[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

May 2



SAUDI ARABIA:

The Execution of Mujtaba al-Sweikat----A Saudi student who gained admission to 
Western Michigan University was beheaded last week for charges associated with 
his participation in a pro-democracy protest.



He was 17 years old, at the airport to catch a flight to the U.S., where he 
planned to visit colleges and hoped to attend Western Michigan University, 
where he subsequently gained admission. But he was arrested for crimes related 
to participation in a pro-democracy protest before he could board the plane.

Last week Saudi Arabia announced Mujtaba al-Sweikat was one of 37 people 
executed for terrorism-related crimes. The human rights group Reprieve says 
al-Sweikat, who was arrested in December 2012, was convicted on the basis of a 
confession obtained by torture.

CNN reported on court documents it obtained regarding al-Sweikat’s prosecution. 
According to the documents obtained by the broadcaster, al-Sweikat’s father, 
who served as his lawyer, portrayed his son as a diligent student, loyal to the 
kingdom of Saudi Arabia, who completed his final high school exams with a score 
of 94 %. Although al-Sweikat confessed to throwing Molotov cocktails at 
security forces and running a chat group to help organize demonstrations, his 
father claimed in reality he joined the demonstrations just twice, for 5 
minutes each time.

"He was subjected to psychological and physical abuse, which drained his 
strength," his father reportedly said. "The interrogator dictated the 
confession to Sweikat and forced him to sign it so that the torture would stop. 
He signed it."

United Nations human rights officials had previously written to Saudi officials 
regarding al-Sweikat’s case, using an alternative spelling of his name. In 
November 2016, they wrote in regard to information they had received that he 
“was routinely subjected to torture including suspension from his hands and 
feet, sleep deprivation, severe beatings with cables and shoes, cigarettes 
burns and pouring of cold water on his body during winter. He was put in 
solitary confinement for 3 months. As a result, Mr. Suwaiket suffers from a 
broken shoulder, sustained pain in back and knees and blood deficiency due to 
insufficient nutrition. He has been deprived of any medical care. Mr. Suwaiket 
was reportedly subjected to acts of torture until he confessed to armed 
disobedience against the king and to attacking, shooting and injuring security 
forces, civilians and passers-by … On 1 June 2016, after several hearings, Mr. 
Suwaiket was convicted and sentenced to death by the [Specialized Criminal 
Court], on the sole basis of the confession extracted under torture.”

The letter from the U.N. officials said that while they did not want to 
prejudge the accuracy of the accusations regarding al-Sweikat’s treatment, they 
were concerned about the decision to impose the death penalty in light of 
international human right conventions related to fair trials, due process, 
torture and protection of the rights of children (as al-Sweikat was a juvenile 
at the time the alleged crimes were committed).

A subsequent letter from U.N. officials, sent in July 2017 in relation to 
multiple cases, including al-Sweikat’s, faulted judges for failing to 
investigate the allegations of torture and forced confessions. “While it was 
raised in court that the confessions were forced and had been obtained under 
torture, no investigation was initiated by the judges. Instead the forced 
confessions were admitted as evidence and used as the basis for their 
convictions,” they wrote.

In a written response, Saudi Arabia’s mission to the U.N. said that al-Sweikat 
was not subjected to torture or ill treatment. They said the claim his shoulder 
was broken was false and that he suffered from shoulder-related pain for 5 
years prior to his arrest due to “sports-related activities.”

Saudi government officials also denied that his confession was extracted 
through torture and said he confessed “of his own free will.” They said that 
the judge "did not rely solely on the confession as evidence in his judgment 
but on the evidence provided, including the arrest and investigation records, 
witness statements, and the deliberations and statements made during the 
judicial proceedings."

The Saudi mission wrote, “The lower court judgment sentenced Mojtaba Suwaiket 
to death after convicting him of committing crimes such as: manufacturing 
firebombs (Molotov cocktails) and supplying them to others for use against law 
enforcement officers; throwing firebombs at law enforcement officers and their 
vehicles; involvement in the targeting of a security patrol by opening fire on 
it; monitoring police officers, their location and their movements and 
transmitting the information to members of another cell who used it to 
implement one of their operations; concealment of wanted individuals charged 
with opening fire on security patrols and persons charged with launching 
attacks on private property; concealment of persons charged with setting fire 
to a security vehicle and stealing a machine gun and bulletproof vest from it.”

In a subsequent communication, the Saudi mission said al-Sweikat's death 
sentence was upheld on appeal by the Supreme Court, rendering it “final and 
enforceable.”

