[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

Oct. 16


IRAN:

Sunni prisoners beaten by prison guards


2 Sunni prisoners of conscience awaiting execution in Iran, brothers Jamshed 
and Jahangir Dehghani, along with their family who were visiting them, were 
beaten by prison guards today in Rajai Shahr prison in Karaj, Iran.

According to the report of Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), the 
attack took place today in the meeting room of the prison, where the family of 
the 2 prisoners had been allowed to meet them for the 1st time in months.

The family had originally been permitted to meet the men for 40 minutes, but 
after just 10 minutes prison officers told the family that the meeting was over 
and that they had to leave.

According to eyewitnesses, after Sunni prisoner Jamshed Dehghani had complained 
about the order, prison officials as well as soldiers on duty in the prison 
began beating the men.

The family members of the prisoners, including the men???s two elderly parents, 
2 sisters, as well as a young child, were also reportedly assaulted by the 
prison guards.

The men's Sunni beliefs were also insulted. Witnesses reported that during the 
attack, one of the prison guards said, "these filthy Sunni guys should be 
hanged [executed] from the top of this meeting room".

(source: Human Rights Activists News Agency)






INDONESIA:

Change of president means unsettling time for Indonesia's death row prisoners


On October 20, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono will step down as President of 
Indonesia after two five-year terms, and Joko Widodo will be inaugurated. What 
will be the potential impact of the change of Presidency on those prisoners on 
death row in Indonesia, which include Australians Andrew Chan and Myuran 
Sukumaran?

Mr Yudhoyono has a mixed record on the death penalty. Under his 10-year 
presidency, 14 prisoners were executed for premeditated murder, three for 
terrorist offences, and 4 for drug trafficking. However, executions by the 
state declined notably in his 2nd term with no prisoner executed between 2009 
and 2012, in part because of domestic concern over the fate of Indonesian 
domestic workers sentenced to death abroad.

Around 140 people remain on death row in Indonesia. 30 to 40 of these prisoners 
have exhausted all options of appeal. Their fate rests solely with the 
Attorney-General's Office, which bears the responsibility for carrying out 
executions, though possibly with the president's tacit consent.

For another 40 or so prisoners who have had no luck overturning their death 
sentences in the courts, the final option to avoid the firing squad is 
presidential clemency: the power of the president under the Indonesian 
Constitution and the 2010 Clemency Law to reduce a death sentence to life 
imprisonment.

Over the last weeks of his presidency, Yudhoyono has faced up to 40 clemency 
petitions from prisoners on death row, and hundreds or even thousands of 
petitions from non-death row prisoners seeking to reduce the length of their 
prison sentences.

Unless they have already been decided on, Chan's and Sukumaran's mercy 
petitions will be among those sitting on the president's desk. What will happen 
to these petitions as Mr Yudhoyono leaves office and the Widodo administration 
steps in?

4 possibilities exist.

1st, Mr Yudhoyono could grant all of the clemency petitions put before him. 
Death row prisoners and their relatives will hope Mr Yudhoyono authorises a 
mass grant of clemency, as has frequently occurred in the United States, where 
State Governors have pardoned numerous prisoners upon leaving office, reasoning 
there is no political cost in doing so.

With the speculation that Mr Yudhoyono plans to pursue a career at the United 
Nations, a mass commutation of death sentences would be well received, given a 
majority of UN member states have now abolished the death penalty in law or in 
practice. This option could see Chan and Sukumaran spared from the firing 
squad, though they would still face a life sentence.

The 2nd option is that Mr Yudhoyono grants some petitions and rejects others. 
There is a precedent since, in October 2012, the president granted 19 of 128 
clemency petitions (including four death sentence reductions) for drug 
trafficking cases between 2004 and 2011.

The decisions here could be made on the basis of humanitarian considerations 
such as good behaviour in prison, expressed remorse, or sufficient time already 
spent on death row, as well as political considerations such as relations with 
foreign states. Notably, the Governor of Bali's Kerokoban Prison has already 
expressed support for Chan's and Sukumaran's appeals for clemency due to their 
good behaviour. However the Indonesian Supreme Court, which has a formal role 
in giving advice to the president on clemency, reportedly does not support 
Chan's petition.

