[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

Feb. 15



BANGLADESH:

War Crimes Trial Of Kamaruzzaman ---- Full SC verdict likely this week



The full text of the Supreme Court judgment upholding the death penalty for war 
criminal Muhammad Kamaruzzaman is likely to be released any day this week.

It will clear the way for the Jamaat assistant secretary general to seek a 
review of his capital punishment by the apex court.

All the four SC judges, who had delivered the verdict on November 3 last year 
by a majority decision, have recently completed writing their parts of the 
judgment, an SC source said.

The parts of the judgment will be compiled into a full verdict and then the 
judges will affix their signs on it for its release.

Talking to The Daily Star on Friday, Attorney General Mahbubey Alam said 
Kamaruzzaman has to file the review petition with the SC within 15 days after 
the release of the full judgment.

The Appellate Division of the SC might take a few days for hearing and 
disposing of the review petition, if filed by the convict, he added. The scope 
for reviewing judgments in criminal cases is very little, observed the attorney 
general.

If the SC does not review its judgment in the war crimes case, the convict can 
seek presidential mercy.

The International Crimes Tribunal-2 had handed capital punishment to the key 
organiser of the infamous Al-Badr Bahini for committing crimes against humanity 
during the Liberation War in 1971.

The SC upheld the death penalty to the 62-year-old for the mass killing at 
Sohagpur of Sherpur on July 25, 1971. All the 4 SC judges found him guilty of 
the charge, but the death sentence was upheld by a majority decision.

The Al-Badr was responsible for abduction, torture and killing of freedom 
fighters, intellectuals and pro-liberation people during the war.

A lawyer for Kamaruzzaman, Shishir Manir said they will meet their client at 
Dhaka Central Jail for necessary instructions after receiving the full judgment 
of the SC.

The decision on seeking presidential mercy will be taken if the review petition 
is rejected by the SC, he added.

Justice SK Sinha, now the chief justice, headed the four-member SC bench.

The other members were Justice Md Abdul Wahhab Miah, Justice Hasan Foez 
Siddique and Justice AHM Shamsuddin Choudhury Manik.

The apex court commuted Kamaruzzaman's death sentence to life term imprisonment 
for killing Golam Mostafa at Gridda Narayanpur village of Sherpur.

It also found the Jamaat-e-Islami leader guilty of 2 more charges relating to 
killing and torture, but acquitted him of another charge of killing.

The SC has so far completed the trials of 2 war crimes accused, while the 
trials of 7 others are pending with it.

(source: The Daily Star)








TURKEY:

Minister urges re-introduction of death sentence amid reactions to brutal 
killing of young woman



Turkey's Economy Minister Nihat Zeybekci posted a message urging for the 
re-adoption of the death sentence via his Twitter account on Sunday night, in 
the face of nation-wide protests against the brutal killing of 20-year-old 
Ozgecan Aslan, who was stabbed and burned in Mersin on Thursday.

Zeybekci wrote, "I wish God's mercy upon our child Ozgecan Aslan and express my 
condolences to her family. I hope God places our child in the most beautiful 
place in heaven. We need to carefully discuss and reinstate the death penalty 
for those murders such as that of Ozgecan Aslan."

The body of Aslan, who was studying psychology, was found near the village of 
Camalan, about 40 kilometers from the Tarsus district of Mersin province in 
southern Turkey. She was reportedly stabbed to death and her body was then 
burned.

The suspect, a 26-year-old minibus driver, was captured in Mersin in a joint 
operation of the police and gendarmerie forces late on Friday. 2 other 
suspects, the driver's father N.A., 50, and another man identified as F.G., 20, 
were detained on Friday in connection with the murder.

The incident has stirred demonstrations all over the country.

(source: Sunday's Zaman)








INDONESIA:

Ban Ki-moon makes plea to Indonesia over executions ---- UN 'opposes death 
penalty in all circumstances', says secretary general, while Tony Abbott says 
Indonesia should heed Australia???s appeals for clemency



Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary general, has joined calls for Indonesia to cancel 
the execution of 9 people, including the Australian citizens Andrew Chan and 
Myuran Sukumaran, for drug crimes.

The intervention came as Tony Abbott said "millions of Australians" were 
alarmed by the imminent fate of the pair. The prime minister called on 
Indonesia to be "responsive" to Australia's pleas to spare them.

Diplomats from Australia and other countries with citizens on Indonesia's death 
row have been summoned to a meeting in Jakarta on Monday to be told of official 
procedures for the executions. They would not be told of the date at the 
meeting, an Indonesian official said, but 72 hours' notice was under 
discussion.

