[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

Nov. 22


GLOBAL:

UN vote boosts support for a global moratorium on the death penalty----114 of 
the UN's 193 member states today voted in favour of the UN resolution to 
establish a moratorium on executions.


The vast majority of the world's countries today threw their weight behind a UN 
General Assembly resolution to establish a moratorium on executions with a view 
to abolishing the death penalty globally, Amnesty International said.

114 of the UN's 193 member states today voted in favour of the resolution which 
will go before the General Assembly Plenary for final adoption in December.

"Today's vote confirms that more and more countries around the world are coming 
around to the fact that the death penalty is a human rights violation and must 
end. It is also a clear message to the minority of states that still execute - 
you are on the wrong side of history," said Chiara Sangiorgio, Death Penalty 
expert at Amnesty International.

Since 2007 there have been 4 resolutions calling for a worldwide moratorium on 
the death penalty, with support increasing each time. Overall, the votes in 
favour of this resolution increased by 3 since the last time a similar vote 
took place in 2012.

114 states voted in favour, 36 voted against and 34 abstained compared to 111 
votes in favour, 41 against and 34 abstentions in December 2012. The draft 
resolution was co-sponsored by 94 UN Member States from all regions of the 
world, the highest number yet.

New votes in favour came from Eritrea, Fiji, Niger and Suriname. As a further 
positive sign, Bahrain, Myanmar and Uganda moved from opposition to abstention. 
Regrettably, Papua New Guinea went from abstention to a vote against the 
resolution.

Today's vote in the UNGA's Third Committee, which addresses social, 
humanitarian and human rights issues, is an important indicator for the main 
vote on the resolution in the General Assembly Plenary next month, when the 
resolution is expected to be endorsed. Although not legally binding, UN General 
Assembly resolutions carry considerable moral and political weight.

"Governments around the world should seize the opportunity of today's vote to 
renew their dialogue to make this moratorium call a reality - we hope we will 
see even stronger support come the final vote in December," said Chiara 
Sangiorgio.

Amnesty International urges all UN Member States to support the resolution when 
it comes for adoption at the plenary session. Those countries still retaining 
the death penalty should immediately establish a moratorium on executions as a 
first step towards full abolition. Background

When the UN was founded in 1945 only 8 of the then 51 UN Member States had 
abolished the death penalty. Today, 95 Member States have abolished the death 
penalty for all crimes, and in total 137 out of the 193 have abolished the 
death penalty in law or practice.

The adoption of these ground-breaking resolutions on a moratorium on the use of 
the death penalty since 2007 has generated momentum to renew the commitment to 
the abolition of the death penalty.

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception, 
regardless of the nature or circumstances of the crime; guilt, innocence or 
other characteristics of the individual; or the method used by the state to 
carry out the execution.

(source: Amnesty Internatnional)






SAUDI ARABIA----execution

Saudi Arabia beheads Turk for drug trafficking


Saudi Arabia on Nov. 20 beheaded a Turkish man convicted of drug trafficking, 
the interior ministry said, in the latest execution in the ultra-conservative 
Gulf kingdom.

Ali Agirdas had been convicted of receiving a "large amount of drugs" and was 
executed in the Saudi capital Riyadh, the ministry said in a statement.

His execution brings to 70 the number of Saudis and foreigners beheaded in the 
kingdom this year, according to an AFP count, despite international concern.

Rape, murder, apostasy, drug trafficking and armed robbery are all punishable 
by death under the kingdom's strict version of Islamic sharia law.

(soruce: Agence France-Presse)






INDIA/SRI LANKA:

Rights activist welcomes Lanka's pardon to Indian fishermen

Noted human rights activist Avadhash Kaushal on Friday welcomed Sri Lankan 
President Mahinda Rajapkasa's pardon to 5 Indian fishermen on death row for 
alleged drug trafficking but urged him to give the same treatment to the 3 
fishermen from his own country sentenced to death along with them for the same 
crime.

"Pardoning and releasing the 5 Indian fishermen is a welcome step by the 
President but he should also release and pardon the 3 Sri Lankan fishermen 
handed capital punishment along with them by the High court of Sri Lanka for 
the same crime," Kaushal, a Padmashree awardee, said in a statement here.

He also said he was against capital punishment and wants its abolition from all 
over the world.

A renowned human rights activist and a member of the International Commission 
to probe missing persons and war crimes done by Srilankan forces as well as 
LTTE, Kaushal is based in Dehradun and runs an NGO called Rural Litigation and 
Entitlement Kendra.