Western Michigan previously confirmed al-Sweikat was admitted in 2013 but never 
enrolled. A university spokeswoman, Paula Davis, said Monday he was an 
applicant for pre-finance studies and English language. “We learned about his 
shocking death last week and grieve this tragic loss of a young life full of 
potential,” she said.

The American Federation of Teachers, which represents Western Michigan faculty, 
was involved in campaigning for al-Sweikat’s release.

“Saudi Arabia’s sickening criminal beheading of a young student, after he was 
tortured and held in solitary confinement for years, is a despicable violation 
of international law and basic humanity,” Randi Weingarten, the AFT president, 
said in a statement last week. “Condemned at 17, Mujtaba al-Sweikat was 
planning to attend Western Michigan University when he was arrested after 
attending a peaceful protest rally. Today, we discover this young man has been 
executed, along with more than 30 others, in a ghastly display of state 
brutality.”

“If it was not already clear, Saudi Arabia, under the leadership of Crown 
Prince Mohammed bin Salman, has moved to the top tier of the bloodiest regimes 
in world history,” she said. “We demand the U.S. government immediately 
condemn, in every way and with every means, this disgusting and outrageous 
crime.”

(source: insidehighered.com)

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

Saudi Arabia put these 2 men to death. Now their families are calling on Canada 
to stop arming the regime----After a mass execution by the Saudi government, 
relatives claiming asylum in Canada are speaking out



Ever since he last heard from his younger brother in a Saudi jail 3 years ago, 
Ali Al Aradi has clung to hope that the 2 might one day be reunited.

That dream came to an abrupt end just over a week ago, when Saudi Arabia 
announced the deaths of 37 men, most belonging to the country's Shia minority. 
Al Aradi's 24-year-old brother Ahmed Hussein Al Aradi was one of them. Abdullah 
Salman Al Asreeh, also 24, was another.

There was no phone call, no warning, Al Aradi said.

"I saw it on the news," Al Aradi, 26, said when he and Al Asreeh's cousin spoke 
to CBC News in an exclusive interview in Toronto.

In the wake of one of Saudi Arabia's largest mass executions in decades, the 
families of the two men are calling on Canada to stop the sale of arms to the 
regime, saying continuing to do so makes Canada complicit in the kingdom's 
human rights abuses.

Under a secretive $15-billion deal first signed by the Harper government in 
2014, Canada was to sell 928 armoured vehicles, including those outfitted with 
heavy assault cannons, to the regime. 2 years later, that number was scaled 
back to 742 vehicles. Deliveries continue amid concerns Saudi-backed forces 
could use the vehicles against civilians in its effort to quell the largely 
Shia Houthi rebel movement in neighbouring Yemen.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has repeatedly stood behind the deal.

"How many times have we talked about Canada stopping arming or selling vehicles 
to Saudi Arabia?" Al Asreeh's cousin Mohammed Al Ahmed, 31, said. "We are 
dealing with a regime country — they don't have any red line."

'We're going to take your brothers, your mother'

Wednesday's deaths followed an earlier mass execution, in 2016, of 47 people, 
including the prominent Shia cleric Nimr al-Nimr, part of a growing clampdown 
on dissent under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who ascended to the throne 
in 2015.

But while bin Salman at first appeared to be ushering the kingdom into a period 
of reform — moving to finally allow women to drive, for example — Saudi Arabia 
has also drawn widespread criticism for the murder of journalist Jamal 
Khashoggi at its consulate in Turkey last year and recently rounding up women's 
rights activists.

One of the last times Al Aradi spoke with his brother, Ahmed Hussein said he 
had a feeling he wouldn't get out alive.

Ali Al Aradi said there was no warning his brother would be killed. 'I saw it 
on the news,' the 26-year-old said in exclusive interview with CBC News at his 
home in Toronto.

Ahmed Hussein was a student when he was jailed at 19 for participating in 
demonstrations to bring attention to the regime's treatment of its Shia 
community as second-class citizens, Al Aradi said.

The Saudi government accused him of having attacked police and German 
diplomatic vehicles, according to Al Aradi.

He says there was never any evidence. "If you get caught by the government, 
they already have charges, you just have to sign them."

Al Aradi says his brother was tortured. "They used electrical torture and they 
broke his hand, teeth.… They would tell him we're going to take your brothers, 
your mother."

What makes his death even more difficult to accept, Al Aradi said, was that his 
family had been told by Saudi officials that his brother would soon be 
released.

"We're shocked," he said.