Ban spoke with the Indonesian foreign minister, Retno Marsudi, on Thursday "to 
express his concern at the recent application of capital punishment in 
Indonesia", said UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric.

"The United Nations opposes the death penalty under all circumstances," 
Dujarric said. "The secretary general appeals to the Indonesian authorities 
that the executions of the remaining prisoners on death row for drug-related 
offences not be carried out."

Tony Abbott said on Saturday: "Millions of Australians are feeling very, very 
upset about what may soon happen to 2 Australians in Indonesia.

"My plea even at this late stage is for Indonesia to be as responsive to us as 
it expects other countries to be to them when they plead for the life of their 
citizens."

Chan, 31, and Sukumaran, 33, could be spending their last days in Kerobokan 
jail, where they have been for 10 years after their attempt to smuggle heroin 
out of Indonesia.

Authorities have given permission for them to be moved to the prison island 
Nusakambangan, on a date to be determined, for execution.

Senior figures from all sides of politics in Australia have repeatedly urged 
President Joko Widodo to spare the men.

Besides more than 55 ministerial and prime ministerial representations, 
Australian officials and members of the business community are understood to 
have made overtures to Indonesian contacts.

The foreign minister, Julie Bishop, said she had been flooded with letters 
concerning the executions and there was strong support at vigils for the men.

Bishop has warned that Australian tourism to Bali - a crucial source of income 
for the island - could be threatened if Indonesia goes ahead with the 
executions.

"I think the Australian people will demonstrate their deep disapproval of this 
action, including by making decisions about where they wish to holiday," she 
told Fairfax radio on Friday.

"Executing these 2 young men will not solve the drug scourge in Indonesia."

Joko has given a defiant vow not to succumb to outside pressure.

Lawyers for Chan and Sukumaran are challenging the president's blanket denial 
of clemency for all drug offenders sentenced to death.

The former Australian high court justice, Michael Kirby, said the heroin was 
being smuggled out of Indonesia, not into Indonesia.

"The important thing in this case this was not Indonesian drug dealing, it was 
Australian drug dealing, these were Australians who are getting on to an 
Australian plane to bring them back to Australia with Indonesian drugs," he 
said.

(source: The Guardian)

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

Bali 9 death sentence judges 'asked for bribes' for a lighter sentence: new 
claim



The 6 judges who handed down the death penalty to the Bali 9 pair on death row 
offered to give them a lighter sentence in exchange for money, the men's 
Indonesian legal team alleges.

The sensational allegation is contained in a letter sent by the legal team of 
Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran to Indonesia's judicial committee, claiming 
there had been a breach of ethics.

The letter says the judges received pressure from "certain parties" to hand out 
the death penalty.

The lawyers, led by human rights advocate Todung Mulya Lubis, told the judicial 
committee that all 6 judges who brought down the death sentence had breached 
ethics.

The new claim follows the shock intervention of the Bali 9's former legal 
counsel, Muhammad Rifan, last weekend, who said there had been an 
"intervention" that could discredit him but provided no details.

In an extraordinary statement after visiting the men inside Kerobokan prison, 
Mr Rifan said he was prepared to "take the heat" and provide the "never 
revealed evidence" to Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran's current lawyer, Mr 
Mulya.

"It's something that implicates us, it could discredit me. But for them I will 
take it. I told Myuran it's okay," Mr Rifan said cryptically. "It's 1 last 
thing I can do for them."

Following his dramatic, if imprecise, comments, Mr Rifan left Indonesia to 
travel to Mecca for a religious pilgrimage.

The lawyers, meanwhile, have also written to Indonesia's Attorney-General, H.M 
Prasetyo, requesting a stay of execution for Chan and Sukumaran, who are due to 
be executed this month.

They say their clients have an outstanding legal challenge in the 
administrative court and there is still a chance for their clients to have 
their sentence commuted.

The letter to the judicial committee is the 3rd appeal this year by the pair's 
lawyers.

A bid for a 2nd judicial review foundered after it was found it contained no 
new evidence.

A case lodged with the administrative court in Jakarta is pending, although Mr 
Prasetyo has already requested that it be dismissed.

Mr Prasetyo's conduct has raised questions about the independence of 
Indonesia's judiciary.

Chan and Sukumaran have been facing imminent execution for several weeks. On 
Monday, Australian embassy officials will attend a meeting in Jakarta with the 
Indonesian government to discuss the arrangements for the killing by firing 
squad. .

