[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

Jan. 5



PAKSITAN:

4 Criminals Of Death Penalty Set Free By Rawalpindi Court



4 criminals of death sentence who were arrested in charge of suicide attack in 
Rawalpindi in 2002 have been set free by Rawalpindi High court, PakistanTribe 
received media reports.

Rawalpindi high court has set free 4 criminals who were to be hanged in charge 
of suicide attack on Imam Bargah Shah Najaf in 2002. Court set them free for 
not finding strong evidences of their involvement in the attack.

Justice Ibad ur Rehman Lodhi and Justice Qazi Muhammad Hanif were leading the 
bench in hearing the case.

The criminals Fazal, Tahir, Hafiz Naee, and Habibullah were given death 
sentence by anti terrorist court.

It is pertinent to mention that Lahore high court has also took strict notice 
against superintendent jail Faisalabad for taking the death warrants of 
Criminal Faiz from court as his case was still under hearing in supreme court.

High court also asked superintendent Jail Faisalabad to give a written note to 
court that these prisoners will not be hanged before any decision form Supreme 
court.

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

EU Has No Concern On Death Penalty Moratorium In Pakistan; EU Spokesman



European Union (EU) spokesman said that EU has no concern on death rejection of 
penalty moratorium in Pakistan as it is the internal security need of Pakistan.

PakistanTribe received a media report that European Union spokesman denied the 
news about the moratorium request on capital punishment on death penalty in 
Pakistan. EU has no objection as it is the internal issue of Pakistan and it is 
need of time as it is the critical stage for Pakistan in security point of 
view.

Earlier Nawaz Government had put a ban on executions of over 8000 criminals 
waiting to be hanged.

It is worth mentioning that 2 weeks ago international media reported about EU 
that they are not in favor of capital punishment in Pakistan. European Union 
demanded Pakistan for restoration of moratorium on death penalty as it is 
violation of Human Rights to hang.

Criticizing on the recent governmental policies of Pakistan the EU envoy to 
Pakistan Lars-Gunnar Wigemark had said "We believe that the death penalty is 
not an effective tool in the fight against terrorism." He regretted about the 
hanged ones that Pakistan should not have hanged the the prisoners.

The same day stance of White House televised and US State Department 
spokesperson Marie Harf said that the lifting of the moratorium on the death 
penalty in Pakistan was the country's internal issue.

Talking to media Harf said "Well, clearly this is an issue for Pakistan - a 
decision for Pakistan, excuse me. It's not really ours to weigh in on."

She added that terrorism is a common threat for Pakistan and the US. She said 
that "More Pakistanis are victims of counter terrorism, I think, than anywhere 
in the world. So clearly it's a shared threat, but when we have concerns like 
this we'll raise them."

It is also pertinent to mention that Genral Secretery United Nations (UN) had 
also talked telephonic about the amnesty on death penalty prisoners which was 
refused by PM Pakistan.

(source for both: Pakistan Tribune)








INDONESIA:

Govt under fire for limiting case reviews



Legal experts have lambasted President Joko "Jokowi" Widodo's administration 
for backing a Supreme Court's letter that places limits on criminal convicts 
filing case reviews, a move deemed a violation of citizens' rights to seek 
justice in a legal case.

The Supreme Court letter, which grants only one chance for convicts to file a 
case review, opposes an earlier ruling by the Constitutional Court that allowed 
citizens to file multiple reviews should they produce enough evidence to 
challenge their verdict.

The Constitutional Court scrapped Article 268, Point 3 of the Criminal Law 
Procedures Code (KUHAP) following a request from former Corruption Eradication 
Commission (KPK) chief Antasari Azhar, who was convicted in a high-profile 
murder case.

The article limited the number of case review petitions for convicts to one. 
Muzakkir, a legal expert from the Indonesian Islamic University in Yogyakarta, 
lambasted Coordinating Political, Legal and Security Affairs Minister Tedjo 
Edhy Purdijatno - who had earlier voiced support for the Supreme Court's 
decision - for saying that multiple chances for case reviews could bring "legal 
uncertainty" to law enforcement institutions in executing verdicts ruled by 
judges in court.

Muzakkir said on Sunday that criminal verdicts were subject to potential 
errors, thus case reviews were the best tool for clarification should judges 
make mistakes in their verdicts.

"An amendment to the KUHAP grants rights for law enforcement institutions to 
execute court orders in criminal cases," he said.

He further said that Tedjo apparently spoke without a legal basis when claiming 
that convicts on death row made use of their case review rights to postpone the 
execution of their death sentences.

"Unlike other verdicts, the execution of death penalties cannot be clarified. 
What else is there to clarify after the execution is conducted? Thus, the 
execution of convicts on death row should wait until case reviews have 
confirmed their guilt or innocence," Muzakkir said.

On Saturday, Tedjo said death penalty convicts used their multiple case review 
rights as a "legal excuse" to avoid execution.

"When they hear they are soon to be executed, they suddenly file case review 
proposals [to the Supreme Court] to delay matters. When will the execution take 
place if such a condition recurs? There should be legal certainty [for law 
enforcement institutions] to execute death penalty convicts," Tedjo 
said.Muzakkir said there was no reason for law enforcement institutions such as 
the Attorney General's Office (AGO) to postpone court orders for death penalty.