'The government didn't give him a chance'

Of the 37 men executed Wednesday, 14 had been arrested in connection with 
protests in the predominantly Shia city of Al Awamiyah in 2011 and 2012.

Al Asreeh was among them.

Al Asreeh, 20 at the time of his arrest, spent much of his time working on his 
father's farm, his cousin Al Ahmed said. He also cared deeply about shining a 
light on the living conditions of minorities, though Al Ahmed insists he only 
ever engaged in peaceful protest.

"If you're going to talk about human rights or anything, they're going to kill 
you. You are a terrorist … everyone's going to think it's good, the government 
killed someone who's a terrorist. But he's not," Al Ahmed said, adding his 
cousin didn't have access to a lawyer when he was arrested.

"He was a normal person," Al Ahmed said. "He wanted to build his life, but the 
government didn't give him a chance."

In a statement announcing the executions, Saudi Arabia's state press agency 
said the deaths relate to "the formation of terrorist cells to disrupt security 
… to attack the security headquarters using explosive bombs and to kill a 
number of security personnel."

The Saudi government's press office did not return a request for comment.

Amnesty International has condemned the executions, decrying a lack of due 
process, saying the majority of those executed were convicted after "sham" 
trials that relied on confessions "extracted through torture." At least one of 
those put to death was a minor when he was arrested and convicted, it said, 
adding the use of the death penalty against those under 18 is a violation of 
international law.

'Cancel that deal'

Asked about the executions after question period Tuesday, Foreign Affairs 
Minister Chrystia Freeland said Canada is opposed to the death penalty wherever 
it is used and joins with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in its 
concerns.

"It is a cruel and inhumane punishment. We are particularly concerned given 
that some of those executed were minors when they were arrested," Freeland 
said.

We demand and expect that Canadian arms exports are used in a way that fully 
respects Canadian values. - Global Affairs Canada

On the question of whether it would revisit the sale of armoured vehicles to 
the kingdom, however, Global Affairs Canada was less definitive. "As the prime 
minister has said, we are actively reviewing existing export permits to Saudi 
Arabia. No decision has been made. We are not issuing new permits to Saudi 
Arabia while this review is ongoing," GAC said in a statement.

"We demand and expect that Canadian arms exports are used in a way that fully 
respects Canadian values and our foreign policy objectives."

But Amnesty International's secretary general Alex Neve says it's "disgraceful" 
the deal is still on the table at all.

"That, I think, is the most obvious next step that Canada needs to take to 
demonstrate how deeply concerned we are about the state of human rights.... 
Cancel that deal."

That could prove difficult for Canada, not only because of the implications to 
the relationship between the two countries, but also because of the possible 
fallout in an election year, says University of Waterloo political science 
professor Bessma Momani.

"I think the Canadian government recognizes that there are a lot of costs to be 
borne, particularly by a number of industries in the military sector. That is 
just not worth losing jobs over," she said.

'Naming and shaming' not working

Last August, when Canada expressed its "grave concern" about the arrest of 
human rights advocates in a tweet, that prompted the Saudi government to expel 
Canada's ambassador, threaten trade deals and suspend all Saudi Arabian 
Airlines flights to and from Toronto.

"I think the Canadians, frankly, don't see much prospect of changing the 
regime's behaviour or really taking on a big hit both politically and 
diplomatically from being the sole voice of criticizing the Saudis," Momani 
said.

Still, while a "naming and shaming" approach may not have proven effective, 
Momani says Saudi Arabia's behaviour is something Canada should remain 
concerned about, with the charge of terrorism being used as a "catch-all" term 
to quash any dissent — something that often extends to family members through 
"collective punishment."

That, in part, is why Al Aradi and Al Ahmed have claimed asylum in Canada.

For now, though, both men are trying to come to terms with a loss that's left 
them stunned, their friends and relatives carrying out a prayer ceremony in 
Toronto last Friday for those killed.

They'd hoped to hold funerals, but the Saudi government still hasn't released 
the bodies, Al Ahmed said.

"When we get his body, we will find out what they did with him."

(source: Shanifa Nasser, cbc.ca)



IRAN:

Juvenile Offenders’ Execution Shows Iran’s Contempt for Rights of Children, 
Others



On Tuesday, multiple news outlets picked up on a statement that was issued by 
Amnesty International, calling attention to the latest executions of juvenile 
offenders in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The nation has long maintained its 
status as the 2nd most prolific user of the death penalty, with the world’s 
highest per-capita rate of executions. In terms of the total number of 
state-sanctioned killings, Iran lags only behind China, while it is apparently 
number one among the small handful of countries that still implement the death 
penalty for persons who were under the age of 18 at the time of their crimes.

