[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

February 9





IRAQ----executions

ISIS executes 3 brothers after kidnapping in Iraq’s Salahuddin



Islamic State militants on Friday killed 3 brothers after kidnapping them in 
the north of Salahuddin Province, a local security source has confirmed.

The 3 brothers were abducted 3 days ago while reportedly picking truffles on 
Makhoul Mountain, not far from the village of Mishak, from where the young men 
came.

The security source told Kurdistan 24 that members of the jihadist group took 
the 3 young men on Wednesday but called their relatives on Friday morning 
claiming they had been released.

“It looks like it was a trick to deceive the family… so that the security 
forces would not go looking there, allowing the jihadists to hide,” the source 
said.

The security forces later found the bodies lying on the ground near the 
mountain, where the Islamic State remains active.

The victims were handcuffed, according to another source, adding 2 of the 
brothers were university graduates while the 3rd was a middle school student.

The victims were reportedly shot dead.

The brothers left for the mountain by car to look for truffles but stopped to 
rest in a remote area before they were attacked by the jihadist group, a family 
member said.

Locals in the provinces of Salahuddin, Kirkuk, Anbar, and Nineveh have 
repeatedly warned Iraqi military officials of growing activity by Islamic State 
militants in the area.

The jihadist group uses the mountainous areas as a base and hiding spot, making 
it challenging for security forces and the US-led coalition to find or track 
them.

Over the past year, they have carried out insurgency attacks, kidnappings, and 
ambushes in the country despite Iraq declaring victory against the Islamic 
State in Dec. 2017.

(source: kurdistan24.net)








TUNISIA:

Tunisia awaits verdicts on jihadist massacre suspects



A Tunisian court was holding final hearings on Friday in 2 trials over jihadist 
attacks in 2015 on a museum and a tourist resort that left dozens dead, lawyers 
told AFP.

21 defendants, including 2 women, appeared in the Tunis courtroom for a closed 
hearing on the March 18, 2015 shooting at the Bardo museum in Tunis, which 
killed 21 foreign tourists and a Tunisian security guard.

"Only 3 defendants still have to give their pleas, and the verdict will be 
announced this evening," lawyer Monia Bousalmi told AFP.

Victims' family members in France and Belgium watched the hearing via a live 
video feed.

Bousalmi said a verdict was also expected Friday evening on 44 suspects in a 
separate trial on the June 26, 2015 shooting rampage in the Sousse tourist 
resort, which killed 38 people, most of them British tourists.

The court has heard that the 2 attacks, both claimed by the Islamic State 
group, were closely linked.

Several defendants pointed to the fugitive Chamseddine Sandi as mastermind of 
both.

According to Tunisian media, Sandi was killed in a US air strike in 
neighbouring Libya in February 2016, although there has been no confirmation.

Defendants in the 2 trials could be sentenced to death if found guilty, 
although Tunisia has had a freeze on capital punishment since 1991.

4 French nationals, 4 Italians, 3 Japanese and 2 Spaniards were among those 
killed in the Bardo attack, before the 2 gunmen themselves, armed with 
Kalashnikov assault rifles, were shot dead.

One suspect questioned in court, Tunis labourer Mahmoud Kechouri, said he had 
helped plan the attack, including preparing mobile phones for Sandi, a 
neighbour and longtime friend.

Other defendants accused of helping prepare the attack said they had only 
discussed ideas with friends. Several alleged they were tortured in detention.

Since a 2011 uprising that toppled dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, jihadist 
attacks in Tunisia have killed dozens of members of the security forces.

The Bardo and Sousse attacks dealt a heavy blow to the vital tourism sector in 
Tunisia, already suffering high unemployment.

(source: news24.com)








ZIMBABWE:

Govt Removes 34 From Death Row To Life Imprisonment As Death Sentence Phases 
Out.



Government has shown its commitment towards abolishing the death penalty in 
line with international human rights obligations after it commuted sentences of 
34 inmates on death row to life terms, a Cabinet minister has said.

There are 81 prisoners on death row while the total number now serving life 
terms is now 127.

The process of commuting the remainder on death row to life terms is now 
ongoing.

