[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

July 20



MALAYSIA:

Scrap metal collector charged with murder


A scrap metal collector could face death penalty for slashing another man in 
Brickfields.

R. Prabakaran, 23, was charged with murder at the magistrate's court here this 
morning. He allegedly killed F. Logeswaran, 25, between 5.30am and 6am in Jalan 
Travers, Brickfields on July 2 this year.

The offence is punishable under section 302 of the Penal Code, which carries 
the mandatory death sentence upon conviction.

No plea was recorded after the charge was read to the accused.

Prabakaran was represented by Mohd Norazihan Adnan while prosecuting officer 
Asst Supt Nom Phot Prackdit prosecuted.

Magistrate Jessica Daimis set Sept 21 for remention of the case pending chemist 
report.

Previously, it was reported that victim was slashed to death by 3 men in Sri 
Kota.

During the 5.45am incident, Logeswaran fell of his motorcycle after crashing 
into a lamp post.

An eyewitness, who stopped to help the victim, was allegedly chased away by 3 
men, after which the trio allegedly slashed Logeswaran with parang.

The victim, who suffered injuries on his head, face and hands, died on his way 
to the hospital.

(source: The Rakyat Post)






INDIA:

Yakub Memon's cousin Usman Memon meets him in Nagpur prison


A family member of 1993 Bombay blasts convict Yakub Memon, who is on a death 
row, on Monday met him at the high security Central Prison here. Yakub's cousin 
Usman Memon, accompanied by a local lawyer, arrived at the Central Prison in 
the afternoon where the convict is lodged.

His other family members, particularly his wife and daughter, were also 
expected to visit him, but they did not turn up. Usman and lawyer Anil Gondane 
refused to talk to the media persons waiting outside the jail premises.

Memon's curative petition, his last legal attempt to escape the gallows, is 
expected to come up for hearing before the Supreme Court on Tuesday. Memon, a 
key conspirator with Dawood Ibrahim in the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts case, is 1 
of 10 convicts awarded death penalty by a special TADA court.

His death sentence was upheld by a Supreme Court bench on March 21, 2013. 
Earlier, amid reports that Yakub will be hanged this month end, Maharashtra 
Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis had last week said his government would follow 
the directives of the Supreme Court on the issue.

"Whatever we do will be made public at an appropriate time," Fadnavis had said. 
If the execution is carried out, it will be the first in connection with the 
violence that rocked Mumbai resulting in the death of over 250 people in 1993.

Media reports had earlier said the execution will take place if Memon's 
curative petition is rejected by the Supreme Court, after his appeals against 
the death sentence were rejected by the apex court and by President Pranab 
Mukherjee. The Nagpur prison authorities had earlier evaded questions on 
whether they had any information on the possible date of hanging.

Asked if the prison has received the death warrant, Jail Superintendent Yogesh 
Desai pleaded ignorance stating "it is (something) at the government level." 
Prison officials had, however, said the jail is equipped with all the necessary 
facilities to carry out the execution.

(source: India Today)

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

Supreme Court allots less than 5 minutes to Yakub Memon's final appeal of his 
death sentence----3 of its senior-most judges are to evaluate on July 21 a 
'curative' petition filed by the man convicted for his alleged role in the 1993 
Mumbai bomb blasts.


Yakub Memon's curative petition, which is one of his last chances against his 
death sentence, may get less than 5 minutes for consideration in the Supreme 
Court on Tuesday. The apex court's list of curative and review petitions to be 
heard on July 21 is out. Memon's petition is listed for 1.40 pm. But it is 3rd 
in a list of 5 petitions listed for 1.40 pm, and appears to be the only one 
involving a matter of life and death.

In the schedule, these 5 petitions are to follow 2 curative petitions, listed 
for 1.30 pm and 1.35 pm respectively, and precede a review petition listed for 
1.45 pm. Memon's petition will be placed before Chief Justice HL Dattu, Justice 
TS Thakur and Justice Anil R Dave.