Ordinarily, the Iranian judiciary delays the execution of such offenders until 
after they have passed the internationally-recognized age of majority. However, 
Iranian law allows for boys to be held legally responsible at the age of 13, 
and girls at the age of nine. This principle has been variously reaffirmed by 
Iranian judges after international outcry helped to encourage the review of 
relevant cases, only for the vast majority of death sentences to be upheld on 
the basis of the court’s claim that the alleged criminals were sufficiently 
mature at the time of their offenses.

Despite the rarity of vacated death sentences, the reexamination of juvenile 
offenders’ cases has generally been regarded as part of an effort to defray 
some of the international condemnation that almost invariably emerges from 
public appeals by Amnesty International and other human rights defenders. The 
Iranian regime’s effort to control its notoriety without altering its practices 
is presumably also the reason why most juvenile offenders are not executed 
until after they have turned 18.

But this practice was not repeated in the context of the case most recently 
highlighted by Amnesty and by Western media. The defendants in question, Mehdi 
Sohrabifar and Amin Sedaghat, were abruptly executed on April 25, although both 
boys were still only 17 years old. They had been arrested on allegations that 
they committed rape at the age of 15, and the boys were held in pretrial 
detention for two months, during which they were repeatedly beaten by their 
interrogators.

Amnesty International also reported that the resulting trial, like a great many 
prosecutions in the Islamic Republic, was unfair and was characterized by a 
lack of legal representation for the defendants. Furthermore, the verdict in 
that trial was apparently not communicated to the condemned boys or to their 
families until the time of their execution. Sohrabifar and Sedaghat were 
transferred to a new prison, without explanation, just 1 day before they were 
hanged. Their families were then invited to visit them, but were not informed 
that they had been scheduled for execution until the following day, when they 
were instructed to collect the victims’ bodies. Examination of those bodies 
indicated that both boys were flogged shortly before their deaths.

By maintaining such secrecy regarding the case, authorities were arguably 
working to compensate for their decision not to hold back the executions until 
after the boys had grown somewhat older. That scheme was apparently successful 
in the sense that it prevented serious outcry about the case from flaring up in 
advance of the execution. However, with multiple reports stemming from the 
Amnesty statement, the incident stands to add significantly to international 
recognition and condemnation of Iran’s human rights violations, particularly as 
they relate to children.

A Pattern of Child Abuse

Relevant statistics about Iran’s recent and long-term juvenile executions have 
re-emerged in those reports. CNN pointed out, for instance, that at least 97 
incidences have been recorded of juvenile offenders being executed between 1990 
and 2018. And according to Al Jazeera, the Islamic Republic put to death at 
least seven such individuals last year alone, while the total number of 
executions for people of all ages was recorded as 253. This represents a 
decline over previous years, owing perhaps entirely to a reform of the nation’s 
drug laws that ostensibly gets rid of the mandatory death penalty for 
non-violent traffickers. Nevertheless, the death toll is adequate to maintain 
Iran’s status as the leading abuser of the death penalty, and the 
Sohrabifar/Sedaghat case reaffirms that there are still serious human rights 
issues to be found among non-drug related sentencing.

At the same time, the practice of juvenile executions calls attention to Iran’s 
broader disregard for the rights of children. Since 1994, the Islamic Republic 
has technically been a signatory to the United Nations’ Convention on the 
Rights of the Child. This and the International Covenant on Civil and Political 
Rights both prohibit the execution of juvenile offenders under all 
circumstances. Yet the Iranian regime’s adoption of the Convention was 
accompanied by a proviso declaring itself immune from any aspect of the 
document that was deemed to be at odds with Iranian law or Islamic law. It is 
presumably this principle that is invoked by the Iranian judiciary each time it 
reviews a juvenile death sentence and upholds the death sentence on the basis 
of Iran’s own conception of legal maturity.

On Tuesday, IranWire referenced Iran’s selective and ultimately arbitrary 
enforcement of the Convention while reporting on the recruitment and deployment 
of child soldiers. The article noted that children as young as 13 routinely 
fought in Iran’s war against neighboring Iraq between 1980 and 1988. More than 
22,000 persons under the age of 18 were killed in combat during that time, 
though it is not known how many minors received training from the Islamic 
Revolutionary Guard Corps in total.