The 3rd alternative is that Mr Yudhoyono rejects all pending petitions. Chan 
and Sukumaran, plus the many other prisoners affected, would have to consider 
any remaining legal options to avoid execution, including constitutional 
challenges. An impending execution could be challenged based on the cruelty of 
excessive time spent on death row, a new one-year deadline for clemency 
petitions impeding an effective legal defence, or even Mr Yudhoyono's own 
tardiness in responding to the petitions (Chan's and Sukumaran's mercy pleas 
should have been decided on by the president more than 18 months ago, according 
to time-limits set by the 2010 clemency law).

Finally, if he does not want to make a decision, Mr Yudhoyono could simply pass 
off the pending clemency requests to the new president. In the end, this may be 
the most likely outcome, as it will save Mr Yudhoyono from dealing with any 
political fallout.

The Widodo administration isn't likely to be as punitive as a Prabowo Subianto 
Presidency would have been (while campaigning, Mr Subianto stated that he was 
in favour of sentencing rapists and corrupt officials to death), yet the 
immediate abolition of the death penalty is still unlikely. Indonesia's public, 
government and religious institutions favour retention. Mr Widodo's treatment 
of clemency petitions is as yet unknown, but the longer they remain unanswered, 
political and legal pressure will build on the new president to dispose of the 
petitions by either rejecting or granting them.

(source: Daniel Pascoe is an assistant professor at the School of Law, the City 
University of Hong Kong; The Age)






MALAYSIA:

Jobless man charged with butchering woman


An unemployed man, who allegedly cut a woman into pieces and set the body parts 
on fire, has been charged in court and faces the death penalty if convicted.

Abd Khalid Md Isa, 43, who is believed to be the victim's boyfriend, is accused 
of murdering Rohani Hashim, 30, whose remains were found in Juru, Penang, on 
Oct 1.

He allegedly committed the offence at a house in Jalan Pengkalan Datok Keramat 
in Bukit Tengah here between 4pm on Sept 29 and 6pm the next day.

It is believed Rohani had wanted to end her relationship with the accused.

No plea was recorded from the accused. The offence under Section 302 of the 
Penal Code is non-bailable.

It was reported that police believed the accused murdered Rohani and set her 
body on fire in an attempt to conceal the crime.

The gruesome find was made by a villager and the suspect was arrested in Bandar 
Baru, Kedah, the same day after police received a tip-off.

Sessions Court judge Musyiri Peet fixed Dec 15 for mention. DPP Lim Saw Sim 
prosecuted the case while Abd Khalid was unrepresented.

(source: Asia One)



ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES:

OAS Lecture Series Examines Universal Abolition of the Death Penalty


The 56 Lecture of the Americas of the Organization of American States (OAS) 
discussed on Tuesday in Washington DC the issue of the abolition of the death 
penalty, as part of the commemoration of the International Day Against this 
punishment on October 10. The event featured a keynote address by the President 
of the International Institute of Human Rights and former President of the 
European Court of Human Rights, Jean-Paul Costa, entitled "Reflections on the 
Abolition of the Death Penalty."

Opening the event, the OAS Secretary General, Jose Miguel Insulza, said that 
the issue "is no stranger to the OAS, particularly to the Inter-American 
Commission on Human Rights that recently issued a new call for the abolition of 
the death penalty," recalling in this regard the significant contribution that 
the Commission has made to the topic. In this regard, the Secretary General 
referred to a report published in 2012 on the restrictions to the abolition of 
the death penalty in the Hemisphere and recalled that although the 
inter-American instruments on Human Rights do not explicitly prohibit its 
imposition, they "place on it significant restrictions and limitations, 
particularly in its application and scope."

The leader of the hemispheric institution also referred to the "long 
abolitionist tradition" that characterizes the Hemisphere, where 19 states have 
abolished it for ordinary crimes and where in 15 it is still legal "but with a 
moratorium on executions and there is only one state that continues with this 
practice."

Secretary General Insulza recalled that this is a controversial topic in the 
region. "Some mistakenly think that the application of the death penalty is a 
deterrent. It is important, however, to note that for some time it has been 
proven that when you want to deter criminals what you have to do is to ensure 
that justice is done; the magnitude of the penalty is less important than the 
certainty of punishment," he said.

Likewise, the OAS leader urged strengthening of the institutional network and 
of all the judicial and prosecutorial systems, "above all an adequate 
rehabilitation system." He insisted that the death penalty has never been shown 
to be a deterrent and stressed that "this is not a topic on which we can have 
an official position of the Organization, but it is worth noting that in 34 of 
the member countries it is no longer practiced."