A curative petition was a mechanism evolved by the Supreme Court in 2002 (in 
Rupa Ashok Hurra vs Ashok Hurra 2002 (4) SCC 388), as a means to allow 
petitioners to seek relief if they feel they have been denied justice by the 
Supreme Court. It is a vital part of the petitioner's fight for justice because 
it comes at the very last stage: it can be filed only after the Supreme Court 
has dismissed a review petition against its own judgment. There is no time 
limit given for filing a curative petition.

In its handbook, the Supreme Court of India says the mechanism of a curative 
petition was necessary in order to "reconsider its judgment/order ... to 
prevent abuse of its process (and) to cure gross miscarriage of justice."

A curative petition is always placed before the 3 senior-most judges of the 
Supreme Court, as well as the bench that dismissed the review petition, if 
available. The proceedings take place in chambers, and counsels are not 
present. If the majority of the judges conclude that the matter needs hearing, 
it is listed before the same bench as far as possible.

On April 9, the Supreme Court rejected Yakub Memon's review petition against 
his death sentence for his role in the serial bomb blasts that ripped through 
Mumbai in March 1993. The same court had earlier rejected his appeal against 
his conviction by a special court in Mumbai in 2006, and the president had 
rejected his mercy petition in May 2014. On the charges for which Yakub has 
been convicted, none of his co-accused has been given the death penalty. For a 
fuller explanation of the background, see this earlier story on Scroll.in.

Not enough time?

When asked whether considering so many curative petitions in 5 minutes was 
normal procedure, Advocate Jaspal Singh, the New Delhi-based lawyer who had 
argued Memon's review petition, replied, "I don't know if this is normal, but 
at least as far as this case is concerned, I feel it's too harsh. There are 
very many legal issues involved here. This is a question of life and death.

But Singh also added that he had been given a full hearing while arguing 
Memon's review petition, which was dismissed in April by a 3-judge bench headed 
by Justice Anil R Dave. Yug Chaudhry, a Mumbai-based lawyer who represented 15 
death row convicts in Shatrughan Chauhan vs Union of India, the case in which 
the Supreme Court gave a historic judgment in January 2014 commuting their 
sentences to life imprisonment, and laying down principles on which a death 
sentence should be commuted to life, told Scroll.in: "This is nothing short of 
a farce. In 5 minutes, it will not even be possible to read or discuss 1 
petition, let alone 5. That this is happening in a death sentence matter is 
very, very sad. Petitioners file curative petitions with the hope that their 
claims would be fairly evaluated."

However, senior advocate R Venkataramani of the Supreme Court said this was 
normal procedure. "A curative petition is circulated in chambers, where only 
judges are present. Counsel are not heard at this stage. If the judges decide 
that it merits a public hearing in open court, it is listed in court and heard. 
There's nothing unusual in this kind of listing."

Key judgement

The judgment that evolved the concept of curative petitions as part of the 
legal process, was passed in 2002 by a bench headed by the then Chief Justice 
SP Bharucha, and comprising Justices SSM Quadri, SN Variava and Shivaraj V 
Patil. The judgment was written by Justice Quadri. Eminent lawyers such as 
Shanti Bhushan, Rajiv Dhawan, KK Venugopal and Ranjit Kumar argued the case.

Laying down reasons for a curative petition, the judgement said, "The concern 
of this Court for rendering justice in a cause is not less important than the 
principle of finality of its judgment. We are faced with competing principles - 
ensuring certainty and finality of a judgment of the Court of last resort and 
dispensing justice on reconsideration of a judgment on the ground that it is 
vitiated being in violation of the principle of natural justice or apprehension 
of bias ... or abuse of the process of the court."

"Such a judgment, far from ensuring finality, will always remain under the 
cloud of uncertainty," it further said. "Almighty alone is the dispenser of 
absolute justice - a concept which is not disputed but by a few. We are of the 
view that though Judges of the highest Court do their best, subject of course 
to the limitation of human fallibility, yet situations may arise, in the rarest 
of the rare cases, which would require reconsideration of a final judgment to 
set right miscarriage of justice complained of.