The moratorium on execution will pave way for the total abolition of the death 
penalty, according to a paper presented on behalf of Justice, Legal and 
Parliamentary Affairs Minister Ziyambi Ziyambi by a senior ministry official, 
Mr Charles Manhiri, at the Zimbabwe Staff College yesterday.

Government is in the process of implementing strategies and policies aimed at 
abolishing the death penalty.

Minister Ziyambi said his ministry was waiting for Cabinet to approve its 
recommendations on the death penalty.

“Should Cabinet approve the ministry’s recommendation to abolish the death 
penalty, the constitutional provision which permits the imposition of the death 
penalty will be subsequently amended,” said Minister Ziyambi.

He said Government has not executed inmates on death row for over a decade now.

The last execution was carried out in July 2005. Executed then were notorious 
armed robbers Steven Chidumo and Edmund Masendeke.

Minister Ziyambi said his ministry on several occasions requested Cabinet to 
consider the granting of clemency on those sentenced to death. This has seen 
the sentences being commuted to life imprisonment.

“As Government we are mindful of the fact that the rights to life and dignity 
are the most important of all human rights and the source of all other personal 
rights contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHRs),” he 
said.

Minister Ziyambi said the death sentence was cruel and degrading punishment as 
it destroyed life and annihilated human dignity.

“Criminological researches have revealed that the death penalty does not deter 
the commission of crimes, but rather compounds it,” he said.

Minister Ziyambi said the possibility of the sentence being imposed on innocent 
people could not be ruled out and once executed, sentence is irrevocable.

(source: zimeye.net)








GAZA:

2 Death Sentences Issued in Gaza within 1 Week, PCHR Condemns and Calls for 
Adhering to the Protocol Aiming at Abolition of Death Penalty



On Sunday, 03 February 2019, The First Instance Court in Deir al-Balah issued a 
death sentence by hanging ‘A. F. (32), from al-Nussairat refugee camp after 
convicting him of killing Child (A. F.). ‘A. F. was previously sentenced by 
hanging on the same charges on 06 July 2010, but the Cassation Court abolished 
the sentence and referred the case to the First Instance Court for the retrial.

In the same context, on Tuesday, 29 January 2019, the First Instance Court in 
Khan Younis issued a death sentence against Y. ‘A (30) from Rafah City after 
being convicted of killing M. Sh.

The Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) condemns the ongoing use of 
death penalty in the Gaza Strip and calls upon the authorities to respect 
Palestine’s international obligations as in June 2018 Palestine signed the 
instrument of accession to the International Covenant on Civil and Political 
Rights’ Second Optional Protocol, aiming at abolishing and banning execution of 
death penalty.

Since the beginning of 2019, 2 death sentences have been issued Thus, the total 
number of death sentences issued in the Palestinian Authority (PA) controlled 
areas has risen to 218 since 1994; 30 have been issued in the West Bank and 188 
in the Gaza Strip. Among those issued in the Gaza Strip, 130 sentences have 
been issued since 2007.

PCHR confirms that any death sentence should not be executed without the 
Palestinian President’s ratification and the application of any death sentence 
without the ratification of the Palestinian President is considered an 
extra-judicial execution and those executing or issuing the sentence should be 
held accountable. PCHR also commends Palestinian President’s position not to 
ratify any death sentence since 2005, confirming ratification on death 
sentences shall be completely suspended in a prelude to abolish it from the 
Palestinian legislations.

Since the establishment of the PA, 41 death sentences were executed, 39 of 
which were in the Gaza Strip and 2 in the West Bank. Among the sentences 
executed in the Gaza Strip, 28 have been applied since 2007 without the 
ratification of the Palestinian President in violation of the law.

PCHR emphasizes that issuing death sentences requires presence of the necessary 
litigation guarantees, particularly right to defense and not being subject to 
torture, and interrogation techniques that leads to having objective 
evidence-based convictions. These requirements are not available in the Gaza 
Strip; thus, PCR calls upon the authorities to abstain from using death 
penalty.

PCHR also calls upon the Palestinian President to issue a law by decree to 
suspend the death penalty until an elected legislative authority assumes the 
legislative power and abolishes this penalty from the Palestinian legislations.

(source: pchrgaza.org)








SRI LANKA:

Sri Lanka, narcotics laws and death penalty: Another war on drugs?