Whatever this number may have been in 1988, it has continued to grow ever 
since. IranWire notes that human rights groups have warned about child soldiers 
being deployed from Iran to fight as part of paramilitary groups tasked with 
the defense of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. At the same time, even among 
minors who are not actually deployed to combat zones, there is a common trend 
of appearing in state propaganda that emphasizes youths’ supposed commitment to 
the IRGC and military defense of Iran and its theocratic revolution.

Although this practice has been roundly condemned throughout the world, 
IranWire concludes that there is ultimately nothing the international community 
can do, legally speaking, to halt the practice. The use of child soldiers was 
banned worldwide in an Optional Protocol added to the Convention on the Rights 
of the Child in 2000. And although Iran’s Foreign Minister signed the document 
in 2010, it has never been ratified by the Iranian parliament. Concerted 
hardline opposition to such ratification serves to underscore the clerical 
regime’s refusal to be bound by international standards of behavior, even where 
the rights of children are concerned.

As yet another example of Iran’s disregard for this issue, Iran Human Rights 
Monitor reported last week that the latest statistics show 4,000 girls between 
the ages of 10 and 19 as having been married in North Khorasan Province alone, 
during the Iranian calendar year that ended in March 2019. This reflects a 
nationwide phenomenon that has left 24,000 girls widowed nationwide before the 
age of 18. This latter statistic speaks to the fact that the marriages in 
question are often arranged marriages involving a young girl and a much older 
man, often motivated by the economic hardship of the girl’s family.

According to Parvaneh Salahshouri, the head of the women’s delegation in the 
Iranian parliament, a staggering six percent of married Iranian women had their 
wedding between the ages of 10 and 14. “Early marriages” comprise 24 percent of 
total marriages annually, according to other government officials. But even 
this statistic presumably refers only to marriages involving girls aged 13 or 
older, since this is technically the legal age of marriageability. However, 
younger girls may be married under certain circumstances, and in other cases, 
the relevant law is simply not enforced.

Girls’ Hardship Continues Through Adulthood

Noting that the practice of child marriage has been institutionalized by the 
Iranian government, IHRM identifies it as “one of the examples of violence 
against women.” In fact, there are potential signs that the situation in the 
Islamic Republic is presently growing worse for women and for children, and 
thus especially for young girls. Regime authorities have been engaged in a 
years-long effort to reinforce hardline principles regarding gender and 
sexuality, as by pressuring young women to avoid the workforce in favor of 
starting large families at an early age, and extending bans on mixed-gender 
activities to include school-aged boys and girls.

Naturally, though, the most prominent example of the ongoing crackdown on 
women’s rights relates to the laws that mandate Islamic head coverings for all 
Iranian women, in all public places, even when outside the country or out of 
public view. Opponents of forced veiling have been boldly protesting the law, 
with 2018 being marked by a series of protests dubbed “Girls of Revolution 
Street,” in which participants removed their hijabs while standing on elevated 
structures in public. Those women were almost invariably arrested, and some 
have been handed multi-year prison sentences, while a prominent lawyer who 
sought to defend the protesters was recently given a sentence of 33 years.

The Revolution Street protests were an outgrowth of the “White Wednesdays” 
movement, which simply encouraged women to wear white hijabs on Wednesday as a 
symbol of silent protest against the forced veiling laws. The main organizer of 
that movement, UK-based Iranian activist Masih Alinejad, was previously known 
for popularizing the “My Stealthy Freedom” campaign, which involved women 
removing their veils in private spaces, such as in their cars, then posting 
them to social media. Though seemingly private in nature, such activism 
generated backlash from regime authorities that is still ongoing to this day.

IHRM reported on Tuesday that hundreds of Iranian women had recently received 
text messages summoning them to appear before the country’s “morality police” 
in connection with allegations that they had violated the Islamic dress code 
while driving their cars. Tehran police commander Hossein Rahimi confirmed via 
state media that the messages were official warnings, then declared, “The 
police will identify and deal with vehicles whose passengers remove their 
veils.” Persons who responded to the summons were reportedly released after 
signing a statement pledging not to repeat the violation, and they were 
informed that failure to abide by that statement would result in criminal 
charges.

Any such prosecution would be in keeping with a wide-ranging crackdown on 
dissent that has been by no means limited to the sphere of women’s rights. 
Meanwhile, the use of text messaging as a tool of intimidation reflects the 
regime’s broader efforts to leverage information technology for the purpose of 
enforcing hardline principles while limiting the ability of the general 
population to use those same resources for organizing and open discussion.

