Enactment. It is not fair on PAS. If DAP was so concerned 
about the "no-hudud" agenda, it should not have formed an alliance with PAS 
until and unless PAS repeals the 1993 Enactment.

Also, some members of the MCA are condemning DAP for allowing PAS to amend the 
1993 Enactment. May I remind the MCA that 12 Umno members did vote in favour. 
Also the Syariah Criminal Offence (Hudud and Qisas) Enactment 2002 is still 
very much valid in Terengganu although BN has been ruling the state for many 
years.

Can the MCA and other component parties in BN persuade Terengganu to repeal the 
2002 Enactment? If not, then they have nothing to complain about the DAP.

(source:*Shamsher Singh Thind is a law lecturer in a private college*----With a 
firm belief in freedom of expression and without prejudice, FMT tries its best 
to share reliable content from third parties. Such articles are strictly the 
writer's personal opinion. FMT does not necessarily endorse the views or 
opinions given by any third party content provider; Free Malaysia Today)