[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

Feb. 10



SAUDI ARABIA:

Saudi Arabia executions 'extraordinarily high' as state executes 28 people in 5 
weeks ---- The Syrian man was found guilty of smuggling amphetamines



Saudi Arabia has reportedly executed a Syrian man on the same day Prince 
Charles arrived in the Kingdom amid calls from campaigners to raise human 
rights concerns.

The Saudi Press Agency said Abdullah Mohammed al-Ahmed was executed Tuesday in 
the northwestern al-Jawf province after the Supreme Court confirmed his 
conviction and sentence for smuggling amphetamines into the country.

It does not say how he was executed, according to the although methods used in 
the Kingdom include beheading and firing squad. His death marks the 28th 
execution in 2015 alone, according to Human Rights Watch (HRW).

Prince Charles has a good relationship with the Saudi royal family and has been 
under pressure to use his trip to raise the case of Saudi blogger Raif Badawi, 
who was sentenced to 1,000 lashes and 10 years in prison.

Amnesty International had expressed hope that Charles would use his unique 
position to "pass on a few well-chosen words" to King Salman bin Abdul-Aziz Al 
Saud and his royal hosts.

But this latest execution casts doubts as to how willing the Kingdom might be 
to listen to fears over human rights abuses. King Salman oversaw his 1st 
beheading just 5 days after succeeding his late brother King Abdullah.

The kingdom follows a strict interpretation of Islamic law and applies the 
death penalty on crimes such as murder, rape, apostasy and witchcraft. Rights 
groups have criticised executions carried out for non-lethal crimes.

He told The Independent that out of the 28 executions which occurred in January 
and February 2015, 11 were for non-violent drug offences - an "extraordinarily 
high" figure he condemned as "particularly egregious".

"Between 1 January and 4 August 2014, only 15 executions took place. They 
finished the year on 87, and that pace has continued," he said. "If they keep 
on this pace it will be a record in the context of the past 2 years."

Salman became King of Saudi Arabia last month following the death of King 
Abdullah Salman became King of Saudi Arabia last month following the death of 
King Abdullah Mr Coogle says he is unsure what is behind the surge in 
executions. "It could be that they are trying to appear as though they are 
tough on crime and willing to deliver 'justice', but I don't know. I haven???t 
seen any official comments on this jump.

"The major point is that although executions are not prohibited under 
international human rights law, they are strongly discouraged and they should 
be reserved only for only the most serious crimes.

"It's been made clear under international human rights law that people should 
not be killed for non-violent drug laws. Saudi Arabia, a member of the Human 
Rights Council, is clearly flouting this."

(source: The Independent)








INDONESIA:

Bali 9: Indonesia's attorney-general dismisses challenge against president's 
refusal to grant pardon



Indonesia effectively rules out any chance of two Australians being able to 
save themselves from facing the firing squad for drug trafficking.

Indonesia has effectively ruled out any chance of 2 Australians being able to 
save themselves from facing a firing squad, despite lawyers for the men 
launching a last-ditch legal appeal.

Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran have been on death row since 2006 for 
organising to smuggle heroin out of Bali with 7 other Australians.

Lawyers for the men said they were planning to lodge an administrative appeal 
against Indonesian president Joko Widodo's refusal to grant them pardons.

They said the president should have considered each case and not just refused 
clemency for all drug crimes, as he is doing.

But Indonesian attorney-general Muhammad Prasetyo has dismissed the attempt at 
another legal challenge, saying it is not possible to challenge the president.

"Clemency is a prerogative right that cannot be obstructed by anybody, can not 
be challenged by anybody. It's a prerogative right," Mr Prasetyo said.

"The president has that prerogative right as the head of state and nothing can 
obstruct that.

"In this republic he's the sole holder of that right. Clemency, amnesty, 
abolition, rehabilitation, as the constitution stipulates. Only the president 
has the authority.

"The legal process is completed. The legal venues that we have are through the 
court procedures, higher court appeal, Supreme Court appeal, judicial review 
and the last venue is clemency. Clemency is a special legal venue."

More than 100 Australian MPs have signed a petition urging the Indonesian 
government to show mercy to the 2 Australians.

