[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

Dec. 8



IRAN----executions

3 Men and 1 Woman Hanged in 1 Day


On Sunday December 6, 3 men with alleged murder charges were reportedly hanged 
to death at Zahedan Central Prison and also 1 woman was reportedly hanged in 
Ghazvin Central Prison for allegedly murdering her husband.

According to close sources, the names of the 3 men are: Mohsen Piri, Mohsen 
Gomshadzehi and Aziz Sarani. They were reportedly among 5 prisoners who on 
Thursday December 3 were transferred from their cells to solitary confinement 
in preparation for their executions. The other 2 were returned to their cells 
after the plaintiffs on their case files granted them respite from hanging. 
Iranian official sources have been silent on the execution of the 3 men.

The Iranian official news site, Parsine, has identified the woman as F. 
Zanjanian. According to the official report, "Zanjanian" committed the act of 
murder in 2011 and was sentenced to death and 99 lashings by Iranian courts.

(source: Iran Human Rights)






MONGOLIA:

Mongolian parliament votes to abolish death penalty


Mongolia is to abolish the death penalty next year, Amnesty International 
reports.

Lawmakers on Thursday voted in favour of a new criminal code that abolishes the 
death penalty for all crimes and will take effect from September 2016.

This would bring the total number of countries to have completely abandoned 
capital punishment to 102.

Roseann Rife, East Asia Research Director at Amnesty International, described 
Mongolia's decision as "a great victory for human rights" and added: "Mongolia 
has set an example which we hope will quickly ripple across Asia.

"The countries that continue to execute have been shown a clear path to follow 
to end this cruel and inhumane punishment."

Worldwide, there are 37 countries which retain the death penalty in both law 
and practice, including the United States, Japan, Singapore, and Taiwan.

Earlier this year, Indonesia resumed executions amidst worldwide criticism, 
while Pakistan has executed at least 300 people since it lifted a moratorium on 
executions in December 2014.

There are 50 countries which retain capital punishment, but have not used it 
for at least 10 years or are under a moratorium, such as South Korea.

In Europe, only Belarus continues to execute people.

3 countries - Fiji, Madagascar and Suriname - abolished the death penalty this 
year.

The last execution in Mongolia was in 2008 and the death penalty remained 
classified as a state secret. Since then, the country has taken a series of 
steps towards abolition culminating in last week's parliamentary vote.

In 2010, the country's president, Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj, commuted all death 
sentences and announced a moratorium on all executions. In 2012, Mongolia 
ratified an international treaty committing the country to the abolition of the 
death penalty.

Elbegdorj has repeatedly said Mongolia must turn its back on the death penalty 
in order to fully respect the right to life.

He argued that the threat of executions does not have a deterrent effect and 
the risk of a miscarriage of justice is inherent in any system of justice.

Amnesty International says the death penalty is contrary to international law 
and standards.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations 
General Assembly in December 1948 in response to state brutality and terror 
witnessed during World War II, recognises each person's right to life and 
states that "no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or 
degrading treatment or punishment."

Amnesty International argues that the death penalty violates these rights.

(source: Global Government Forum)






SAUDI ARABIA:

Sri Lankan maid wins reprieve from death by stoning in Saudi Arabia----Saudi 
authorities have agreed to retry a Sri Lankan housemaid sentenced to death by 
stoning for adultery, her country's deputy foreign minister said on Tuesday.


Saudi authorities have agreed to retry a Sri Lankan housemaid sentenced to 
death by stoning for adultery, her country's deputy foreign minister said on 
Tuesday (Dec 8).

Harsha de Silva told parliament in Colombo the government had secured a fresh 
trial for the woman after Sri Lankan diplomats visited her in a Saudi jail over 
the weekend.

"Through our intervention, they (Saudi authorities) have agreed to reopen the 
case," de Silva told parliament.

"This can be considered a big victory. We will provide her with legal counsel," 
he added, without elaborating on the grounds for a retrial.

The woman, a 45-year-old married mother of 2 who has not been named, was 
convicted of adultery in August.

She was sentenced to death by stoning, while an unmarried Sri Lankan man 
convicted alongside her was sentenced to 100 lashes.