(source: Sydney Morning Herald)








AUSTRALIA:

Don't recall out our man in Jakarta; campaign to abolish death penalty



Australia's man in Jakarta needs to stay put, even should the firing squad 
execute Bali 9 pair Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan. This has nothing to do 
with maintaining a good relationship with Indonesia. Leaving the ambassador in 
Jakarta will best serve Australia's interests, so that each and every time he 
walks into an office in the city, he can remind Indonesians of Australia's 
utter dismay.

Those 2 words, "relationship" and "interests", are chosen deliberately. 
Australia has a relationship with Indonesia, which like any two neighbours, 
goes through ups and downs. But Australia has its own consistent and overriding 
interests in Indonesia, the welfare of citizens visiting the country first and 
foremost.

Interests are usually served by improving the relationship. But sometimes, 
standing up for interests means telling a neighbour they are plain wrong.

Does Australia have the right, given Indonesia is an independent nation 
entitled to make its own laws? Undoubtedly. The lines drawn on a map to mark 
one nation's sovereign jurisdiction as separate from another often prompts 
moral confusion, a belief these boundaries are absolute.

But as University of Melbourne philosopher Tony Coady explains, there is a huge 
difference between expressing a critical opinion and dropping bombs.

"Nothing should stand in the way of stating what you think about wrongdoing 
anywhere," Coady tells me. "Ways of expressing criticism need to be carefully 
weighed, so as not to show contempt or convey superiority. But people from 
different cultures must be able to criticise and learn from each other on 
fundamental issues or there will never be understanding or moral progress in 
either culture."

This doesn't mean Australia has the right to send SAS troopers to break 
Sukumaran and Chan out of prison. But respect for Indonesia's sovereignty does 
not shield the country from all criticism - having Julie Bishop write an 
opinion article in an Indonesian newspaper, for example, or finding sympathetic 
Indonesians to press the case for mercy.

There is another good reason for Australia's ambassador to remain in Jakarta. 
Uncomfortable though this might seem right now, the interest in the welfare of 
Australian citizens in Indonesia goes beyond the individual cases of Sukumaran 
and Chan. Much as their fate is most immediately desperate, there will be 
always be other Australians in Indonesia who need help.

The Netherlands and Brazil chose to recall their top envoys in protest last 
month after Indonesia put to death a citizen of each country. It is easy to 
imagine the Abbott government will be under enormous pressure to follow suit, 
should the worst come to pass for Sukumaran and Chan.

Indonesia has itself twice pulled its ambassador from Australia in the past 
decade; in 2006 after 42 West Papuans were granted refugee protection, and 2013 
when Edward Snowden's leaks gave a glimpse into Australia's usually secret spy 
operations in the region.

Yet by contrast, Australia has never made a habit of withdrawing its ambassador 
from other countries as a way of expressing diplomatic outrage. Foreign 
diplomats have been righteously booted from Canberra over the years, but rarely 
has Australia summoned its own back home.

Australia's representative to Fiji was recalled for "consultations" after the 
country's various coups, and the Keating government, under public pressure, 
pulled the ambassador out of Paris in 1995 when the French decided to test 
nuclear weapons in the South Pacific.

But after the 2005 hanging of Nguyen Tuong Van in Singapore, Australia's 
representative stayed put. Even during the toxic spat with Malaysia following 
the 1986 execution of Kevin Barlow and Brian Chambers - which Bob Hawke branded 
as "barbaric", much to the annoyance of Malaysia's prickly autocrat, Mahathir 
Mohamad - Australia preserved diplomatic ties.

The indignation expressed by recalling an ambassador, while understandable, is 
ultimately futile. It is gesture politics, nothing more. For what comes next? 
Eventually, the diplomats always return.

Better to recognise that moments of trouble are precisely the time a country 
most needs a representative in the foreign capital, to put forcibly a point of 
view. That is why Australia's ambassador is still in Indonesia, part of what 
the government assures is an extensive, behind-the-scenes campaign to spare the 
lives of Sukumaran and Chan.

Tony Abbott has admitted he is not optimistic. Indonesia's elite opinion has a 
discernible lack of sympathy about the death penalty, believing the rhetoric 
that a message needs to be sent to tackle scourge of drugs. President Joko 
Widodo is sounding ever more shrill in his nationalist pronouncements, not only 
about executing convicted drug smugglers, but is muscling up over fishermen 
from neighbouring Papua New Guinea.

Complicating Australia's pitch was the foolish opinion poll broadcast by ABC 
Triple J, a survey that better resembled a morbid computer game where players 
responded by SMS on their mobile phone to an abstract question about executing 
Australian drug smugglers in another country. Indonesia has seized on the 
results, believing Canberra will not be under much public pressure should the 
executions go ahead.