But all efforts to influence Mr Widodo have so far failed, including emotional 
pleas from Chan and Sukumaran's families, and Prime Minister Tony Abbott asking 
if there was anything that could be done to spare the men.

We have to respect Indonesia's sovereignty: Bishop

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop was asked about the case on commercial television 
last night.

"The fact is, drug trafficking is a crime in Indonesia that attracts the death 
penalty and we have to respect Indonesia's sovereignty, it's an independent 
nation state with its own judicial system," Ms Bishop said.

On Monday, Sukumaran's mother Raji said she blamed the Australian Federal 
Police for her son facing now death.

It was the AFP that tipped off Indonesian police about the Bali 9's plans, 
meaning the men were arrested there and charged under Indonesian law.

Mr Prasetyo has now confirmed the executions will be done, as expected, at a 
maximum security prison facility on Nusa Kambangan, an island off Java. But 
there is still no word on when the executions will be carried out.

"I'm telling you, we haven't decided on the time, we have decided the location. 
The location will be in Nusa Kambangan," he said.

Nusa Kambangan is a high security island prison, where the men would be tied to 
a pole and shot by firing squad.

Earlier there was confusion within the Indonesian government over whether the 
executions would be delayed.

While Indonesia informed the Australian embassy last week that it planned to 
execute Chan and Sukumaran this month, Indonesia's justice and human rights 
minister Yasonna Laoly said their executions could be delayed by a pressing 
political situation, involving a war of sorts between corruption investigators 
and the national police.

But Mr Prasetyo said that would not affect plans to execute the Australians.

A senior government source doubts the executions will be carried out this week 
or next, but it is up to the attorney-general.

Once the logistics are organised Mr Prasetyo only has to give 72 hours notice 
that the men are to face the firing squad.

(soure: The Independent)








KENYA:

Justice Is Served As 3 Men Are Sentenced To Death For Murdering MP



3 men were sentenced to death while 1 woman escaped death due to lack of 
evidence linking her to the murder of an MP.

The 3 were sentenced for the January 2008 assassination of former Embakasi MP 
Melitus Mugabe Were. Melitus who was dubbed a peacemaker met his untimely death 
after he was dragged out of his car and shot as he prepared to go into his 
compund.

He was said to be more reasonable when compared to other leaders during the 
height of post-election violence and offered the voice of reason to his 
followers, discouraging violence.

His family can now rest easy knowing that justice has been served after a judge 
sentenced James Omondi, Wycliffe Simiyu and Paul Otieno to death for the murder 
of Melitus.

This is a landmark ruling since although the death penalty is constitutional, 
no executions have been reported.

(source: ghafla.co.ke)








SRI LANKA:

Bali 9, Capital Punishment and Sri Lanka's Policy Ambiguities



As Australia is stunned and saddened by Indonesia's adamant decision to go 
ahead with the execution of 2 young Australian convicts of drug trafficking, 
Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, without listening to many appeals, it is 
shocking to hear from the new Minister of Justice in Sri Lanka, Wijedasa 
Rajapaksa, whom I considered in high esteem as a rational person before, that 
Sri Lanka would reinstate capital punishment (if necessary) to curb crime in 
the country.

In the latter case, even I wondered whether there is anything intrinsically 
wrong with the name Rajapaksa!

The 2 parallels remind us how inhuman or cruel our public policies still are 
irrespective of the progress that we humans have achieved in science and 
technology. Of course drug trafficking, murder, rape and child abuse are all 
reprehensible and indications of the same ailments in society and in the 
systems of governance. It is also an established fact that most of those who 
indulge in crime and violence are those who are closer to or part of the power 
structures in society whether in developing or developed countries. Sri Lanka 
is a good example.

There is no denial that the questions of crime are complicated and endemic in 
countries like Indonesia or Sri Lanka compared to a country like Australia. The 
scales are different. Sri Lanka's population is more or less the same as 
Australia's for its smaller size and Indonesia's is more than 12 times higher. 
However, that does not preclude us to device common policies on how to tackle 
crime or how to punish them. Our knowledge of 'Homo sapiens' and their natural 
conditions or why people are motivated for violence or crime are more or less 
the same, although that knowledge is not complete or perfect.