Sri Lankan lawmakers from all parties have united in urging the government to 
secure clemency for the woman and a pardon for the man.

Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera met the Saudi envoy to Colombo last week 
and expressed concern over the case, which has sparked calls for a ban on Sri 
Lankan women travelling to Saudi Arabia for domestic work.

There were similar calls in 2013 when Saudi Arabia beheaded a Sri Lankan woman 
convicted of killing a baby in her care in 2005, when she was 17 years old.

Sri Lanka's Muslim minority on Monday appealed to Saudi King Salman to 
intervene and pardon the couple.

Under the conservative kingdom's strict Islamic sharia legal code, murder, 
armed robbery, rape, adultery, drug trafficking and apostasy are all punishable 
by death.

(source: channelnewsasia.com)

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

Saudi Arabia considers appeal against stoning of Sri Lankan maid for adultery


Saudi authorities have agreed to consider an appeal against the sentence of 
death by stoning imposed on a 45-year-old Sri Lankan maid for adultery, Sri 
Lanka's deputy foreign minister said on Tuesday, welcoming the decision as a 
"big victory".

The married woman, who had been working as a domestic helper in Riyadh since 
2013, was convicted by a Saudi court in August. Her partner, also a Sri Lankan 
migrant worker, was given a lesser punishment of 100 lashes because he was 
single.

Sri Lankan Deputy Foreign Minister Harsha de Silva said Colombo had appealed to 
Riyadh's central appeal court, which had agreed to send the case back to the 
provincial court to reconsider the sentence.

"Through our intervention, they (Saudi Arabia) have agreed to reopen the case. 
This can be considered a big victory. We will provide her with legal counsel 
and bear all the costs for legal counsel," de Silva told parliament.

Officials from the Saudi embassy in Colombo were not immediately available to 
confirm that the sentence was being reconsidered. No date has been announced 
for the stoning.

Oil-producing Saudi Arabia follows sharia, Islamic law, and is often criticised 
by human rights groups for the wide range of crimes which carry the death 
penalty, including adultery, drug smuggling and witchcraft.

Saudi Arabia - currently chair of the United Nations Human Rights Council - has 
executed more than 150 people this year, mostly by public beheading, the 
largest number of executions in 20 years, rights group Amnesty International 
said last month.

In 2013, Riyadh beheaded a young Sri Lankan housemaid for killing an infant 
left in her care, rejecting repeated appeals by the Indian Ocean island against 
her death sentence.

The beheading prompted United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to express 
concern over the lack of justice for women in Saudi Arabia, and Colombo 
recalled its envoy from Riyadh in protest.

The current case has generated national debate and sparked protests in Sri 
Lanka, home to hundreds of thousands of men and women who migrate to the Middle 
East every year to take up jobs as maids or drivers.

Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera held an urgent meeting with Saudi 
diplomats last week to seek clemency for the woman as scores of Buddhist monks 
protested outside, calling for her to be freed.

Deputy Energy Minister Ajith P. Perera and other politicians have called on 
Colombo to stop women going to work in Saudi Arabia if the stoning goes ahead.

"I ask the government to ban sending house maids to Saudi Arabia if the stoning 
continued despite requests from the government," Perera said in parliament on 
Friday.

According to Central Bank data, 279,952 Sri Lankans went to work in Middle 
Eastern nations in 2014, generating over $7 billion in remittances, around 9 
percent of GDP.

(source: Reuters)

********

Media Release: Save Prisoner of Conscience from Death Penalty


On 17 November 2015, a Saudi court sentenced to death a Palestinian Refugee, 
Ashraf Fayadh (35), for alleged blasphemous statements during a discussion, 
which are also mentioned in his poetry. The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights 
(PCHR) calls upon you to participate in the global efforts to halt Fayadh's 
execution and to release him.

WireService.ca Media Release (12/07/2015) Gaza Strip - On 01 January 2014, 
Saudi authorities arrested Fayadh, who lives in Saudi Arabia since he was born. 
He was charged with, inter alia, insulting the "Divine Self" and the Prophet 
Muhammad; mocking and refuting the verses of God and the Prophet's; spreading 
atheism; and denying the Day of Resurrection, Fate and Divine Decree. The 
charges mainly depended on a complaint reported by someone to the police 
relevant to Fayadh's poetry published in 2008.