Sri Lanka will bring back capital punishment and start hanging convicted drug 
offenders within the next three months, ending a 43-year moratorium on 
executions as part of a crackdown inspired by the Philippines’ brutal war on 
drugs.

President Maithripala Sirisena, who faces a tough re-election campaign in 2020, 
and a deeply divided parliament over replacing PM Ranil Wickremesinghe with 
Mahinda Rajapaksa last October, addressed his MPs on Wednesday, vowing to 
tighten laws to curb narcotics-related crime in the island nation to “make a 
spiritual society.”

Sirisena had flagged the possible return of the death penalty for drug dealers 
for the 1st time last July. He told the government, which earlier had 
unanimously backed the reinstatement of capital punishment, that he “was ready 
to sign the death warrants.”

“I hope to carry out the 1st hanging within a month or 2,” he said this week. 
“I appeal to human rights organisations not to try to pressure us on this 
decision.”

As of 2015, there are 1,116 convicts on death row. Around 20 people with 
convictions related to drugs are thought to be in line for execution with 8 of 
those cases under appeal.

On Tuesday, Sri Lanka’s Justice Minister Thalatha Athukorale said 
administrative procedures for the execution of 5 drug convicts had been 
completed and Sirisena now only had to sign the death warrants.

Replicating Duterte’s campaign

This announcement arrives just weeks after his visit to the Philippines last 
month, where Sirisena said he wanted to “replicate the success” of Rodrigo 
Duterte’s ruthless approach to tackling illegal drug use, which he called “an 
example to the world.”

Officially, at least 4,999 drug dealers have been killed by the police during 
anti-drug operations in Philippines since 2016, when Duterte came to office and 
issued “shoot to kill” orders, although the country technically does not have a 
death penalty system. Human rights advocates and an opposition senator have 
pegged the death toll in the government’s war on drugs above 20,000.

Human rights watchdogs including the UN Human Rights Council have been 
increasingly critical of Duterte’s tactics. While they have condemned him for 
executing thousands of people involved in drug trade, none have been successful 
in reining him in so far.

“Even though I have not implemented some of the decisions of President Duterte, 
I will not bow to international non-governmental (rights) organisations and 
change my decision on death penalty for drug offences,” Sirisena said last 
month, praising the “decisive action” of the Philippine president who has 
offered anti-narcotics help to Sri Lanka.

History of capital punishment in Sri Lanka

There have been no executions in Sri Lanka since 1976, although criminals are 
regularly handed down death sentences by the High and Supreme Courts for 
murder, rape, and drug trafficking convictions, but, until now, their 
punishments have been commuted to life imprisonment.

The British had first restricted the scope of death penalties after colonising 
the island in 1815. After independence in 1948, capital punishment was 
abolished until it staged a return once in 1984 after the heroin epidemic, and 
then in 2004 after a noted judge known for handing out tough sentences was 
gunned down. However, both instances were followed by symbolic implementations 
of the penalty.

Properly reinstating the death penalty has been a part of Sri Lanka’s political 
discourse and policy agenda ever since the 26-year-long civil war ended in 
2009, which coincided with a sharp rise in child abuse, rape, murder, and drug 
trafficking, especially after a few high-profile cases.

Sirisena on Wednesday set the 1st timeline for the executions in 43 years.

How severe is the drug problem in Sri Lanka?

During his meeting with the Philippine president last month, Sirisena told 
Duterte, “Drug menace is rampant in my country and I feel that we should follow 
your footsteps to control this hazard.”

An elite police task force set up to fight Tamil militancy in the 1980s was 
brought under presidential control during Sri Lanka’s leadership crisis last 
November and given a mandate to tackle the narcotics trade.

Police say they have busted several drugs rings in recent weeks and an 
underworld figure considered a major kingpin was arrested in Dubai earlier this 
week.

History of drug abuse (1984-2018)

According to a study published in 1988 in Forensic Science International, 
cannabis, hashish and opium were generally abused in Sri Lanka in the late ’70s 
with Colombo as the hub, before heroin took over as the most widely abused drug 
due to the influx of tourists, and separatist terrorists (LTTE) who engaged in 
drug trafficking to afford arms and ammunition.