Part of a Larger Crackdown

Of course, the internet has presented a number of battlegrounds for that 
effort, and Iranian authorities may be on track toward issuing a ban on 
Instagram, the last major social media platform to be officially tolerated in 
the country. In the meantime, some of those same authorities are taking steps 
to enforce vaguely defined standards of behavior in virtually all online 
communications. As reported by the Center for Human Rights in Iran on Monday, a 
committee within the government’s Supreme Cultural Revolution Council recently 
passed an amendment to academic disciplinary regulations which could set the 
stage for punishment of Iranian university students whose online activities are 
deemed “unethical” by regime authorities.

That term is not defined by the standards, and this opens the door for 
criminalizing any expression of dissent or any challenge to the country’s 
hardline, Islamist identity. Indeed, CHRI points to previous instances of 
Tehran cracking down on students’ online activities in just this way. While 
some of those examples were attacks on dissent, as when Mojtaba Dadashi was 
sentenced to three years in prison for criticizing the regime as “un-Islamic,” 
others were reminiscent of the crackdown on women’s rights and the overall 
effort to preserve and defend the regime’s worst impulses.

Multiple students have been suspended from school and summoned before 
government authorities over social media posts containing images in which they 
violated the Islamic dress code while on vacation abroad. This prompted one 
student activist to say of the regime’s response to such activities, “Imagine 
what they will do now that there’s a law against it.”

Accusations of “unethical” behavior carry no defined sentence in Iranian law. 
However, such accusations can easily be connected to established but vaguely 
characterized crimes such as “spreading corruption on Earth” or “enmity against 
God.” These and other such charges may be used as legal justification for 
capital punishment in the Islamic Republic, and Iran’s latest executions of 
juvenile offenders strongly suggest that the judiciary would rarely feel 
compelled to hesitate in doing so.

(source: irannewsupdate.com)

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

A New Notorious Prosecutor Assigned for Tehran



Ebrahim Raissi, criminal Chief Justice of the mullahs’ regime, dismissed 
Tehran’s prosecutor Jaffari Dolatabadi, included in the US Treasury and EU 
sanctions’ list, on Monday April 29, replacing him with another henchman named 
Ali Alghassi-Mehr, formerly chief justice of Fars province since September 
2014, and Shiraz’ prosecutor before that for 3 years.

After listing of the IRGC as a foreign terrorist entity by the US State 
Department, Alghassi-Mehr announced that “he was an IRGC member too”. During 
the December 2017 uprising, he played a repressive role calling those taking 
part in the uprising enemies and hoodlums, threatening that “those who would 
engage in chaos on pretext of civil protests and disturb public order would be 
dealt with according to the law…Known outlaws who have grasped the occasion to 
instigate anti-regime activities against the public order are under full 
security control… The public should be aware of the anti-revolutionary hoodlums 
inside and outside the country. There would be no hesitation to deal with such 
cases…” (Mehr news agency – January 2, 2018 )

Alghassi-Mehr said a few weeks later: “Those arrested during the festivities of 
the last Wednesday of the year would remain in custody till the end of New Year 
holidays, and no permission would be granted for ceremonies to be held in 
Persepolis and Passargad.” (Mehr news agency- March 10, 2018).

The mullahs’ regime new prosecutor for Tehran had issued arrest warrants for 
truck drivers on nationwide strike and, announcing the arrest of 35 drivers, 
had added: “The law permits punishing those who disturb security on Fars’ 
highways as outlaws and corrupted on earth.” (Mehr news agency – September 28, 
2018).

One of Algahssi-Mehr’s latest crimes as chief justice in Shiraz was the secret 
execution of 2 17-year old juveniles and flogging them before execution. 
Announced for the 1st time by Amnesty International, the execution was 
qualified as a shocking crime against all known human, Islamic and human rights 
rules by Mrs. Maryam Rajavi. She added: “The civilized world, UN, UNSC, and UN 
HumanRights Council must condemn the atrocious killing of juveniles in Iran, a 
product of Khamenei’s Judiciary headed by the murderous mullah, Ebrahim Raisi, 
a Death Committee member in charge of the 1988 massacre of political 
prisoners.”

(source: Secretariat of the National Council of Resistance of Iran)

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

2 Child Offenders Executed



The execution of 2 children in southern Iran is an abhorrent violation of 
Iran’s human rights obligations, Human Rights Watch said today. On April 25, 
2019, authorities in Adel Abad prison in Shiraz, Fars province executed 2 
17-year-old cousins, Mehdi Sohrabifar and Amin Sedaghat.

