[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

June 14



MALAYSIA:

M'sia govt can be pressured to remove death penalty



Malaysian government can be pressured to remove the death penalty law if 
diplomacy is applied diligently by other foreign governments as part of the 
diplomatic process to extradite a convict from another country.

Using the example of Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar who is currently detained by the 
authority in Australia after he was sentenced to face death row by the Federal 
Court for the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu, Malaysia's representative on 
Asean Inter-Governmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), Tan Sri Muhammad 
Shafee Abdullah said, diplomacy could play a significant role to put a stop to 
the death penalty practice in any country.M

"A foreign government can allow extradition of a person if you take the death 
sentence off the table, which is what the Australian government said to 
Malaysia in the case of Corporal Sirul," said Muhammad Shafee during the 
"Diplomacy and Death Penalty" discussion at the 1st Asean Regional Congress on 
the Death Penalty recently.

He opined that an Asean country that had removed the death penalty could 
influence the judiciary landscape of another country within the region.

As part of the negotiation, he pointed out a government can relay a message to 
another nation, "if you want to trade a criminal, you need to remove your death 
penalty."

However, he said, diplomatic process could also turn ugly as shown from the 
Indonesia and Australia's strained relationship.

"Diplomacy was lost as the 2 Australians facing the death penalty in 
Indonesia," he said, adding that media attention also contributed to the 
inter-government diplomatic row.

"When I took the case of an American lecturer Kerry Lane Wiley who was on trial 
for bringing in more than 265 gramme of cannabis in the late 80's, I requested 
Wiley's mother not to use the media for his son's ordeal.

"As a result, there was no United States arrogance vs Malaysia government 
stubbornness at that point of time," said Muhammad Shafee, who is also the 
chairman of AICHR and has been vocal on the removal of punishable by death for 
a convict.

He firmly believes in rehabilitation of a convicted criminal.

"From my 40 years experience in legal profession, I have seen hard core 
criminals changed and found a new lease of life," said Shafee.

There were 975 convicts waiting for death sentence in the country when Malaysia 
voted against a resolution by United Nations General Assembly last December, 
with 117 nations voted for a moratorium on the abolishment of the death penalty 
around the world.

(source: Muhammad Shafee, The Sun Daily)








PAKISTAN:

Reforming processes of death penalty----The debate on death penalty has focused 
on outcomes alone



Read Aftab Bahadur's letter from his death cell published in The Guardian. 
These words represent perhaps the last communication, with the outside world, 
of a man on death row.

He was hanged on June 10, 2015.

Adam Smith once wrote that sympathising with someone is an exercise in 
imagination. If that is true, and I find the idea to be particularly 
compelling, then most of us fall well short when it comes to sympathising or, 
just as important, empathising with human suffering. The finite nature of time, 
perhaps, cannot be imagined till you actually have no option but to count the 
seconds ticking down.

Aftab's letter is, in no small way, a comment on the state of Pakistan's 
criminal justice system. It also, along with circumstances surrounding his case 
and others, encapsulates how discourse on opposing sides never really engages 
in a direct grasp of some important issues and the damage this causes.

The debate on the death penalty has gained significant momentum in Pakistan. 
This is, of course, something to be celebrated. But we must also ask ourselves 
whether the debate in its current dominant form provides any real hope for 
alleviation of human suffering. This applies to both the victim(s) and the 
accused in a criminal case but particularly with regard to the death penalty - 
is the focus on outcomes or processes?

Largely the debate has focused on outcomes while ignoring processes, leading up 
to the carrying out of the death penalty. This is no small oversight. People 
and organisations mostly write and argue in terms of 'pro' or 'anti' death 
penalty. Without taking anything away from NGOs that do commendable work to 
help individual prisoners on death row, we must acknowledge the limits of such 
work when it comes to the macro issues. This fact, yes an indisputable fact, 
must be acknowledged and addressed by all relevant stakeholders.

There is little point in giving people injections to fight a disease if you 
never take out time to study the virus itself.

Aftab Bahadur's letter could probably be argued to support an argument against 
the death penalty but doing so would not alleviate the risk for someone in his 
position in the future. What he argues for early on in his letter is not an 
anti-death penalty stance but an argument for transparent processes in the 
system, equality of arms, presumption of innocence etc. What he argues for 1st 
is his innocence. What he pleads is the lack of process.

