[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

July 9




EGYPT:

Ibrahim Halawa's trial in Egypt is further postponed----Dublin man who was 
arrested in Cairo in 2013 faces potential death penalty over protests


There has been yet another postponement in the trial of Dubliner Ibrahim 
Halawa, who has been in jail in Egypt for almost 4 years.

Mr Halawa's sister, Somaia, said the hearing that was to take place on Suday 
has not happened and that it was her understanding that the court would sit 
either next Sunday or on July 19th.

The family, she said, was "very disappointed."

Mr Halawa was 17 when he was arrested and imprisoned in 2013 while attending a 
protest in Cairo along with his 3 sisters.

Mr Halawa's sisters were released but he has remained in prison and his trial 
has been adjourned 26 times.

Amnesty International Ireland has highlighted the case and Irish Government 
observers are watching the trial. There have been repeated expressions of 
concern for the young man's health and his family has said he has suffered 
ill-treatment and torture.

Mr Halawa is 1 of 494 men who were arrested and charged with offences that 
carry the death penalty during anti-government demonstrations. He was not among 
203 youth prisoners who were released last March.

The presiding judge had said 5 further witnesses were to be called as part of 
the prosecution case, and the prosecution case would be concluded at the next 
hearing, which was to have been on Sunday. However that sitting has not now 
gone ahead.

Somaia Halawa said it was her understanding that the prosecution case is now 
complete and the defence case will begin when the court next sits.

A spokeswoman for the Department of Foreign Affairs said it had yet to receive 
an update from Cairo.

(source: irishtimes.com)






IRAN----executions

4 Prisoners Hanged on Drug Charges


4r prisoners were reportedly hanged at Urmia's central prison on drug related 
charges. According to close sources, the prisoners were executed on the morning 
of Saturday July 8.

Iran Human Rights has obtained the names of the prisoners: Khalil Mousavi 
Kousi, Mir-Jan Abdi, Kheiroldin Mashmoul and Soufi Koloukzadeh Gangchin. These 
prisoners were reportedly transferred to solitary confinement in preparation 
for their executions.

Iranian parliament members had formerly requested from the Judiciary to stop 
drug related executions for at least 5,000 prisoners pending further 
investigation. However, the request has not stopped the Judiciary from carrying 
out death sentences for prisoners with drug related charges.

Iranian official sources, including the Judiciary and the media, have not 
announced these 4 executions.

(source: Iran Human Righs)






PAKISTAN:

Death penalty by hanging challenged in PHC


A prisoner on death row has challenged the implementation of death penalty by 
hanging in the Peshawar High Court seeking the introduction of a less painful 
mode of execution in accordance with modern scientific developments.

Kept at the Haripur Central Prison, Jan Bahadur filed the petition requesting 
the high court to declare the mode of hanging to death un-Islamic and 
unconstitutional insisting it is painful and against human values.

He said Section 368 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stated, "When any person 
is sentenced to death, the sentence shall direct that he be hanged by the neck 
till he is dead."

The petitioner requested the court to issue orders for ending the execution of 
death row prisoners by hanging declaring it cruel, painful, un-Islamic and 
inhuman.

He added that the court should issue directives for the adoption of the mode of 
execution, which was not painful.

Jan Bahadur, whose lawyer is Mohammad Khursheed Khan, said he was sentenced to 
death by an additional district and sessions judge on Apr 7, 2000, in Takht 
Bhai in connection with a 1993 murder case.

He added that the judgment was upheld by the high court in 2002 and by the 
Supreme Court afterwards.

The petitioner said his review petition and clemency petition were also 
rejected.

The respondents in the petition are the provincial home secretary, 
superintendent of Haripur Central Prison, provincial law secretary, secretary 
to the Council of Islamic Ideology and Mardan district and sessions judge.

The petitioner said there were 9 modes of carrying out death penalties, 
including death by through firing squad, gas chamber and electric chair, by 
hanging, shooting in the head, lethal injection, beheading, stoning and pushing 
from unspecified height.

The petitioner claimed that in the past, in all the states of USA the mode of 
execution was through hanging.

He added that the use of electric chair was devised, which was considered less 
painful.

The petitioner however said in 1921, the State of Nevada introduced gas chamber 
for carrying out death penalty.

He said in over 30 US states, the mode of execution is now through lethal 
injection, which was considered more humane and less painful.

The petitioner said that through that mode 3 injections are administered to a 
death row prisoner, the 1st injection turned a prisoner unconscious, the 2nd 
made his body paralysed and the 3rd stopped his heart from functioning.