Authorities arrested Sohrabifar and Sedaghat in May or June 2017, when both 
were 15, on several accusations including rape, a source who preferred to 
remain anonymous told Human Rights Watch. Both children were detained in a 
juvenile detention center until authorities transferred them to Adel Abad 
prison a day before they were executed.

“There is no justification for executing children,” said Michael Page, deputy 
Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “Iranian officials transported 
Mehdi Sohrabifar and Amin Sedaghat straight from a juvenile facility to the 
gallows.”

International law strictly prohibits the use of capital punishment in all cases 
in which the accused was under 18 at the time of the crime.

In recent years, Iranian judicial authorities often waited until a child 
sentenced to death had turned 18 before executing them, claiming that they were 
no longer a child. Documents Human Rights Watch reviewed indicated that 
Sohrabifar was diagnosed with an intellectual disability and had been enrolled 
in a special school for children with disabilities.

The source who spoke to Human Rights Watch said that Iran’s Supreme Court had 
reversed the children’s death sentences once, but the court in Shiraz 
reinstated them. Another source said that the court that reinstated the death 
penalty was branch 1 of Fars province criminal court, and that the Supreme 
Court had upheld that verdict. A forensic doctor had determined that Sohrabifar 
and Sedaghat had reached the developmental maturity to understand the nature of 
the crimes, the source said.

The authorities had not informed the families or lawyers about the verdict 
before the executions took place, and only after the families visited the 
children in Adel Abad prison told them that this was their last visit.

At least one other alleged child offender is on death row in Adel Abad Prison 
in Shiraz. Mohammad Reza Haddadi was initially sentenced to death for an 
alleged murder at age 15 and has been on death row since 2003.

Iran is one of only five countries known to have executed people since 2013 who 
were children at the time of their offense. The others are Pakistan, Saudi 
Arabia, South Sudan, and Yemen. Hamas authorities in Gaza have also executed 
child offenders. Iran is a state party to the Convention on the Rights of the 
Child, which bans executing offenders who were children at the time of their 
offense.

Iran’s penal code, as amended in 2013, prohibits executing child offenders for 
certain categories of crimes, including drug-related offenses. For other 
serious crimes, article 91 of the amended penal code allows judges to use their 
discretion and not issue a death sentence against a child who was not able to 
comprehend the nature and consequences of the crime at the time. The amended 
law also allows the courts to rely on “the opinion of a forensic doctor or 
other means it deems appropriate” to establish whether a defendant understood 
the consequences of their actions.

However, Iranian courts have continued to sentence children to death after 
these amendments became law. From 2014 to the end of 2017, Iran executed at 
least 25 people for crimes committed when they were children, according to 
Amnesty International and Iran Human Rights. In 2018 alone, Iran executed seven 
people for crimes they allegedly committed as children. In the case of Abolfazl 
Chezani Sherahi who was executed on June 27, 2018, a forensic doctor had 
claimed that he had sufficient “developmental maturity” to understand his crime 
and therefore be executed for it.

A growing body of neuroscientific research states that children, including 
those who are 16 or 17, are different than adults and in important respects 
less culpable than adults who commit the same crimes, and more amenable to 
rehabilitation, a key objective in juvenile justice systems.

Since 2012, Human Rights Watch has urged the Iranian government to amend its 
penal code to impose an absolute prohibition on the death penalty for child 
offenders, as required by international law. Human Rights Watch has also said 
that Iran’s judiciary should impose an immediate moratorium on executions due 
to the serious concerns regarding due process violations leading to the 
implementation of the death penalty, and move toward abolishing capital 
punishment. Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances 
because it is an inherently irreversible, inhumane punishment.

“Until Iran bans the death penalty, Iranian judges should use the legal 
authority they already have and stop sending children to be killed by the 
state,” Page said. “The Iranian criminal justice system flouted universal norms 
and demonstrated needless cruelty, not justice, by its appalling executions of 
Sohrabifar and Sedaghat.”

(source: Human Rights Watch)








INDIA:

Can't give death penalty for corruption, says SC on misconduct of builders



"We cannot give capital punishment for corruption," a peeved Supreme Court said 
Wednesday while referring to the "misconduct" of realtors in cheating lakhs of 
people across the country.

The top court said builders, in connivance with authorities and banks, have 
flouted norms and constructed sky scrappers side by side across India.

It pulled up the Noida and Greater Noida authorities and banks for turning a 
blind eye towards irregularities committed by the builders including Amrapali 
Group.