"In such acase it would not only be proper but also obligatory both legally and 
morally to rectify the error. After giving our anxious consideration to the 
question we are persuaded to hold that the duty to do justice in these rarest 
of rare cases shall have to prevail over the policy of certainty of judgment 
... as there may be circumstances, as mentioned above, wherein declining to 
reconsider the judgment would be oppressive to judicial conscience and cause 
perpetuation of irremediable injustice."

(source: scroll.in)

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

Trial courts give death freely, but just 5% confirmed


Of 1,790 death sentences, 1,512 were decided by the High Courts, while the 
remaining were either awaiting decision or had been sent for retrials.

Just 5 % of the 1,790 death sentences handed down by trial courts in the last 
15 years have been confirmed by the Supreme Court. The numbers point to wanton 
sentencing by the lower courts resulting in decades wasted on death row, say 
experts.

The Centre on the Death Penalty at the National Law University, Delhi, wrote to 
all High Courts in the country seeking details of all death sentences handed 
down by trial courts in their jurisdictions over the last 15 years. All death 
sentences handed down by trial courts, except in terrorism cases, must go to 
High Court for confirmation. Madhya Pradesh was the only state which did not 
respond, which the Calcutta High Court's data had so much missing information 
that it could not be used.

1,512 sentences were decided by the High Courts, while the remaining were 
either awaiting decision or had been sent for retrials.

In over a quarter of these cases, the High Courts acquitted persons who had 
been not just convicted, but also given death sentences by the trial courts. 
Another 1/2 of all cases resulted in commutations.

In all, less then 15 % of cases were confirmed by the High Courts. Bihar had 
the highest rate of High Court acquittals.

Of the cases that went to the Supreme Court (186 cases), 10 % resulted in 
acquittals, while 60 % resulted in commutations.

In all, just 59 cases of the original 1,790 - or fewer than 5 % - were 
confirmed by the Supreme Court. In all, a third of death sentences given by 
trial courts resulted in acquittals at a later stage.

(source: The Hindu)






TRINIDAD & TOBAGO:

Privy Council imposes death penalty on 2 Trinidadians


Dear Editor,

The recent decision by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council to impose 
the death penalty on 2 Trinidadian men is the talking point in legal circles in 
the region, including Guyana, although the Co-operative Republic abolished 
appeals to the London based court more than 4 decades ago.

The Privy Council varied its own decision it handed down 22 years ago in the 
landmark decision of Pratt and Morgan, the famous Jamaican case in which the 
court ruled that persons convicted of murder and sentenced to death cannot be 
legally executed if they spent more than 5 years on death row awaiting 
execution. Reports state that from the Pratt and Morgan ruling in 1993 the 
Privy Council has commuted the death sentence imposed on possibly hundreds of 
individuals to life in prison based on that principle.

The reason for the new ruling by the PC is that lawyers for the 2 men, Timothy 
Hunte, and Shazad Khan did not raise the argument of the constitutionality of 
their sentence and as such, it could not be raised as a fresh issue at the 
Privy Council. This means that if the President of the Twin Island republic 
does not pardon the 2 men, they will go to the gallows. The last execution in 
Trinidad and Tobago took place in July 1999 when Anthony Briggs was hanged for 
brutally murdering a taxi driver.

The last judicial execution in Guyana took place in Guyana 18 years ago, and 
February 1995 was the last in St Vincent and the Grenadines. In the United 
Kingdom the last hanging was in 1964 - 51 years ago - and the death penalty was 
abolished in all circumstances in 1998 in the UK and all its dependent 
territories, including the British Virgin Islands, Anguilla, Montserrat, Turks 
and Caicos and the Cayman Islands. Guyana passed legislation in October 2010 
partially abolishing the mandatory death penalty. Death sentences can be 
imposed for killing a police officer in execution of his duty, or for slaying a 
judge or other judicial officer.

Yours faithfully,

Oscar Ramjeet

(source: Letter to the Editor, Stabroek News)