[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

March 29



NEPAL:

There is a need to revive the provision of death penalty for inhuman crimes 
like rape-cum-murder and gang rape



The rape-cum-murder resulting in the death of a seven-year-old girl in Bara has 
triggered a debate on whether or not Nepal should revive the death penalty for 
particular crimes. I am not a lawyer but as an observer of socio-political 
dynamics, I am in favour of the partial revival of the death penalty for the 
actualisation of social reforms.

Right to live

During the royal rule, there was a provision of death penalty for high treason 
against the state, meaning against the royal throne, which was used to put some 
democratic political activists to death. In the 1990 constitution, which 
institutionalised parliamentary democracy with limited powers for the monarchy, 
the provision of death penalty was dropped. But there was a deep-seated 
dissatisfaction among some sections of society, who thought that it was a 
premature decision for a country like Nepal, where people take more pride in 
breaking laws rather than following them.

While some countries in the world have death penalty provisions, many others 
provide capital punishment for various crimes. The basic question is whether 
the state has the inherent right to take the life of a person. The contractual 
origin theory of the state presupposes a contract between the individual and 
the state wherein individuals surrender rights to the state to receive security 
in return. But the contract does not include surrendering one's right to live. 
In fact, it is a special right protected by the state. No political philosophy 
proposes the death penalty as a basis for social order. If so, from where does 
the state get the right to take away the life of its citizens?

A corollary question can be asked: does anyone have the right to defy the law 
of the land and commit a crime devoid of all humanity? Do males have the right 
to demand submission and loyalty from women through a one-sided decision and 
perpetrate inhuman crimes against women for having tried to evade men? If 
everyone has an equal right to live and be protected, why does one person take 
away the right to life of another person? If the state cannot protect an 
innocent from being killed by a criminal, how can it justify its inherent right 
to receive loyalty from its citizens? Can the state, then, not take recourse to 
the death penalty as a deterrent against the evil designs of bad people? There 
could be several angles to such thinking that defend death penalty.

Whose responsibility?

Let us now turn to some practical aspects of social disorder. Violence against 
women comes to the forefront. Though there are laws to curb such violence, its 
occurrence is frequently revealed. Sexual abuse is one glaring example. Raping 
seems to have been the fondest pastime of depraved males. Women of all ages 
have been raped here and there, but raping of minors, ranging from toddlers to 
teenagers, is even more heinous. Comparable violence could be the abuse of a 
daughter-in-law to extract dowry from her parents, failing which the helpless 
girl is burnt to death and it is called suicide.

Of late, children as well as adults are abducted for ransom, failing which the 
hostage is killed. Sometimes, even when the ransom is paid to the abductors, 
the hostage has been found to be murdered. Journalists are killed for the 
simple reason of revealing the truth behind the evil designs of powermongers. 
Political opponents are killed for revenge. Innocent people have been killed on 
mere suspiocion of being informers for secret organisations. These are but some 
of the gruesome examples of social depravity. Who is responsible for such 
despicable acts of human beings? Who has the responsibility to control such 
behaviour?

While the state has the ultimate responsibility of controlling social 
depravity, it should start at the family level. It is the family that teaches a 
child how they should behave. But in this age, the family has failed to provide 
such an education because the child is exposed to a variety of social 
influences beyond family control. New values have evolved in conflict with 
existing values of the family, which creates friction, leading to a generation 
gap. The child lives and grows with a sense of insecurity in this turmoil, 
unable to discern good from bad. To some extent, the child learns from the bad 
examples of the guardians on how to behave and yet, escapes punishment. These 
multiple factors create a seedbed of crimes in the mind of the man.

To the gallows

Many girls are unsafe in their own household because they are abused by 
relatives, at times by their own fathers and grandfathers! Mothers have been 
found to influence their husbands to rape their own daughters. In schools, many 
children face sexual abuse. At work, women are often victimised by their senior 
male colleagues. All of this must stop.

The state has several options to respond to such crimes. Courts exist to uphold 
laws to punish crimes. The police exist to enforce the decision of the courts. 
But when all these institutions become corrupt, society becomes a mess. That is 
what we are passing through. There is licensed impunity when the prime minister 
of a country defies the order of a court and protects a criminal with his 
political clout. There is outright impunity when a former prime minister dares 
the court to take action against him for giving the order to murder in whatever 
name it may be. In such a situation, laws fail to act as deterrence against 
crime.

All said, there is a need to revive the provision of death penalty in certain 
extreme cases of inhuman crimes like the rape-cum-murder, gang rapes, 
abduction-cum-murder of innocent people, and the like. But there should be 
checks and balances in its implementation. A way to do so would be to have a 
provision for a jury of neutral persons who can decide through a unanimous vote 
whether the crime deserves the death penalty. I see the need for a provision 
which seeks public opinion on whether a crime deserves death penalty. This will 
not only add to the strength of the judge but also act as a means of informing 
and educating society as to the ultimate consequences of social depravity.