Fayadh denied the charges against him and called 3 witnesses to refute the 
testimony of the man who reported him to the religious police. The defense 
witnesses said that the man reported Fayadh following a personal dispute and 
that they had never heard blasphemous statements from Fayadh. Fayadh also 
stressed that his book of love poetry titled "Instructions Within" was 
published 8 years ago and never written to insult religion.

Fayadh emphasized that he was innocent and begged the court for mercy saying, 
"I am repentant to God Most Gracious and I am innocent of what was mentioned in 
my book in this case." However, the court convicted Fayadh and sentenced him to 
four years in prison and 800 lashes, on 26 May 2014.

The situation became worse when the prosecutor had appealed the ruling. As a 
result, the appeal court referred the case to the lower court but with a 
different judge. The new judge reversed the previous sentence and sentenced 
Fayadh to death for apostasy, on 17 November, 2015. The sentence must be 
approved by the Appeal Court and the Supreme Court to be applied.

Fayadh has not got the minimum guarantees of the fair trial. He was denied the 
right to access to his lawyer during interrogations. The court ignored the 
testimonies of the defense witnesses. Moreover, the convection itself goes 
against the minimum standards of human rights, especially the right to speech 
and freedom of conscience.

Five UN Special Rapporteurs in a joint statement issued on 03 December 2015 
urged the Government of Saudi Arabia to halt the execution of Fayadh. The 
Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Christof 
Heyns, highlighted that the execution verdict of Fayadh was issued "on basis 
seemingly unreliable evidence to the effect that he exercised his freedom of 
expression after an unfair trial. This has to be deplored as an arbitrary and 
thus unlawful execution".

The misery of Fayadh also has been moving some international, regional, and 
national NGOs to take actions to prevent his execution. Amnesty International 
launched a letter-writing campaign for calling the Saudi authorities to release 
Fayadh. Human Rights Watch and the Arab Organization for Human Rights addressed 
the issue as well. Therefore, a lot of efforts are needed from all of us to 
rescue Fayadh's life.

PCHR calls upon you to take urgent actions to pressurize the Saudi officials to 
release Fayadh. Taking an action now could save the life of an innocent man who 
is going to be beheaded in a savage manner. In addition, your action will be an 
important precedent against the death penalty in general and against 
persecution of freedom of conscience in particular.

Raji Sourani, Director of PCHR

(source: wireservice.ca)






BANGLADESH:

Verdict on Nizami appeal Jan 6


The Supreme Court today fixed January 6 for delivering verdict on the appeal 
filed by war criminal Motiur Rahman Nizami challenging his death penalty.

The four-bench of the Appellate Division headed by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar 
Sinha set the date after concluding hearing on the appeal.

During the hearing, Attorney General Mahbubey Alam prayed to the apex court to 
uphold the death penalty of Nizami saying the Jamaat-e-Islami chief instigated 
the Al-Badr, an auxiliary force of the occupation Pakistani army, to commit the 
crimes against humanity including killing the intellectuals in 1971.

Meanwhile, defence lawyer Khandker Mahbub Hossain, the principal counsel for 
Nizami, urged the court to acquit his client from all the 8 charges brought 
against the 75-year-old Jamaat leader.

He however prayed to the court to commute his death sentence to life 
imprisonment if the apex court finds him guilty of his wartime offence.

International Crimes Tribunal-1 on October 29 last year handed Nizami the death 
penalty on 4 charges of war crimes, including murdering intellectuals. He was 
awarded life imprisonment on 4 other charges.

On November 23 last year, Jamaat-e-Islami chief Nizami challenged the ICT-1 
verdict.

Nizami must be sentenced to death: AG

Talking to reporters following today's court hearing, the attorney general 
observed that people will be frustrated if Nizami is not sentenced to death for 
his crimes against humanity in 1971.

Mentioning that Nizami had written an article titled "Badr Dibosh" [Badr Day], 
the AG said in that article Nizami had encouraged the al-Badr force to kill 
pro-liberation people including the freedom fighters.