But opposition to the death penalty is one of those issues where leaders have 
usually been ahead of the majority. Attempting to persuade the Indonesian 
public that capital punishment is wrong is another job for Australia's 
ambassador in Jakarta.

A good portion of Australia's aid budget should now be directed to an all-out, 
well-funded international campaign against the death penalty. This should be 
directed to Indonesia, but not solely. Australia's ambassador in Washington 
should tell the US government capital punishment is cruel and unjustified. So 
should Australia's envoys to Beijing, Riyadh, Islamabad, Kuala Lumpur, and any 
other country where the death penalty is imposed.

The job for diplomats is give Australia a voice in the world. Australia's 
interest will not be served by silence.

(source: Commentary, Daniel Flitton--Brisbane Times)








IRAN----executions

2 Baloch prisoners hanged



2 prisoners were hanged in the main prison in the southeastern city on 
Saturday, according to reports received from Iran.

The 2 Balochi men, identified as Hamed Kahrazhi, 28 and Mobasher 
Mir-Balochzehi, had spent 4 years in prison.

They had been sentenced to death for 'Moharebe' or enmity with God.

Meanwhile a group of 6 prisoners held in the main prison in the northeastern 
city of Uromiyeh were transferred on Saturday to solitary confinement to await 
their execution.

The 6, whose execution is expected to be carried out on Monday, were arrested 
on drug related charges.

Another group of 3 prisoners, including a women, held in Shahab prison in the 
city of Kerman, have also been sentenced to death for drug related offences. 
They were transferred to isolation on Saturday to await their execution.

More than 1,200 prisoners have been executed in Iran since Hassan Rouhani 
became president in July 2013.

******

British author Rushdie's death sentence stands, Iranian cleric says



The death sentence issued in 1989 by Khomeini against British author Salman 
Rushdie remains in force and only Ali Khamenei, the regime's Supreme Leader can 
rescind it, a senior cleric has declared.

Mohsen Gharavian said: "Salman Rushdie is a mercenary of the world arrogance 
... Years has passed since Khomeini made the ruling but the decree continues to 
remain live and valid and no one except the person in the position of Velayat-e 
faqih can rescind it."

The death verdict against Salman Rushdie was issued by the Iranian regime's 
founder, Khomeini, for writing a novel.

Cleric Mohsen Gharavian made the remarks in the city of Qum on the anniversary 
of the death verdict, state-run news agency ISNA reported.

In December 1990, 2 days after Rushdie renounced his novel, Ali Khamenei, the 
then and current Supreme Leader of the regime issued a statement describing 
Rushdie as an apostate.

Ali Khamenei said that Khomeini ruled before his death that the edict against 
Rushdie would remain in place even if the author repented and that Khomeini's 
order therefore still stands.

(source for both: NCR-Iran)

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

Execution of Juvenile Offender is Imminent



The family of a juvenile offender on death row has been informed that he will 
be executed on February 19, 2015. Saman Naseem, 20, was 17 years old when he 
was arrested and later put on trial on charges of moharebeh (enmity with God) 
for membership in the PJAK (Party for Free Life of Kurdistan), an armed Kurdish 
opposition group.

A member of Naseem's family told the International Campaign for Human Rights in 
Iran that Naseem's lawyer told the family they should visit him for the last 
time before his execution. In the face of his imminent execution, the family is 
reaching out to international human rights organizations to appeal for his 
life.

Following a July 17, 2011 armed confrontation with PJAK forces on the Sardasht 
border region in Kurdistan, IRGC forces arrested the 17-year-old Marivan 
resident Saman Naseem (born September 1994). Naseem was kept inside the IRGC 
Intelligence Unit's solitary cells in Orumiyeh for 2 months, where he was 
interrogated and tortured. He was later transferred to Mahabad Prison in West 
Azerbaijan Province.

After the Mahabad Revolutionary Court sentenced Naseem to death on charges of 
moharebeh, his sentence was upheld by the West Azerbaijan Province Appeals 
Court, and confirmed by Branch 32 of the Supreme Court in December 2013.

Saman Naseem's family member told the Campaign that Naseem was severely 
tortured during his interrogations. "When his family went to visit him in 
prison for the 1st time, they observed that his finger and toe nails had been 
pulled [out]. IRGC agents told Saman and his family that if they agreed to 
provide confessions in front of a television camera, he would be released. 
However, after Saman his mother and his brother provided the television 
interviews and the program was aired and his court was convened, he was not 
released," said the source. Naseem's family member emphasized that he was 17 at 
the time of arrest, and that he should not have been sentenced to execution as 
a juvenile.

(source: Iran Human Rights)