"If a death penalty convict files another case review, then the AGO should 
quickly study his or her proposal. If the proposal is supported by enough 
evidence, process the case review, but if not then his or execution must 
proceed. This is about how fast the AGO can move in such a scenario," Muzakkir 
said.A legal expert from Gadjah Mada University, Zainal Arifin, concurred with 
Muzakkir, saying that to avoid death penalty convicts using case review chances 
to delay execution, the government must establish a new regulation to explain 
under what conditions convicts could challenge their verdicts for a 2nd or 3rd 
time.

"The specific regulation then will become a guide for executions," Zainal said 
on Sunday.Last week, Attorney General HM Prasetyo also supported the Supreme 
Court's decision to limit the number of case reviews for convicts.

"It is already a good step, but it is not enough," he said.

(source: Jakarta Post)

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

Time to speak up for Australians on Indonesia's death row



In Indonesia, 2 Australian men stand to be shot to death by firing squad. They 
are among as many as 64 convicted drug smugglers in the country facing 
execution and new president Joko Widodo has pledged never to grant a pardon. 
Australians should be appalled.

Australians should equally condemn the law in Malaysia that would hang a 
51-year-old Sydney grandmother by a rope until dead. She is accused of 
attempting to carry 1.5 kilograms of the drug ice through Kuala Lumpur airport 
last month.

And Australians should tell Pakistan, without equivocation, that even the 
hideous slaughter of 132 children by local Taliban in a Peshawar school a few 
weeks ago does not justify a return of the death penalty, where 500 convicts 
convicted of "terrorism" may go to the gallows.

That's the thing about a matter of principle; a wrong is a wrong even if done 
to a person without principle, and capital punishment is wrong. Institutions 
are fallible, and with the death penalty, mistakes cannot be undone.

Whether in Saudi Arabia for the crime of sorcery or the US for bombing the 
Boston marathon, Australia should always oppose this punishment.

But the argument becomes much weaker when applied selectively, with a judgement 
dependent on someone's nationality. The problem for Australia in the diplomatic 
appeal to Indonesia to spare the life of Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan - 2 
of the Bali 9 condemned to death - is successive governments have not been 
consistent making the case against the death penalty.

John Howard acknowledged he could be accused of a "double standard" when 
Indonesia executed the terrorists who orchestrated the 2002 Bali bombings. "I 
cannot find it in my heart to publicly ask the Indonesian government to spare 
the lives of the people who murdered 88 Australians," Howard admitted when the 
bombers went before the firing squad - a position echoed by his then Labor 
opponent, Simon Crean.

"The fact is the crime was committed on Indonesian soil," Crean argued, "and 
the Indonesian courts have handed down the death penalty. I won't be seeking to 
interfere in that decision."

One Labor backbencher warned at the time such words would would be "thrown back 
in our faces" when an Australian wound up on death row. To plead for clemency 
for Australians while being indifferent to the plight of non-citizens is at 
best hypocrisy.

Sure enough, all the moral pressure Australia could mount on Singapore in 2005 
did not spare the life of Nguyen Tuong Van. A local hangman delivered a 
grotesque warning beforehand, that the condemned could "struggle like chickens" 
without the proper technique.

Joko has not been as cruel with words, but he has branded the death penalty as 
"shock therapy" for would-be drug traffickers. He had cleared the way to 
execute 5 prisoners on death row before New Year, but quietly allowed that 
deadline to pass with the eyes of the world on the AirAsia plane crash. Another 
20 are apparently set to die this year.

Sukumaran and Chan have exhausted all appeals, and the arbitrary timing of 
their execution - this month, this year, or the next, with 72 hours all that is 
formally required by way of notice - is symptomatic of the cruel torture 
inherent to this system.

It is possible the legal wrangling will go on, the search for last-minute 
technicalities in a bid to win a reprieve. But this only highlights the 
problems of Indonesia's judicial system. Locals sometimes complain about the 
"mafia peradilan", or the justice mafia. As the Jakarta-based Human Rights 
Watch campaigner Andreas Harsono told me, bribery and corruption is rampant in 
the judiciary, from the district courts to the Supreme Court, involving police 
officers, prosecutors, lawyers, and judges.

"It also goes down to the prison where one should pay to be in certain cells 
... [a] private cell, air conditioned one, to have laptop, to have cell phone," 
Harsono explains. "It's just an irony to have death sentences in a place where 
you cannot trust the judiciary."

There are sensitives whenever a country attempts to influence another, cultural 
and jurisdictional. The prevailing wisdom of officialdom and some country 
specialists is that quiet advocacy on behalf of Sukumaran and Chan is best, 
that resorts to "megaphone diplomacy" will only drive Indonesia to assert its 
sovereign right to make laws.

But the softly-softly approach achieved nothing with Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, 
the clemency appeals left untouched on the former president's desk.

It is time to speak plainly. Australia risks being seen as apathetic about 
capital punishment in Indonesia unless it vigorously campaigns against it. If 
this is seen to be interfering, so be it, because the death penalty is wrong, 
for the condemned Australians or anyone else.

Some Indonesians would undoubtedly resent Australia's advocacy. But many 
Indonesians will equally be appalled at the practice of the death penalty. In a 
country where social media campaigns and politics are fiercely intertwined, 
this might be just the right moment to spark a debate - before an execution 
date is set.

Otherwise the only certain outcome is when the firing squad pulls the trigger.

(source: Daniel Flitton is senior correspondent for The Age)