Mahbubey Alam also claimed that Nizami' lawyer Khandker Mahbub Hossain had 
admitted to be true the incidents of crimes against humanity during the 1971 
Liberation War.

Jamaat-e-Islami leaders Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed and Kamruzzaman, who were 
followers of Nizami, had already been sentenced to death and executed for their 
war crimes, the AG mentioned.

"So, Nizami must be sentenced to death for his war crimes," Mahbubey Alam said.

The AG expressed hopes that the Supreme Court will uphold Nizami's death 
penalty.

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

Of Pakistan's denials of war crimes and the world's silence


In an act of denial, Pakistan has alleged that no war crimes had been committed 
during the 1971 Liberation War of Bangladesh. The statement is a slur on the 
very foundation of our collective spirit. It is also a contradiction to 
Pakistan's judicial inquiry into the country's "political-military assessed 
involvement in East-Pakistan" (now Bangladesh), since the inquiry precisely 
mentioned the atrocities committed on innocent people of Bangladesh during the 
war.

More surprising is the fact that the organisations monitoring human rights 
across the world and the United Nations (UN) that had shown so much concern for 
the fairness of the ongoing war crimes trial in Bangladesh, preferred to keep 
mum on Pakistan's recent statement. Though Pakistan made pointless arguments 
demeaning the Liberation War before, the rights watchdogs were completely 
noncommittal about them, which is why Pakistan has found the gumption to come 
up with such outrageous statements once again.

Pakistan's denial of war crimes is the denial of one of the worst genocides 
that has ever taken place in the history of mankind. It's a mockery of the 
sacrifice of the 3 million people killed, 200,000 women raped, and nearly 30 
million people who were made homeless. They have turned a blind eye to the fact 
known to even a school going kid who can surf the internet to read articles on 
war crimes on Wikipedia. But neither Amnesty International nor Human Rights 
Watch and the UN have ever made a protest to refute such ridiculous statements 
issued by Pakistan.

When two notorious war criminals - Salauddin Quader Chowdhury and Ali Ahsan 
Mujaheed - were set to go to the gallows, Amnesty International issued a 
statement that said, "2 opposition leaders face imminent execution after 
serious flaws in their trials and appeals". Unfortunate as it may sound, the 
rights watchdog was vocal in its favour of Salauddin Quader Chowdhury who had 
given a false alibi by producing a forged certificate; he had also made 
statements vowing to take revenge against all those who were involved in the 
trial process. A public university vice-chancellor gave a horrifying account of 
how he had been tortured by Chowdhury and his father. On the other hand, 
Mujaheed is infamous for leading the systematic murders of intellectuals of the 
country during the war.

However, the recent statement issued by Pakistan that totally denies the war 
crimes drew no flak from Amnesty International. In another mockery of justice, 
Pakistan termed the said executions as 'unfortunate' and expressed anguish and 
deep concern. Echoing the same tone, Human Rights Watch, another international 
watchdog, asked that we stop the execution, alleging that the trial process was 
flawed. But the reality is that the incorporation of the provision for a review 
appeal made the tribunal fairer and more transparent than that of Nuremberg or 
many other such tribunals.

Though the rights body has shown surprising promptness in coming up with 
statements before and after any verdict issued by the International Crimes 
Tribunal, it has appeared to be quite indifferent to the objectionable 
statement made by Pakistan. This shows the obvious bias of the watchdog.

Immediately after the execution, we observed that the UN called for a 
moratorium on executions in the country. But this very organisation appears to 
be forgetful of the fact that Pakistan ranks 1st and the US 4th in terms of 
execution of the death penalty. Thus it appears that the international body 
prefers to remain silent regarding the execution of some criminals, while 
choosing to become vocal when it comes to mass murderers being sent to the 
gallows.

Before Quader Mollah, the war criminal popularly known as the 'butcher of 
Mirpur', was hanged, US secretary of State John Kerry forecasted that the 
execution might derail the national elections. Does it imply that the 
government should compromise on law on the grounds that those loyal to war 
criminals might create anarchy? But the US registered no protest against 
Pakistan's statement. Does the US want to justify their decision to send its 
seventh fleet to aid Pakistani occupational forces during the Liberation War of 
Bangladesh?