However, capital punishment is not a clear deterrent for crime or homicide. 
There are of course dangerous criminals who could be a further danger to the 
society. They should be kept in imprisonment. The life imprisonment is the best 
device that the world has invented in protecting society and punishing major 
crimes. What constitutes major crimes can also be in dispute. Be as it may, the 
capital punishment or killing for killing or for any other crime cannot be 
condoned.

Andrew and Myuran

I have been repeatedly seeing for the last couple of months or even before on 
Australian TV, the pictures of Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, who were 
pushed and jolted by the prison guards whenever they were being taken in or out 
of courts for their trials or appeals. These are shown by the journalists who 
of course want to create sympathy for their predicament as they are in line for 
execution. That is one advantage that we have today through media and the 
newest technology in knowing what is happening throughout the world in order 
that we can make up our concerned opinions or make our protests known.

No one says they are innocent and even they have not said so. The following is 
a statement or an apology made by Myuran on their predicament.

"I acknowledge more than anyone that I've made mistakes and that I'm not a 
perfect person, but I've learned a lot in prison and I am grateful to the 
Indonesian justice system and to the prison guards for allowing me to achieve 
all that I have for myself and for the other prisoners."

"Fellow Bali 9 member Andrew Chan and I are not the same people we were 10 
years ago, but who is really? We did commit a serious crime and deserve 
punishment, but we have also paid a great deal for our crimes, as have our 
families. Please allow us to stay in prison and live."

The story unfolded 10 years ago when a group of 9 young Australians aged 
between 18 and 28 in April 2005 were arrested in Bali for planning to smuggle 
8.3 kg of heroin worth around A$ 4 million from Indonesia to Australia. Hence 
it was called Bali 9. After several rounds of trial, all others were sentenced 
for life imprisonment but all appeals and clemency pleas have gone unheard for 
Chan and Sukumaran for one reason or the other. They are supposed to be put on 
death by firing by the end of this month.

The crucial question however is whether their killing is really necessary? 
Can't they have any mercy? Capital punishment on them is absolutely cruel and 
barbaric. They can really be rehabilitated.

Wijedasa Statement

It is in this context that Sri Lanka's new Justice Minister's statement in 
Kandy on 3rd February, at a press conference, is worrying who said that "the 
government would not hesitate to consider the implementation of the death 
penalty, if the crime rate keeps rising." There is no doubt that the crime rate 
is rising. There is no doubt that the curtailment of the crime rate is also not 
easy. However, the solution is not capital punishment whether it is murder, 
rape drug trafficking or child abuse.

It is not that Sri Lanka is at present free from capital punishment and the 
right to life is absolutely respected according to the Universal Declaration or 
the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and 
Political Rights (ICCPR). Sri Lanka is one country which has not implement the 
capital punishment since 1976. However, the number of people who are on the 
death row have been increasing as a reflection of the rising crime rate for 
other reasons. It is reported that there are over 900 convicts in prisons who 
are sentenced to death, and around 500 of them have appealed their cases. 
However, the other 400 are waiting until their sentences are (though capital 
punishment) commuted for life imprisonment or even without knowing their future 
fate at all. This is in itself is inhuman. As the local saying goes, 'it is 
like killing without killing' (nomera maranewa wage).

It is true that non implementation of the capital punishment or the abolition 
of the capital punishment in itself is not satisfactory. If necessary measures 
are not taken to prevent, control and reduce crime, then the crime rate would 
naturally increase. What is truer is that capital punishment is not a remedy 
for crime.

Some Remedies

What have been lacking since the non-implementation of the death penalty, or 
even otherwise, in Sri Lanka are the preventive measures such as the systematic 
policing, stronger civil-police relations and proper 'human rights and civic 
education' for both the police and the civilians, beginning with school 
children.

The prevention of crime should begin at the top level, to be an example for the 
ordinary people. When the leaders of the country at the highest body of the 
legislature or Parliament speak and behave like criminals, it would be 
difficult to prevent crime in the country. Many provincial council leaders or 
local government politicians are worse. Most despicable and harmful are the 
interference of politicians in police affairs and their protection of criminals 
on partisan basis, whether they are in the government side or the opposition.