The heroin epidemic of the 80’s became a ‘novel drug problem’ for the political 
and religious authorities to tackle, demanding state intervention and tough law 
enforcement to frame legitimate responses and foster ‘moral and upright 
behaviour’, especially after Interpol listed Sri Lanka as a transit country for 
the movement of heroin from India and Pakistan into Europe.

According to the data and incidents reported in 2016, Western province shows a 
higher tendency for use of psychotropic substances and prescribed drug abuse. 
The most recognised drugs include marijuana, cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, 
and ecstasy.

Gaps in narcotics legislation

In 1984, during the parliamentary debate on the Poisons Opium and Dangerous 
Drugs Ordinance of 1929 Amendment Bill, exiled PM and then education minister 
Wickremesinghe had said, “Some may think that the death penalty is too harsh a 
penalty. I do not think so. Many countries have come to the stage where they 
accept the death penalty.”

His statements came at a time when the drug crisis had entered Sri Lankan 
schools and colleges, posing a danger to the nation’s assets and overall 
socio-economic development. Another important development that took place at 
the time was that most Asia-Pacific countries, including Malaysia, India, 
Bangladesh, Pakistan, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, and Indonesia introduced the 
death penalty for drug-related offences.

Sri Lanka too reinstated the death sentence for drug-related offences, 
introduced stringent law enforcement on drug users and traffickers, and the 
creation of the National Dangerous Drug Control Board to coordinate all efforts 
related to drug control. But this was largely symbolic, to maintain a ‘tough on 
crime’ image; there have been no executions of drug users or traffickers over 
the last three decades, their death sentences invariably commuted to life 
imprisonment.

Out of the total prison population in the country, nearly 45% were admitted for 
narcotic-related offences (including users) in 2000, the largest single 
category according to the Handbook of Drug Abuse Information published by the 
National Dangerous Drug Control Board in 2002. The proportion has remained the 
same to this day. The total number of persons arrested for drug-related 
offences between January and June 2015, was 8,570 according to the NDDCB 
database.

Existing legislation on drugs either sentences a person to death or life 
imprisonment, for possessing 3 grams of morphine, or 2 grams of cocaine or 2 
grams of heroin (for personal use). There is little demarcation between drug 
users, street-level dealers and large scale traffickers while sentencing them 
for drug-related offences.

Sri Lanka also passed the Drug Dependent Persons’ Treatment and Rehabilitation 
Act No 54 in 2007, but its impact on alleviating addiction over the last 11 
years has not been studied. The reported number of clients treated for drug 
abuse island-wide was 2355 in 2016, with 35% of them from the treatment centres 
of the NDDCB, and 29% from Prisoner Diversion Scheme of the Department of 
Prisons.

Addressing drug menace as public health problem

Majority of drug users languishing in prison are from lower socio-economic 
backgrounds who are in dire need of treatment and rehabilitation. International 
evidence and the UNODC suggest that voluntary community-based treatment 
programmes produce better outcomes than coerced or compulsory treatment in 
prison.

The evidence of the steady rise in drug seizures, arrests, drug-related prison 
admissions, drug use, drug-related harm and relatively stable drug prices 
suggests that the nation’s policy on drugs that existed for over three decades 
needs re-thinking. For this, the problem needs to be seen as a public health 
issue instead of waging a war on drugs or adopting a penal approach.

Rather than drawing from the Philippines, Sri Lanka could follow in the 
footsteps of its other Asian neighbour Malaysia, which recently phased out 
harsh punitive measures to include a public health approach.

There are other policy lessons that can be learned from countries such as 
Switzerland, Portugal, U.K, Australia and the Netherlands.

What about India? Where do we stand on capital punishment?

Not too high on the scale of contemporary standards of decency, it seems.

Indian trial courts, according to a study by the National Law University, 
Delhi, handed out the highest number of death penalties since 2000, 162 to be 
precise.

This increase is possibly owing to the amendment extending capital punishment 
to those convicted of sexual assault against minors below 12 years of age. 
Prior to this, death sentences were only meted out to those convicted of 
homicidal crimes.

But in the wake of the outrage following the horrific Kathua and Unnao rapes 
last year, the Indian Penal Code was amended to incorporate such gender crimes. 
Madhya Pradesh claimed most of the death penalties awarded in 2018 (7 of the 
state’s 22 verdicts which ended in death sentences involved rape of a minor 
below 12). The number also rose significantly in Karnataka, Maharashtra and 
Rajasthan.