The 5 Indian fishermen on death row in Sri Lanka on drug-trafficking charges, 
walked free on Wednesday, after President Mahinda Rajapaksa used his executive 
powers to commute their death penalty.

(source: Zee News)



PAKISTAN:

Violating the most important human right


With the Lahore High Court's decision to uphold Aasia Bibi's death penalty last 
month, the debate on whether capital punishment should be abolished in Pakistan 
has once again become a hot topic. In Pakistan, 27 different crimes, including 
murders of various forms, treason, blasphemy and 'sabotage of the railway 
system' are punishable by death. With over 8500 individuals on death row in the 
country, the issue of capital punishment has managed to gain a significant 
amount of international attention.

Despite the fact that a moratorium was imposed on executions in 2008, the new 
government in 2013 initially refused to renew the moratorium. Only after the 
government realized the adverse economic consequences of not renewing the 
moratorium did it suspend the implementation of the death sentence for an 
indefinite period of time. Despite all these measures, the execution of Shoaib 
Sarwar almost took place in September 2014 and was stopped only due to a last 
minute stay order.

While it is true that no civilian executions have taken place in Pakistan since 
2008 and no military executions have taken place since 2012, the number of 
convicts on the death row continues to increase. With the current government's 
unclear stance on the moratorium, most of these convicts face a constant threat 
of being executed immediately.

The debate on whether Pakistan should abolish the death sentence completely 
arises mainly because of the fact that abolishing the death sentence is 
contrary to Islamic Shariah and no law that contradicts any Islamic law can be 
implemented in the country. While this argument can be used to support the 
continuation of the death sentence on Pakistan, there are a number of other 
factors that strongly suggest that the death sentence should be abolished.

It is no secret that the Pakistani law and order system is heavily compromised. 
Unfair police investigations, baseless accusations and corruption within the 
judicial system aren't unheard of in Pakistan. With such imperfections being 
present in the society, giving the judicial system the right to take away 
someone's life is highly unjustified.

The death sentence is in itself a violation of basic human rights. That, paired 
with the frailty of the Pakistani judicial system, makes the existence of the 
death penalty in Pakistan even more odious. In a country where the rich and 
powerful can get away with almost anything, it is extremely unfair to allow 
capital punishment to exist.

In controversial cases like that of Aasia Bibi, who was accused of blasphemy, 
the possibility of the presence of false accusations for individuals' personal 
benefits makes the death sentence a seriously flawed punishment.

In murder cases, the concept of blood money is not unheard of. Individuals can 
get away with murder if they have the means to pay sums of money to the family 
of the deceased while those who lack these means are left to rot behind bars, 
waiting for death. This makes the death sentence in murder cases an even worse 
injustice.

In many cases, the convicted individuals fail to get adequate legal 
representation simply because they cannot afford to do so. This almost suggests 
that the death penalty is only reserved for the underprivileged and that some 
lives are more valuable than others. It is ironic that while everyone is 
supposed to be equal under the law, this blatant display of discrimination 
still exists.

Many of the convicts on the death row have been imprisoned for long periods of 
time. Shoaib Sarwar, for example, has already served 18 years of his life in 
prison. Punishing a person twice for the same crime isn't acceptable in any 
court of law. Yet he was almost executed a month ago. While the government 
maintains its unclear stance on the moratorium on the death penalty in 
Pakistan, authorities very conveniently ignore the severe psychological impacts 
that the constant fear of death has on those who are sentenced to death.

The death row syndrome is just one of the many psychological issues that most 
of the death row prisoners face in which they become so worn out that they fail 
to understand the situation that they are really in. As a result, these 
convicts not only face time in prison, they also experience mental torture. The 
mental agony is further extended to the families of these individuals as well 
who not only have to deal with the possibility of a loved one getting executed 
but also have to deal with social issues associated with being the family 
member of someone on the death row.

Capital punishment is a flawed concept in itself owing to its irreversible 
nature. If a person is sent to prison but is later found to be innocent, they 
can be released. If a person is executed and is later found to be innocent, the 
damage done is irreversible. With such high stakes involved, is capital 
punishment a risk worth taking?

In a country where the court's decision can be changed if a powerful contact is 
used, where police reports can be manipulated and altered according to the 
wishes of those in power, where money has the ability to buy freedom, the 
presence of capital punishment cannot be justified, no matter how hard we try. 
Sadly, however, most Pakistani's are of the view that capital punishment should 
not be abolished; we have become a nation that no longer values the importance 
of a life.

(source: Wishal Raheel, The Nation)