The deterioration of rule of law has been a primary reason for the increase of 
crime rate. The rule of law should be implemented not only in civil affairs but 
also in commercial and business affairs. With the expansion of commercial 
activities, there has emerged quite a substantial sector of illicit trade and 
commercial activities to earn quick money with the patronage of politicians of 
all sides. Without stopping those activities and connected legal loopholes the 
rise of crime rate might not be curtailed.

Equally responsible is the deterioration of professional standards and 
independence of the judiciary. Without a strong, well trained and an impartial 
judiciary, crime cannot be curtailed in any country. The delay of court cases 
and lack of free or reasonable legal assistance have led to many miscarriages 
of justice. In such instances, people have taken justice into their own hands, 
becoming criminals or perpetrators themselves. Land disputes have led to many 
civilian conflicts and criminal actions.

If people are empowered of their due human rights, they themselves can become a 
deterrent to crime. They can resist and bring crime to the notice of the 
authorities speedily. Unfortunately, ordinary citizens are scared to assert 
this deterrent role because many politicians and police authorities are behind 
some of the criminals and criminal gangs. The role of the media is also 
important not for sensational reporting of crime stories for sale but to bring 
criminals and criminal networks to the notice of the authorities. But 
unfortunately this is not the case at present.

Erratic History

The recent history of the capital punishment has been quite erratic in Sri 
Lanka. Prime Minister S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike abolished the capital punishment in 
1956 in good faith and then he was assassinated in 1959. That does not mean 
that he would have been saved if the capital punishment was not abolished. 
Thereafter his immediate successors reintroduced it retrospectively and the 
assassin was hanged for the crime.

Since June 1976 no one has been executed under the capital punishment, but 
there has been a spate of extrajudicial killings and assassinations for various 
political reasons and as a result of violent political upheavals. During 1990s, 
several times the then President Chandrika Kumaratunga wanted to implement the 
capital punishment again but both internal and external pressure prevented it. 
In 2004, even the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL), the foremost lawyers 
association, wanted to implement the capital punishment without restrictions, 
after a High Court Judge was gunned down.

All these were instances of spontaneous or kneejerk reactions without mindful 
of required policies and principles to address the issues of crime or 
punishment. If one traces the ancient history, there had been times that the 
country was free from capital punishment. Among the kings who abolished or 
suspended the death penalty was King Voharika Tissa of the Third Century who 
was reported to be a humanist. This shows that while there had been periods of 
cruel and inhuman punishments, as Robert Knox had recorded, there were also 
periods of enlightenment and sophistication. In the case of the latter, the 
principles undoubtedly were derived from Buddhist and Hindu humanitarianism. No 
one can perhaps go to the extent of King Siri Sangabodhi who even sacrificed 
his own head to save others. However, there is a need for humanism and human 
rights in criminal justice administration, particularly today, where there are 
highly developed international norms and principles that Sri Lanka should 
follow.

Conclusion

There are contradictions in the statements of the new government on the subject 
of capital punishment. Otherwise, Sri Lanka is one country which could easily 
abolish capital punishment as the sentences have never been implemented since 
1976. It is only 1 step forward. Reportedly, the Prime Minister has given an 
assurance to the human rights community promising to accede to the Second 
Optional Protocol to the ICCPR. This optional protocol is not just another 
human rights declaration, but a binding agreement to abolish the capital 
punishment.

On the other hand, the statements made by the Minister of Justice that the 
government would not hesitate to implement the death penalty, if the crime rate 
keeps rising, is not only contradicts Prime Minister's statements but also go 
against the expectations of the human rights community within and outside the 
country about the new administration.

The issue of capital punishment is not merely a Sri Lankan matter but an 
international one. The threatened lives of Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran in 
Indonesian jail show the barbarity and cruelty of the capital punishment. 
Although there haven't been such dramatic cases in Sri Lanka like in Indonesia 
in the recent times, if capital punishment is implemented again, then nearly 
400 people's lives might be in danger whose sentences are not yet commuted. It 
is also possible that since the capital punishment has not been implemented for 
a long period, that the judges were quite liberal in 'sentencing people to 
death' instead of life imprisonment directly. If that is the case, there can be 
a major miscarriage of justice, if the 'threat' of the Minister of Justice 
materializes in implementing the capital punishment.

(source: Laksiri Fernando, Sri Lanka Guardian)