[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

May 5



SAUDI ARABIA/FRANCE:

France's Hollande in Saudi calls for death penalty ban----French President 
Francois Hollande calls for abolition of the death penalty, speaking in Saudi 
Arabia which this year has seen a large rise in the number of executions



French President Francois Hollande called on Tuesday, May 5, for abolition of 
the death penalty, speaking in Saudi Arabia which this year has seen a large 
rise in the number of executions.

The ultra-conservative Gulf kingdom has executed 78 locals and foreigners, 
compared with 87 during all of 2014, according to an AFP count.

Hollande, who attended the Gulf Cooperation Council summit in Riyadh on 
Tuesday, said: "France is campaigning across the world to abolish the death 
penalty."

"The death penalty should be banned," he told reporters after meeting GCC 
leaders including Saudi King Salman.

He said Paris's position towards the death penalty is "not because one of our 
citizens could be a victim of an execution", referring to Frenchman Serge 
Atlaoui who is on death row in Indonesia.

Hollande said he would make the call to ban executions "everywhere, and 
regardless who is involved. And I do it here too" from Riyadh.

Just hours before Hollande's arrival on Monday in Saudi Arabia, the kingdom 
beheaded 5 foreigners for murder and robbery, adding to what Amnesty 
International has called a "macabre spike" in the number of executions in the 
country.

The 5 were 2 Yemenis, a Chadian, an Eritrean and a Sudanese.

London-based Amnesty ranked Saudi Arabia among the world's top 3 executioners 
of 2014.

Drug trafficking, rape, murder, apostasy and armed robbery are all punishable 
by death under the Gulf nation's strict version of Islamic sharia law.

The interior ministry has cited deterrence as a reason for carrying out the 
punishment.

(source: rappler.com)








PAKISTAN----stay of impending juvenile execution+

Execution of Pakistan death row convict stayed in dispute over age



A Pakistani judge on Tuesday stayed the execution of a man whose lawyers say 
was 14 when he was charged with murder, a case that has angered rights groups 
and prompted mercy appeals from his family.

Shafqat Hussain was due to be executed on Wednesday. His lawyers say he was 14 
in 2004 when he was burnt with cigarettes and had fingernails removed until he 
confessed to the killing of a child.

It was the 2nd stay of execution for Hussain.

In March, he was dressed in a white uniform ready for hanging and told to write 
his will before his execution was postponed while the Federal Investigation 
Agency looked into the question of his age.

The agency, Pakistan's equivalent of the U.S. FBI, later determined he was not 
a juvenile at the time of the killing and a new execution date was set. But 
that was also challenged.

"The judge has ruled that the FIA did not have the mandate to conduct the 
investigation into Shafqat's age and this should be done by a competent 
judicial forum," Shahab Siddiqui, of the Justice Project Pakistan, a legal aid 
group representing Hussain, told Reuters.

"So, until the matter is decided, his execution is stayed."

The death sentence cannot be imposed on a defendant who was under 18 at the 
time of the crime. Testimony obtained by torture is also inadmissible.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif lifted a moratorium on the death penalty on Dec. 
17, a day after Pakistani Taliban gunmen attacked a school and killed 134 
pupils and 19 adults.

Since then, 102 people have been executed, according to the Human Rights 
Commission of Pakistan.

Hussain's family has made heartrending appeals to the government, complaining 
of a flawed justice system that allowed months of torture to extract a 
confession.

Human rights groups say convictions in Pakistan are highly unreliable because 
its antiquated criminal justice system barely functions, torture is common and 
the police are mostly untrained.

(source: businessinsider.com)








BANGLADESH:

4 get death penalty for killing Swechhasebak League leader



A court has ordered death penalty for four convicts accused of killing 
Joypurhat Swechhasebak League's Vice President Sirajul Islam.

Joypurhat District and Sessions Judge Mijanur Rahman has given the verdict in 
the 10-year-old case on Tuesday.

The accused are Taslim Uddin Tiplu, Farhad Hossain, Haider Ali from Teghorbisha 
village and 'Shapin' from Joypurhat.

Taslim Uddin and Haider Ali were present in the court when the verdict was 
pronounced.

The other 2, Farhad and 'Shapin' were absconding, said Prosecutor Nripendranath 
Mandal.

According to the case documents, on Nov 30, 2005 Sirajul Islam was hacked to 
death near Charmatha area of Teghorbisha village in Joypurhat.

Sirajul's father, Mojibur Rahman filed a case against 13 people the same night.

At the end of their investigations, police submitted a charge sheet accusing 9 
people.

Among the accused, 4 died in RAB 'crossfire' at different times, and 1 was 
killed by his opponent, said the prosecutor Mandal.

(source: bdnews24.com)

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

4 awarded death penalty in Joypurhat



4 persons have been sentenced to death for killing a local leader of 
Swechchhashebak League, a front organisation of ruling Awami League, in 2005.

Additional district and sessions judge Mizanur Rahman on Tuesday delivered the 
verdict on the murder case of Sirajul Islam, Swechchhashebak League leader of 
Joypurhat district.

The convicts are Safin Hossain, Taslim Uddin, Haider Ali and Farhad Hossain. Of 
them, Safin and Taslim are absconding. Haider and Farhad are now in jail. The 
court acquitted 5 other accused.

According to the prosecution, Sirajul Islam was hacked to death on 30 November 
2005.

Sirajul's father filed a case with Joypurhat Sadar police station accusing 13 
people.

3 of the 13 accused were killed in a 'gunfight' with the police and 1 got 
killed by terrorists.