A bench of Justices Arun Mishra and U U Lalit, hearing a batch of petitions 
filed by home buyers who are seeking possession of around 42,000 flats booked 
in projects of the Amrapali Group, told the authorities that their timely 
actions could have saved several projects.

"We know what kind of corruption is going on in real estate sector and how 
officials have benefitted in connivance with the builders. There are blatant 
violations of norms.

(source: business-standard.com)








BRUNEI:

Boycott of Brunei-owned businesses over gay sex death penalty likely to expand



Businesses will likely continue to shun companies owned by Brunei, activists 
and consultants said, as they come under pressure to honor commitments to LGBT+ 
rights after the sultanate imposed the death penalty for gay sex and adultery.

Meanwhile, global oil company Shell, which has a joint venture with the Brunei 
government, is being urged by investors to protect LGBT+ staff working in the 
Muslim-majority former British protectorate.

The small Southeast Asian country sparked a global outcry when it rolled out 
its interpretation of Islamic laws, or sharia, on April 3, punishing sodomy, 
adultery and rape with death, including by stoning, and theft with amputation.

The move, which was condemned by the United Nations and the European 
Parliament, led actor George Clooney and singer Elton John to call for a 
boycott of 9 hotels owned by the sultanate.

Banks, including Morgan Stanley, Deutsche Bank, Citi and Nomura, have banned 
staff from using the hotels, which include the Dorchester in London and the 
Beverley Hills Hotel in Los Angeles, while numerous organizations have canceled 
events.

Transport for London (TfL), which is responsible for London’s transport system, 
removed adverts promoting Brunei as a tourism destination from the city’s 
public transport network last month.

STA Travel, a global travel agency, stopped selling flights on Royal Brunei 
Airlines, while Virgin Australia Airlines ended an agreement that offered staff 
discounted tickets on the national carrier.

“A lot of businesses have just looked on in horror with what’s happened,” Iain 
Anderson, the chairman of Cicero, a communications consultancy, and an LGBT+ 
activist, told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

“As long as Brunei continues to be unbending on the issue, then I think that 
you’re going to see more and more companies coming out to not use Dorchester 
Collection hotels, or indeed other companies within the Brunei government’s 
ownership.”

In a letter to the United Nations last month Brunei defended the imposition of 
strict sharia laws, which it began introducing in 2014 but halted after a 
backlash, as more for “prevention than to punish”.

“This particular boycott is likely to have longevity,” said Ian Johnson, head 
of consultancy OutNow, which works with companies on LGBT+ issues. “You’ve got 
very high profile voices driving mainstream opinion.”

He pointed out that since the first boycott of Dorchester Collection hotels in 
2014 LGBT+ rights such as same-sex marriage have become more widespread 
globally, spurring more businesses to declare support for gay and trans people.

“Inclusion, diversity and equality are the foundation of Dorchester 
Collection,” the hotel group said in a statement last month. “Our values are 
far removed from the politics of ownership.”

A spokeswoman for the group declined to comment further.

OFF THE SCALE

Anderson said there had been a huge growth in “quiet diplomacy” by companies on 
gay and trans issues in the last 10-15 years.

Brunei’s sharia laws have prompted more public action from companies, though.

“This is so off-the-scale egregious... that they need to be seen to act,” 
Anderson said.

But Shell, which touts its support for its LGBT+ employees on its website, has 
largely stayed quiet.

“Our core value of respect for people means that we respect all people, 
irrespective of gender, age, race, religion, sexual orientation and all the 
things that make people different,” a spokeswoman said.

The oil major would never discuss sharia law with Brunei’s government, a Shell 
employee who used to work in the country said.

“It’s a directive from the sultan,” the employee said. “It’s not something you 
try to challenge or criticize.”

Shell, which achieved a perfect score of 100 from advocacy group Human Rights 
Campaign on an index that rates companies on their LGBT+ policies, is 
nonetheless coming under pressure from investors to ensure its gay and trans 
staff are protected.

“It is expected from the company that they live up to their policies on 
inclusion and LGBT-equality, wherever they have operations,” said a spokesman 
for Eumedion, a Dutch group that represents investors.

“Considering the recent developments in Brunei, this issue may be put on the 
dialogue-agenda during our regular conversations with Shell,” he said in an 
emailed statement.

The spokesman emphasized that the focus of any meeting would be on protecting 
Shell’s workers rather than advocating for legal change in Brunei.

Robeco, a Dutch asset manager that leads Eumedion’s discussions with Shell, 
declined to comment.

(source: Reuters)