During his presentation, Judge Jean-Paul Costa analyzed how the abolition of 
the death penalty has gained ground in many regions of the world, saying that 
in several countries it has been eliminated "either by law or in practice." He 
said that currently about two thirds of the United Nations member countries 
have abolished it for all crimes and sixty still maintain it as part of their 
legislation. Judge Costa added that the abolition approaches vary from region 
to region being Europe the continent where the fewest executions have been 
carried out in recent years. "In Africa, 17 of 48 states have abolished the 
death penalty by law and there has been a positive trend of not using its 
application."

"The instruments of greater influence at the international level tolerate the 
death penalty, including the Universal Declaration of 1948 and the 1966 
International Covenants on Human Rights which do not prohibit it," said the 
President of the International Institute of Human Rights, but recalled that 
"more recently international bodies such as the Inter-American Commission on 
Human Rights and the African Commission on Human Rights have called for its 
abolition." "The world has moved forward in the abolition, though large, 
populous countries still have it as in the cases of China, India, Indonesia, 
Japan and the United States," he said.

Judge Costa referred to the Resolution adopted by the UN Human Rights Council 
last June 26 which for the first time "deplored the human rights violations 
resulting from the application of the death penalty." The Resolution urges 
states that have not done so to "protect the rights of those convicted to the 
death penalty" and called for avoiding the application of this punishment to 
people under 18 years old. Costa said that on October 10 and 11 the 
International Conference on the Universal Abolition of the Death Penalty took 
place in San Jose, Costa Rica which sought "to raise awareness among judges, 
lawyers, NGOs and civil society on the importance of working together for the 
abolition of the death penalty "and said the goal is to achieve universal 
abolition by 2025.

When talking about the future prospects of the death penalty, the former 
President of the European Court of Human Rights stated that "it is an uncertain 
future," and noted that "on one hand we have the political and security 
situation in many regions that affects the strength of the movement due to 
conflicts and large-scale terrorism, organized crime, and trafficking in 
persons; and on the other hand we have the evolution of the past 20 years that 
shows a clear trend towards abolition in practice or by law." "From my 
perspective, without the efforts of the entire society it will be very 
difficult to achieve the goal we have proposed to abolish the death penalty," 
he said.

Following the presentation of Judge Costa, the Assistant Executive Secretary of 
the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), Elizabeth Abi-Mershed, 
summarized the work that the Commission has done in the field and especially 
its role in the establishment of international standards for the application of 
the death penalty. "The Commission was the first international human rights 
body to assess the consequences of the mandatory application of the death 
penalty in the enjoyment of human rights, concluding that it is inconsistent 
with the rights to life, humane treatment and due process," explained 
Abi-Mershed. She also referred to the report entitled "The Death Penalty in the 
Inter-American Human Rights System: from restrictions to abolition" in which 
the human rights framework applicable to the death penalty is analyzed and 
which presents guidelines to address its abolition. "The decisions of the IACHR 
and the Court have become a decisive guidance on legal reforms in the region," 
said Abi-Mershed and commented that the way the Commission has dealt with cases 
involving the issue of capital punishment and as its recent position to call 
for its abolition of capital punishment "shows that in the framework of the OAS 
there is a potential to become a motor for change."

For his part, the Permanent Representative of Costa Rica to the OAS, Pablo 
Barahona, analyzed the various historical and political aspects of the capital 
punishment in the region and in the world, stating that "the best seismograph 
of a country is its Penal Code, it shows what are the protected legal interests 
and sets the sentences, and thus sets the scale of order," and described the 
death penalty as a "savage criminal sanction," and the "product of a very 
limited policy and a mirror of the most basic ignorance." Ambassador Barahona 
agreed with the view presented by Secretary General Insulza regarding the 
inapplicability of "the alleged preventive or deterrent purposes of the death 
penalty," stating that it "does not prevent violent offenders, as violent 
crimes are usually the most irrational, nor does it teach anything good to 
others."

Ambassador Barahona recalled how his country became one of the first to abolish 
the death penalty, "Costa Rica has reaffirmed through its political history its 
strong commitment to the universal abolition of the death penalty, and thus its 
defense of life," he noted and recalled that by 1945, just 7 subscribing 
countries to the UN Charter of had abolished it and that by 2008,"141 countries 
dispensed with this dishonorable punitive practice." He also recalled that 
according to figures from Amnesty International in 2013 there were at least 
1,925 death sentences in 57 countries and that today there are more than 23,000 
sentenced to death worldwide awaiting execution. "Among them there will be 
innocents, we know that." He concluded by noting that the death penalty "does 
not bring justice, not even order, but demonstrates its failure; it is not even 
the failure of the law, it is the failure of the whole society, and to some 
extent, our own failure."