Are we doing a disservice to human suffering by focusing only on the 
consequence?

Bringing individual cases of abuse of process helps flag important issues. 
There is no doubt about this. But by then the war becomes about the 
consequence. The remedy is individualistic and it does not make the system 
better or the existence of an accused any safer. It is not surprising that the 
press loves highlighting individual cases since an argument for a 
re-examination of the relevant criminal justice processes is not as glamorous. 
But even if such concerns for process do not offer faces of individuals that 
you can splash on newspapers, it does represent an issue affecting an 
aggregation of people - rather than just 1 person. What is ignored is a 
systemic issue and what takes a backseat is concern for substantive justice for 
all.

When the debate becomes pro- or anti-death penalty, it does a disservice to 
human interests at stake as well as the commendable work of individuals/NGOs 
regarding particular cases. The issue of whether cases like Shafqat Hussain's 
have been botched must remain separate from the case for holistically 
addressing the processes that threaten a fair investigation, prosecution and 
trial. The merits of the death penalty are also completely distinct from this.

It is important to view these issues separately instead of conflating them. And 
a conflation of these often occurs when individual cases are brought to light - 
it gives stakeholders a chance to push their broader agendas and it gives the 
press something sensational to throw out there.

This is a tragedy and nothing less.

Aftab Bahadur's letter is also a commentary on human psychology - and the 
impact of imprisonment on a social animal. Things that we take for granted - 
interacting with other human beings, taking stock of our surroundings - become 
scarce. Every little detail of the 'outside world' becomes important. Each 
passing second represents a diminishing opportunity to engage in the exercise 
called life. This is not something we would wish upon anyone, let alone a 
person claiming his innocence. Of course, a cynic (arguably for good reason) 
would say that few men would make a case for life by pleading guilty. That 
might be so. But that does not address the fact that there are bound to be 
scores of cases of wrongful convictions leading to the death sentence - and the 
wait for execution.

What will help the innocent is a reform of the process and not a glamorous 
story about individual cases. The case for reform is not helped by the media, 
highlighting well-intentioned actions gone wrong in cases like Shafqat's.

Many of those engaged in the practice of criminal law look to the Honorable 
High Courts of this country to set things right for just outcomes - and this 
too applies only to individual cases.

A case-by-case exercise is undertaken by Honorable Justices to aid the cause of 
justice. The pressures on their time and resources are immense - indeed even 
unimaginable for most of us. And we cannot expect to flourish as a society by 
leaving all abuses of process to be rectified by appellate courts. The only 
remedy is a reform of the system - and how many are pushing for that?

So, what is the takeaway thought? Whether the death penalty is just or unjust 
is a debate that must be kept separate from a concern for ensuring justice on a 
holistic level. The relevant NGOs, politicians, practitioners all have some 
hard thinking, and work, to do. We can either stand at the end of the line when 
the guillotine has already started doing its work or we can step forward to 
bring people together to ensure transparency in a system - not individual 
cases.

There is little point in giving people injections to fight a disease if you 
never take out time to study the virus itself. The reason: the finite nature of 
time will eventually consume all of us, including our broken systems.

(source: The News)

**********

Pak imposes moratorium on executions during Ramadan



Pakistan has imposed a ban on executions during the holy month of Ramadan after 
hanging about 150 convicts in nearly six months since it lifted the moratorium 
on death penalty.

The Interior Ministry issued an order on Saturday asking all provincial 
governments not to carry out any executions in the Muslim month of fasting.

Ramadan is expected to start from Thursday or Friday depending on the sighting 
of the moon of the next Islamic lunar month.

Muslims all over the world observe fast during the holy month and refrain from 
food, drinks, smoking and sex from dawn to dusk as given in Islamic 
injunctions.

Pakistan had lifted the moratorium on death penalty after about six years in 
December after the terrorist attack at the Army Public School in Peshawar, 
which claimed 150 lives, mostly children.

The United Nations, the European Union, Amnesty International and Human Rights 
Watch and various local groups have asked government to stop the executions.

But government has refused to halt them, saying it is a deterrence against 
militancy and other crimes.

(source: Hindustan Times)