When an ISIL leader known as Jihadi John in Syria was reportedly killed, the 
BBC quoted a US Pentagon official saying that the world had become a bit safer. 
Following the execution of the death sentence of 2 convicted war criminals, 
can't we say that it was a giant step forward towards upholding the values of 
freedom and humanity?

We understand the position of international rights bodies against the death 
penalty. But why should they remain silent when Pakistan denies its army's role 
in committing war crimes? What about the human rights of those martyrs who were 
subjected to inhuman torture and mercilessly killed?

(soruce: Tonmoy Ahmed; The writer is working as Assistant Coordinator 
(Research) at the Centre For Research and Information (CRI). He is also the 
Assistant Secretary of Bangladesh Awami League (sub-committee).

(source for both: The Daily Star)






GLOBAL:

Death penalty in Islam


The classification of crimes in classical Islamic Law is a construct of Muslim 
jurists of medieval vintage. The jurists have distinguished criminal wrongs by 
reference to the punishment that may be prescribed, based on whether it is 
determined or fixed, or whether it is discretionary. Determined crimes are 
those for which penalties have been prescribed in the Quran or the Hadith of 
the Prophet. Where no such penalty is prescribed then it becomes a 
discretionary wrong.

Many Muslims I have spoken to are opposed to the death sentence imposed on the 
unnamed Sri Lankan housemaid in Saudi Arabia.

The death penalty, in my view, is not in consonance with the spirit of Islam. 
According to a Hadith in the compilation of Prophetic traditions known as the 
Mishkat al-Masabih, an adulteress was forgiven for quenching the thirst of a 
dog. The dog held out his tongue from thirst when she passed by a well. The 
woman drew off water using her boot, which she tied to the end of her garment, 
and gave the water she drew for him to drink. We are told that she was forgiven 
for that act of kindness.

Islam values the sanctity of life. Killing under the guise of punishment 
denigrates this cardinal principle. Islam does not condone either stoning to 
death or any other form of killing masquerading as punishment. The imposition 
of the death penalty in the name of Islam gives the religion of Islam a bad 
image. Islam was revealed to deliver mankind from ignorance and inhumane 
practices and as a mercy to mankind.

Compassion is an essential part of the message of the Quran. In the very 1st 
chapter of the Quran, God is described as the Compassionate and the Merciful. 
The Quran reminds mankind of creation in all its forms and declares it as an 
act of His mercy.

The death penalty is wrapped up in medieval notions about crime and punishment 
forming part of the fiqh, which is the legal part of the sharia, and refers to 
the body of principles derived by juristic interpretation from primary sources. 
On many themes, the sharia provides no more than general guidelines and they 
have been elaborated by jurists into a detailed body of laws.

The Quran is immutable but juristic opinions are not, and the latter may be 
reinterpreted to accord with contemporary thinking about crime and punishment. 
Even during the early centuries of Islam, Muslim jurists debated issues 
relating to the sharia, including on crime and punishment, as is evident from 
the differences in opinion that exist among them on various issues. For 
instance, there is a difference of opinion among them as to what constitutes 
intentional murder.

Criminal wrongs in Islamic law

The classification of crimes in classical Islamic Law is a construct of Muslim 
jurists of medieval vintage. The jurists have distinguished criminal wrongs by 
reference to the punishment that may be prescribed, based on whether it is 
determined or fixed, or whether it is discretionary. Determined crimes are 
those for which penalties have been prescribed in the Quran or the Hadith of 
the Prophet. Where no such penalty is prescribed then it becomes a 
discretionary wrong.

Jurists have also categorised criminal wrongs as qisas, hudood and ta???zir 
crimes. Qisas are retribution crimes committed against a person causing 
physical injury. The punishment for a qisas offence may be remitted either by 
the victim or his heir on payment of compensation or waived altogether. In 
effect, qisas crimes are virtually treated like private wrongs.

A hudud crime has been described as an offence for which a mandatory penalty is 
required to be imposed. Adultery and theft are hudood crimes, although they are 
not the only ones. In reality, though, hudud crimes require very strict proof 
which is virtually impossible to satisfy.