At the conclusion of the event, the Permanent Observer of France to the OAS, 
Jean-Claude Nolla, offered appreciative words to the presenters and examined 
the relationship between the death penalty, human rights and democracy. "The 
vast majority of international texts mark a separation between the death 
penalty and human rights," he said, recalling that in many countries in Europe 
and America it is described as "cruel and inhuman." He also analyzed the three 
arguments that support abolition "the judicial error that kills the innocent, 
the ineffectiveness of the death penalty and the idea of the integrity of the 
human person that does not seem to be compatible with the penalty itself" and 
commented in this regard that "all the arguments are valid." Finally, he urged 
the OAS member countries to act as an institution, delivering a united message 
for the abolition of the death penalty.

Prior to the Lecture, Secretary General Insulza held a private meeting with the 
panelists participating in the same. The 56 Lecture Series was moderated by the 
OAS Secretary for External Relations, Alfonso Quinonez.

(source: Bahamas Weekly)






NIGERIA:

Nigerian Soldiers: Mutiny And Preachment Of Ignorance


At the risk of being pressed with unprintable names, I wish to view with 
complete dissonance the preachment in respect of the 12 mutinous soldiers 
recently sentenced to death by firing squad. The arguments and pleadings for 
reprieve lack merit and have exposed the discussants' total ignorance of the 
fundamental issues at stake. So far, all efforts at lucid presentation are at 
best a puerile attempt to drag a serious matter into the mud of public opinion 
and sentiment. Most discussants are of the opinion that the court martial which 
tried the soldiers in Abuja was high-handed and too severe in its verdict. The 
more forceful and apparently coherent the discourse has tended to be, the more 
the discussants lapsed into critical illogic of argument based on ignorance. 
Even as the ranting of the so-called intellectuals raged, 60 other soldiers are 
currently being tried in the military court for similar offences, some of which 
carry the death penalty. Some intellectuals have bumped into issues about which 
they are hazy.

The military is not a university system and is therefore not fertile for the 
cultivation of cultism. There can never be proliferation of divergent views as 
found in academic places. It is not a field where dissidents in the guise of 
trade unionism spurt and war against constituted authorities with fiendish 
relish. There is a very wide chasm between the military and the political scene 
as the former cannot therefore breed virulent opposition that toys with treason 
with discomfiting impunity. The military has zero tolerance for thuggery, 
brigandage, gerrymandering, bizarre policy somersaults and brazen chicanery 
that are rife on the political turf.

The military, anywhere in the world, cannot make pretentions to being a 
democratic institution and can ill afford the laissez-faire fashion of 
politics. The army does not strive in the lackadaisical attitude of so-called 
specialist organisations like the Nigerian Medical Association, NMA, that could 
afford to abandon dying patients in wards across the country for 55 days just 
to press for improved service conditions. It is unlike the academic staff 
unions that felt no qualm leaving hundreds of thousands of students in the 
lurch for eight months and yet pocketed the salaries for such unprecedent job 
dereliction. Put succinctly, the military is a far cry from all civilian 
set-ups. Any attempt to posit what obtains in one with the other is bound to be 
an exercise of nullity.

The military, anywhere in the world, is hierarchically structured and safely 
anchored on discipline exemplified in the mind frame Major General Muhammadu 
Buhari strove for 18 months in the 1980s to inculcate army discipline in the 
general populace. Discipline is the mainstay of the super-structural bulwark 
that supports the army. It is the thick insulator coating the highest calibre 
of armoured cable that channelled its dynamic energy to the very point of use. 
The army is a fighting machine infused with the instinct of a mad dog. It is 
designed to have the ferocity of a lion. Such energy is bottled up in 
discipline to ward off external aggression. Occasionally, this latent dynamo is 
unleashed on the civil society with unmitigated consequences, recently in Odi, 
Bayelsa and Saki-Biam, Benue states. Afrobeat legend Fela Anikulapo-Kuti hit 
the nail hard on the head with his hit - ZOMBE, though he paid dearly for such 
audacity. The military does not brook dissention, no recalcitrance, and no 
refusal of superior order, however barmy. Peace-keeping engagements are geared 
toward priming the army for major national assignment like the insurgency in 
the North-East.