Capital punishment, already a subject of controversial debate, suffers a 
greater blow due to such schemes as the MP government’s rewarding public 
prosecutors who hand out the death penalty (100 to 200 points for maximum 
punishment at lower courts, 500 for a life sentence and 1,000 for obtaining a 
death sentence).

According to Indian Express, posecutors who earn more than 2,00 points are 
given awards such as “Best Prosecutor of the Month” and “Pride of Prosecution” 
while those who fail to score 500 points are issued a warning, posing a serious 
threat to the fundamental right to life and liberty.

The Indian Supreme Court, however, has raised questions over the purpose and 
practice of death penalty, besides overturning or commuting most of such 
sentences in the last few years.

The case against death penalty

While certain crimes, by the nature of their egregious brutality, justifiably 
incite demands for retributive justice, the death penalty ultimately models the 
very behaviour it seeks to prevent. It begs the question if he who lives by the 
sword need die by it, and whether death as a legal penalty serves its primary 
purpose of reformation and punishment. Legitimising death as punishment also 
encourages vigilante justice, as evinced in the recent killings of rape 
suspects in Bangladesh by the anonymous Hercules.

Incarceration has a better chance of achieving both, noted the Supreme Court of 
Connecticut while abolishing death penalties in 2015. “Life imprisonment 
without the possibility of release is an adequate and sufficient penalty even 
for the most horrific of crimes,” it said.

Another undeniable fact that remains largely unaddressed is how the death 
penalty has for centuries been imposed disproportionately on those whom society 
has marginalized socially, politically, and economically, and how it has been 
weaponised by those with political interests.

By choosing to enact the most extreme punitive option to solve a socio-economic 
crisis, Sirisena’s response to Sri Lanka’s drug epidemic exemplifies both.

(source: Prarthana Mitra is a staff writer at Qrius)








PAKISTAN:

Pakistan to present arguments in Kulbhushan case to ICJ on Feb 19----Foreign 
Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said Pakistan’s legal team will present its 
stance in Kulbhushan Jadhav case at International Court of Justice (IJC) in The 
Hague on February 19.



Speaking to the media in Manchester, the UK, the Foreign Minister said 
Pakistan’s legal team has prepared its arguments in the case of alleged Indian 
spy Jadhav. He said the Jadhav has confessed involvement in subversive 
activities carried out in Pakistan.

Pakistan says security forces arrested Jadhav from Balochistan in March, 2016 
after he entered the country illegally from Iran. India denies these charges 
and says he was kidnapped from Iran. India approached the ICJ against Jadhav's 
conviction as a spy.

On May 18, 2017, the ICJ ordered Pakistan to stop Jadhav’s execution. “Pakistan 
should take all measures to ensure that Mr Jadhav is not executed till the 
final decision of this court,” the ICJ said in its judgment.

In April 2017, Jadhav had been court-martialled and sentenced to death by a 
military tribunal for espionage and fomenting terrorism in Pakistan.

“The spy has been tried through Field General Court Martial (FGCM) under the 
Pakistan Army Act (PAA) and awarded the death sentence,” the military’s public 
affairs wing, ISPR said. The FGCM is the military equivalent of a civilian 
criminal trial and is conducted by a military tribunal.

The ICJ will hold the public hearings from February 18 to February 21 at The 
Hague. The first round of oral arguments will take place on February 18, when 
India will argue from 10am to 1pm. Pakistan will put forth their first round 
arguments on February 19 from 10am to 1pm.

Qureshi said Jadhav was arrested on Pakistani territory and has confessed 
during the course of the investigations. He said 70 years of poor relations 
between India and Pakistan cannot be fixed in six months.

Speaking about the PTI government, he said the party put their party manifesto 
in front of the people and that is what they were elected on.

The minister said the government has effectively highlighted the issue of 
Kashmir in British Parliament and we want to promote Intra-Kashmir trade. He 
said India seems worried over the worsening situation in occupied Kashmir as 
young generation of Kashmiris is fed up with Indian policies.

Shah Mehmood went on to say that Pakistan is playing an active role for peace 
in Afghanistan as it is in the interest of the country.