(source: Khagendra Sharma is a freelance political analyst; ekantipu.com)








IRAN----executions

12 prisoners secretly executed in a day



The Iranian regime's henchmen secretly hanged at least 12 inmates on Thursday 
(26 March 2015) in prisons in cities of Shiraz and Mashhad.

A group of 5 prisoners were hanged in a prison in the city of Mashhad in 
northeast Iran while another 6 were collectively hanged in Pirnia Prison in the 
city of Shiraz in southern Iran. On the same day, another prisoner was also 
hanged in Adelabad Prison in the same city.

In Shiraz, the prisoners were transferred to solitary confinements two days 
prior to the Iranian New Year (Nowruz), therefore, the victims spent the New 
Year's day in isolation awaiting execution.

The religious dictatorship ruling Iran has refrained from publishing any report 
or information on the prisoners.

The growing number of executions, including many carried out in secret, are 
just trivial examples of the nationwide repression that continues to take place 
in Iran since Hassan Rouhani became president of the clerical regime.

Mr. Ahmed Shaheed, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights 
in Iran, reported on March 25 that some 1000 executions had been carried out 
during the past 15 months in Iran. Prior to that, on March 16, he told a news 
briefing in Geneva: "There is a lot of concern amongst the Iranian society that 
the nuclear file may be casting a shadow over the human rights discussion."

The U.N.'s special investigator added that the human rights situation and 
repression in Iran has worsened since Hassan Rouhani became president.

(source: Secretariat of the National Council of Resistance of Iran)








INDONESIA:

Supreme Court expedites death row appeals



The Supreme Court guaranteed on Friday that all justices would expedite 
hearings on case-review petitions filed by several death row, as the 
international community was observing the process.

The court decided on Wednesday to reject a 2nd case review petition filed by 
Philippine national Mary Jane Fiesta Veloso, a drug convict in the 2nd batch of 
executions to take place.

2 other drug convicts - Serge Areski Atlaoui of France and Martin Anderson 
alias Belo of Ghana - are still challenging their death penalty rulings via 
case-review petitions.

Attorney General Muhammad Prasetyo praised the court's decision to reject 
Veloso's 2nd case review petition, adding that the decision helped clear the 
way for the Attorney General's Office (AGO) to carry out the 2nd batch of 
executions.

Supreme Court spokesman, justice Suhadi, said hearings in lower courts took up 
most of the time in the case-review process.

Suhadi later pledged that all court justices handling the cases would 
prioritize them.

"It is automatic. All justices know what to do [in prioritizing] those cases 
because it has drawn so much public attention," he said on Friday. "Rest 
assured, we are working professionally."

The Criminal Law Procedures Code stipulates that a case review should be filed 
first with a lower court, which will later hear and study whether the petition 
meets all the requirements.

A case review can only be considered if new evidence or conflicting facts are 
found, or if judges are deemed to have erred in applying the law.The 1st 
hearing of Veloso's 2nd case review petition took place at the Sleman District 
Court on March 3. The lower court later submitted the documents to the Supreme 
Court on March 12.

Atlaouli's case review petition was first heard at the Tangerang District Court 
on March 11, however, the court has adjourned the hearing to March 25. The 1st 
hearing of Anderson's case review took place at the South Jakarta District 
Court on March 19.

Prasetyo expressed hope that court proceedings could be wrapped up soon so the 
AGO could announce the dates of the executions.

Veloso, Anderson and Atlaoui are 3 of 10 convicts set to be executed in the 
near future on Nusakambangan prison island near Cilacap, Central Java.

The other drug convicts facing imminent execution are Bali 9 duo Myuran 
Sukumaran and Andrew Chan of Australia, Rodrigo Gularte of Brazil, Zainal 
Abidin of Indonesia and Raheem Agbaje Salami of Nigeria. Also slated to be 
executed are 3 convicted murderers: Syofial alias Iyen bin Azwar, Harun bin 
Ajis and Sargawi alias Ali bin Sanusi, all from Indonesia.

Separately, Vice President Jusuf Kalla urged the public to wait for the AGO, 
which has authority over the executions, to decide when the executions would 
take place.

AGO spokesman Tony Spontana said it would take a while before the executions 
could take place. ???I can assure you it will not be this week. I'm not sure if 
it will be this month. We must wait."

Meanwhile, House of Representatives Commission III overseeing laws and human 
rights checked Nusa Kambangan prison island to see if it was ready to host the 
executions.

Commission III chairman Azis Syamsudin said after the inspection that the 
prison was prepared and that it was only a matter of time before the executions 
would take place.

"All preparations for the executions of the drug convicts are complete, but the 
prosecutors are still waiting for the completion of the legal process," he 
said.

2 death row convicts from France and Ghana are still challenging their 
sentencesJustices have been told to prioritize case-review petitionsAGO still 
uncertain on timing of executions.

(source: Jakarta Post)