Adultery

Adultery is a hudud crime. Short of a confession, it would be impossible to 
prove adultery because it requires the testimony of at least four male Muslim 
eyewitnesses of unimpeachable character. They must testify that they saw the 
offence being committed at the same time.

A confession to adultery is required to be repeated at least on four separate 
occasions. A person convicted of a hudud crime such as adultery may withdraw 
her confession at any time before the application of the sentence, whereupon 
the penalty cannot be applied. Most schools of Islamic law do not permit a 
conviction for a hudud offence based on circumstantial evidence.

Stoning to death for adultery is not a punishment mandated in the Quran. It is 
mentioned in the Hadith of the Prophet which is one of the sources from which 
Islamic law is derived.

Is hudud a crime against God?

The term 'hudud Allah' is one that appears in the Quran in many places and is 
used to signify the limits of tolerable conduct, and to refer to moral 
guidelines which the Quran has prescribed as righteous conduct. However, it is 
not used in the Quran to signify punishment for crime. The juristic 
interpretation has transformed a concept that signified the limits of 
acceptable behaviour into a crime that is visited with a fixed penalty.

Conventional opinion is that, because a hudud crime is intended to protect the 
right of God, it is a crime against God, and only Allah can forgive the sinner. 
This is a debatable notion. God does not require the protection of man. The 
real objective of a hudud crime is to protect the public interest, and in the 
case of adultery, to prevent indecency in public and to protect public morals.

The same act may or may not be a hudud crime depending who witnessed it. 
Adultery witnessed by 4 women of unimpeachable character cannot be punished as 
a hudud crime. Likewise, adultery cannot be punished as a hudud crime if the 
eyewitnesses happen to be non-Muslims.

Theft is classified as a hudud crime and so is rebellion against legitimate 
authority. How do they become crimes against God?

The God of Islam is compassionate, loving, forgiving, and kind. The Quranic 
philosophy on crime and punishment does not have retribution as its sole 
objective. It also encompasses the idea of reformation, repentance and 
forgiveness. The Quran in many places calls upon the believers to repent and 
forgive. The juristic interpretation giving primacy to retribution seems to 
have foreclosed these further objectives.

In Sura An-Nisa, the verse in the Quran which is cited in support of death as 
the punishment for adultery, the Quran assures that Allah will accept the 
repentance of those who do evil in ignorance and repent soon afterwards

Qisas

In so far as the death penalty for qisas crimes is concerned, the verse in the 
Quran that is invoked in support does not, in fact, support the death penalty. 
It speaks of the principle of 'an eye for an eye' that was prescribed for the 
children of Israel. It is not prescribed for the Muslims. Indeed, the verse 
ends by saying that it did not prevent the continuation of killings and 
excesses being committed.

Islam does not condone the retributive philosophy of an eye for an eye. Muslims 
believe in the prophet-hood of both Moses and Jesus. The Law of Moses as laid 
down in the Torah prescribed stoning to death for adultery but Jesus came and 
revoked it. When the Pharisees brought a woman to Jesus and accused her of 
adultery, and asked Him if she should be stoned, Jesus replied, "If anyone of 
you is without sin, let him be the 1st to throw a stone at her." Jesus was no 
sinner but he refused to stone the woman to death. The Prophet of Islam did not 
revert back to the Law of Moses.

Sharia is not inflexible

The sharia is not an inflexible source of law. Caliph Omar, a companion of the 
Prophet, refused to enforce the Quranic injunction of amputation on a thief 
because the crime was committed when there was a famine. Mutilating punishments 
were hard, if ever, applied in the Ottoman Empire and 19th century Egypt. Many 
leading jurists have argued that the sharia ought to be adapted to accommodate 
social change and that it has the necessary tools to accomplish such change.

There are references in the Quran to slavery but no one will condone slavery in 
this day and age. Every Muslim is obliged to pray 5 times a day and perform 
ablution before prayer. How will a woman with an amputated arm perform her 
ablution, or change her infant child???s clothing?

Finally

The death penalty cannot be condoned as Islamic, or at all. It is contrary to 
present day notions of justice. The punishment regime of sharia must accord 
with current realities. It must be tempered with compassion and mercy.

(source: Reeza Hameed, Sri Lanka Guardian)