(source: nation.com.pk)

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

Extraordinary situation requires military courts



Military courts were established in 2015 during the Nawaz Sharif regime in the 
aftermath of Army Public School (APS) massacre of 140 people, mostly children. 
Military courts carry out swift justice in terrorist cases, they act as a 
deterrent menace of terrorism. This was done in the first place because 
Pakistan's judicial system is not effective enough to implement the laws even 
with all the evidence in the world to convict even hard core terrorists. 
Keeping that in view the Supreme Court (SC) had upheld the establishment of 
these courts. Whereas it is the responsibility of the elected representatives 
to protect the life and liberty of the citizens, implementing the laws of the 
land is further compounded by the lack of political will.

The fundamental rights enshrined in a democracy cannot co-exist with terrorism. 
No democracy in the world is basically equipped to tackle terrorism unless the 
citizen is a stakeholder in the governance. Legislation and reform take time, 
unfortunately the terrorists are already here causing mayhem and murder. Some 
among the Opposition have rejected giving any extension to the military courts 
arguing that these go against the concept of democracy and human rights. Can 
the critics of military courts account for the human rights of the APS 
children? Even western countries had to bring in new draconian legislation to 
deal with extraordinary situations, consider the ramifications of the US 
"Patriotic Act"?

How many times have hard-core urban terrorists walked out of police stations in 
Karachi duly feted and garlanded because it suited the political expediency of 
the then ruling parties? Even when the killers were brought to trial they could 
not be punished by the courts because of flaws in the existing "laws of 
evidence" and the intimidation of witnesses in deadly fear for their lives. The 
combination of political expediency coupled with the lack of political will is 
not only frustrating but morale-sapping for the law enforcement agencies 
(LEAs). What about the human rights of LEAs personnel involved in catching 
terrorists who were killed in retribution?

Given their effectiveness in containing terrorism, military courts were given a 
2-year extension in 2017 .During the 4 years the functioning of military courts 
terrorists in 717 cases of terrorism were given death sentences in the 546 
cases finalised, 234 imprisoned and 310 given the death penalty. Fighting 
terrorism is a national cause that is well beyond parties and party politics. 
Terrorism may have been contained but not eliminated from our country. Given 
this fact the military courts need another extension, only possible with the 
support of the opposition parties. Contrary to the stance of some of his party 
stalwarts PML (N) Head Shahbaz Sharif acknowledged that terrorism has been 
contained because of military courts, indicating that his party would support 
the motion when approached to do so.

Some of the PPP leaders made negative statements about the military courts. 
When the situation required, Zardari's PPP government and subsequently Nawaz 
Sharif's PML (N) government both successively went to war against terrorism. 
The political consensus in the aftermath of the APS tragedy included the 
National Action Plan (NAP) against terrorism. The population of Swat and FATA 
are as good citizens as any other in Pakistan. Did they have due process of law 
or even the benefit of judicial hearing in military courts? Therefore anyone 
opposing military courts is being a hypocrite shedding crocodile tears. However 
Zardari did say PPP would consider an extension it if approached by the 
government. Given Zardari's alleged involvement in the "fake accounts" case and 
given possible confiscation of all his assets abroad under the OECD laws if 
convicted of money-laundering in Pakistan, anyone want to guess what he may 
want in return?

The PTI government lacks the political skills to integrate and include 
opposition forces into the national political agenda. Fighting corruption must 
not prevent the government from creating an 'alliance of the willing' from all 
sides of the divide in the interest of Pakistan. Despite his disqualification 
Jahangir Tareen should play a critical role for his party and the national 
interest.

Wiping out terrorist insurgency in Swat, FATA and Karachi was done without 
benefit of the process of law because the situation so required. Remember the 
three decades and more of dark ages we faced in Karachi listening to Altaf 
Hussain's drunken harangues? The total closure of the city on his whims and 
caprices?

Military courts are not the "sin qua non" of a democracy. Our criminal and 
justice system must be reformed to allow it to tackle terrorism in normal 
courts. Meantime we cannot allow vestiges of terrorism to remain; they must be 
eliminated with 'extraordinary situations being handled by extraordinary 
means'.

(source: Ikram Sehgal; The writer is a defence and security analyst----Business 
Recorder)