He claimed that prisoners were executed through firing squad in 28 countries, 
whereas prisoners were killed by shooting in their heads in 22 countries.

The petitioner claimed that some western researchers had declared death by 
hanging atrocious for different reasons.

He added that the colonial rulers had introduced death by hanging through the 
CrPC in 1898 and after the creation of Pakistan, the same mode was adopted.

(source: dawn.com)






INDIA:

Hijackers will get death for loss of life----A bill to repeal 1982's 
Anti-Hijacking Act was introduced in the Rajya Sabha by civil aviation minister 
Ashok Gajapathi Raju on December 17, 2014.


India's new anti-hijacking law, which provides for the death penalty for 
hijackers in the event of loss of life, has come into force following a 
government notification.

The 2016 Anti-Hijacking Act replaces a 1982-vintage law. Other punishments 
under the new law are life-imprisonment, besides confiscation of movable and 
immovable properties.

The new law, which has come into effect after its notification on July 5, 
includes several acts within the definition of hijacking, including making a 
threat as well as attempts or abatement to commit the offence.

According to news agency reports, those who organise or direct others to commit 
such offence will also be considered to have committed the offence of 
hijacking.

The new law mandates the central government to confer powers of investigation, 
arrest and prosecution on any officer of the central government or National 
Investigation Agency.

A bill to repeal 1982's Anti-Hijacking Act was introduced in the Rajya Sabha by 
civil aviation minister Ashok Gajapathi Raju on December 17, 2014. After a few 
days, it was referred to a parliamentary panel which gave a report on it in 
March 2015.

The Bill was passed on May 4, 2016, in the Upper House, and on May 9, 2016 in 
the Lok Sabha.

(source: asianage.com)

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

SC rejects review plea of Hoshiarpur boy's killers----The convicts had 
kidnapped the victim, son of goldsmith Ravi Verma, on February 14, 2005, and 
murdered him.


The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a review petition filed by death row 
convicts - Vikram Singh, alias Vicky, and Jasbir Singh - for the kidnap and 
murder of 16-year-old Abhi Verma, aka Harry, a student of Hoshiarpur's DAV 
School, in February 2005.

A 3-judge bench headed by justice Dipak Misra held that it has not found any 
"error apparent on the record" in the apex court's January 25, 2010, verdict by 
which the death sentence awarded by the trial court and affirmed by the Punjab 
and Haryana high court was maintained.

The bench, also comprising justices R Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan, observed 
that scope, ambit and parameters of review jurisdiction were well defined, and 
normally in a criminal proceeding, review applications cannot be entertained 
except on the ground of error apparent on the face of the record.

"Further, the power given to this court under Article 137 is wider and in an 
appropriate case can be exercised to mitigate a manifest injustice. By review 
application, an applicant cannot be allowed to reargue the appeal on the 
grounds which were urged at the time of the hearing of the criminal appeal," 
the bench said.

The convicts had kidnapped the victim, son of goldsmith Ravi Verma, on February 
14, 2005, and murdered him. The apex court's order came on the review petitions 
filed by the convicts, whose death penalty was upheld by the top court.

Discussing the scope of review jurisdiction, the apex court said: "Even if the 
applicant succeeds in establishing that there may be another view possible on 
the conviction or sentence of the accused that is not a sufficient ground for 
review".

"This court shall exercise its jurisdiction to review only when a glaring 
omission or patent mistake has crept in earlier decision due to judicial 
fallibility. There has to be error apparent on the face of the record leading 
miscarriage of justice to exercise the review jurisdiction....," it said.

The convicts had filed pleas for re-opening the review petition on the basis of 
a judgment passed by a constitution bench of the apex court which had granted 
liberty to those whose pleas seeking review of verdict confirming death 
sentence were rejected by circulation but death sentences were not executed.

The trial court had convicted Vikram, Jasvir and his wife Sonia in connection 
with the case and had awarded them death sentence. The trial court judgment was 
later confirmed by the high court.

Meanwhile, the apex court passed a judgment in 2010 in which it had dismissed 
the appeals of Vikram and Jasvir. The top court, however, had converted the 
death penalty awarded to Sonia into life imprisonment.

Thereafter, both the death row convicts had filed a review petition in the apex 
court which was dismissed through an order of April 2011 by the two-judge bench 
which had heard the appeals on the ground of delay as well as on merits.

(source: Hindustan Times)