This may appear trite but it is true. At a monthly sensitisation meeting 
(durbar) with a battalion's Commanding Officer (CO) in the 1970s, a forum for 
picking the mind of non-commissioned officers (NCO), a soldier was opportuned 
to speak. He stood up, came spritely to attention and preceded his speech with: 
"Sir, I think....." The CO cut him short; telling the NCO to vacate the realm 
of 'thinking' comfortably occupied by him (commander) and be restricted to what 
he had in mind. That is it! Soldiers are by training pliant. They watch their 
words, deed, association and are taciturn. Disobedience is a very serious 
offence even in peace time. The word 'we' is excluded from military dictionary 
for this is mutinous. 2 or more soldiers saying NO in unison connotes 
pre-agreement and so deserves close scrutiny. Mutiny hangs in the air in every 
military establishment and is a sword of Damocles over every soldier's head. 
Yet this does not make the Army a dreary organisation. Rather it is a structure 
that strives on the edifice of implicit obedience.

That mutiny in Maimalari Barracks, Maiduguri, Borno State, was the apogee of 
military rascality; it was the most reprehensible conduct in such milieu, an 
irresponsible ego trip by a band of misguided soldiers. No military condones 
mutiny. It is worse than the ebola virus disease (EVD) that is yet to find a 
cure. Even if EVD should find a cure, mutiny will never find any. Not even in 
the most advanced econo-medics. The soldiers who bit the mutiny bait in 
Maiduguri must be graciously permitted to face its attendant macabre dance. 
There is no short cut to it except to shear the Nigerian nation of its 
strength; akin to asking the army to cut its nose to spite its face. Those 
preaching forgiveness are too far from the realities on ground. They are asking 
for the destruction of Nigeria's edition of the most resilient institution in 
the world.

Soldiering is a career that requires those in it to either kill or be killed. 
Soldiers must accomplish any order that has not been vacated. The argument that 
they were not fully equipped is inappropriate. More so, who closely examined 
the insurgents to pinpoint whether they were better kitted? Even if soldiers 
were to fight with their bare hands, they still cannot disobey superior order. 
Soldiers are not, and they can never be, part of the rash of indiscipline that 
saturates the civil society.

The Army High Command may not be swayed by the avalanche of pleadings to 
rescind its recent decision to severely punish that crop of mutinous soldiers. 
Procrastination on such dire matter is bound to send the wrong signals that 
such enterprise could be pulled through without its grim consequences. There is 
no global precedence on such issue. Basically, soldiers are the civil society's 
expendable humans. Anyone afraid of death needs not stray into the army.

The academics have destroyed the tertiary institutions. The politicians have 
smashed the polity to smithereens. The doctors are at liberty to look the other 
side while their patients die en masse due to crass abandonment. The economists 
have argued themselves hoarse about the way forward. Top dogs, in the days of 
military encroachment in politics, killed the Nigerian Army. Whatever is left 
of this national institution should not in any way cave in. Maintained or not, 
equipped with 18th century weapons or not, no soldier, even if drafted, has the 
right to take part in a riot or mutiny or feeble protest. Military is a call 
for sacrifice and the sacrificial lambs are the soldiers themselves. The civil 
society should allow the military to do its business. All said, the Army High 
Command may temper justice in this matter by not shooting the culprits.

(source: Akin Owolabi, The News)






GAMBIA:

Teenage Gambian Girl Charged With Murder


A teenage Gambian girl who allegedly killed her boyfriend for not buying an Eid 
(Tobaski) dress for their young daughter was Monday charged with murder.

Mariama Konteh, 18, of Bakau Farokono, allegedly plunged a knife into Tijan 
Bah, 23, on 1 October 2014 in Bakau after a heated argument.

Police said the teenager had a fight her boyfriend around 2am and in the 
process stabbed him with a knife on the left side of his neck resulting to his 
death.

The teenager, who was since arrested, was allegedly taken in handcuff by police 
a day after the incident to view the boyfriend's body in Banjul mortuary before 
it was released to his family for burial.

Sitting alone in the dock and looking confused, the teenager was told by 
Magistrate, Nyima Samateh of the Banjul court that she would be remanded at the 
Mile Two Prisons while the case is transferred to the Banjul High Court.

If found guilty, the teenager could face the death penalty or life in prison 
without parole.

(source: Jollof News)