(source: Prothom Alo)

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

Death or life term for killing after rape



The Supreme Court has declared that a rapist could be awarded capital 
punishment or a life term for killing any child or woman after rape.

A 4-member bench of Appellate Division led by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar 
Sinha passed the judgement on Tuesday morning.

The apex court upheld a High Court verdict that declared the sections 6 (2), 6 
(4) of the Women and Children Repression Prevention (Special) Act 1995 
unconstitutional and illegal.

The provision of the section 6 (2) reads: "Whoever causes the death of any 
child or woman in or after committing rape shall be punishable with death."

"Where more than 1 person jointly cause the death of any child or woman in or 
after committing rape, each of them shall be punishable with death," reads the 
provision of the section 6 (4).

However, the apex court declared the High Court verdict that said the cases 
which were running under the sections 6 (2) and 6 (4) of the Women and Children 
Repression Prevention (Special) Act 1995 will be continued under the same 
sections.

On July 12, 2001, the Women and Children Repression Prevention Special Tribunal 
of Manikganj awarded capital punishment to Sukur Ali, 14, for killing a 
7-year-old girl in 1999.

Later, Sukur filed an appeal with the HC against the trial court verdict.

Then Sukur Ali filed a writ petition with the HC on December 2005 challenging 
the constitutional validity of the section.

On March 2, 2010, the High Court declared illegal and unconstitutional the 
provision of awarding a death sentence under the Women and Children Repression 
Prevention (Special) Act 1995.

The court also stayed the execution of the death sentence for Sukur Ali for 2 
months.

(source: Dhaka Tribune)

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

SC hearing on war criminal Mojaheed's appeal against death penalty continues



Defence lawyer for convicted war criminal Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed yesterday 
placed before the Supreme Court the statements of three prosecution witnesses 
about the charge of torturing and killing freedom fighters in 1971.

The charge was brought against the Jamaat-e-Islami leader for torturing and 
killing several freedom fighters in the old MP Hostel in Nakhalpara, Dhaka, on 
August 30, 1971.

The International Crimes Tribunal-2 sentenced Mojaheed to life imprisonment in 
connection with this charge.

Yesterday, Mojaheed's lawyer read out the statements of the prosecution 
witnesses before the Appellate Division during its second day's hearing on 
Mojaheed's appeal filed on August 11, 2013, challenging all his sentences 
including death penalty.

The SC fixed today for resuming the hearing.

(source: The Daily Star)








AUSTRALIA:

Australian campaign to abolish death penalty



Momentum is gathering in Australia to push for the elimination of the death 
penalty around the world but some say Australians should address attitudes in 
their own backyard first.

Not long before they died, convicted drug traffickers Andrew Chan and Myuran 
Sukumaran expressed a wish for a global campaign to abolish the death penalty.

They had spent 10 long years in Indonesian prisons after being convicted in 
2006 of playing a major role in the so-called Bali 9 drug ring that attempted 
to smuggle more than 18lb (8.2kg) of heroin from Indonesia to Australia.

By all accounts, they had worked hard to rehabilitate themselves: Chan had 
qualified as a pastor and ministered to fellow inmates. Sukumaran found solace 
in art. His talent for painting earned him an associate degree in fine arts 
from Western Australia's Curtin University two months before his execution.

Those changes slowly won them the sympathy of many Australians. Now, their 
desire to see more action on the death penalty is being taken up by some of the 
country's top politicians.

Devastated by the failure of frantic diplomatic and legal bids to save their 
lives, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop last week said "it is time for us to have 
a significant discussion about the application of the death penalty for drug 
offences in our region".

Former Attorney General Philip Ruddock has taken the campaign a step further. 
He has written to the local diplomats of countries such as Brazil, France and 
Nigeria, whose nationals were executed this year by Indonesia or are on death 
row there.

Co-chair of Australian Parliamentarians against the Death Penalty, Mr Ruddock 
wants them to work with Australia on abolishing the death penalty in and beyond 
the region, including in the United States.

"I think it is timely that Australia indicates it has a principled position on 
this matter and that we're prepared to be on the front foot in advocating 
change," Mr Ruddock told the BBC.

But Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce, who is charged with managing sensitive 
trade issues with Indonesia, says Australia might have to look into its own 
backyard as well as trying to influence others.

"I have to be honest, I do get approached by people saying, 'Well, that might 
be your view, Barnaby, that you don't support the death penalty, but it's not 
our view'," he told ABC television.

Australia has a long-standing bipartisan opposition to capital punishment and 
has not executed anyone since 1967.

But the nation's leaders at times send mixed messages about the death penalty. 
Comments by former Prime Minister John Howard in 2007 about the ringleaders of 
the 2002 Bali bombings, which killed 202 people, are a prime example.

"The idea that we would plead for the deferral of executions of people who 
murdered 88 Australians is distasteful to the entire community," he said.

However, Australians' acceptance of the use of the death penalty by other 
countries has fallen in recent years.

A 1986 poll found more than 70% believed it should be carried out if 
Australians were sentenced to death in another country, says Lowy Institute for 
International Policy polling director Alex Oliver.

But a Lowy poll conducted in February this year showed nearly a complete 
reversal: 62% of people did not want Chan and Sukumaran to be executed, and 
nearly 70% believed the death penalty should not be used to punish drug 
traffickers.

Another poll, in 2010, found that nearly 60% of people wanted Australia to push 
for abolition of the death penalty in South East Asia. Ms Oliver expects to see 
similar sentiments in a poll conducted at the weekend about the latest 
executions, to be published later this week.

"The last 35 years have seen a strengthening opposition to the death penalty 
generally," she says.

However, she says views can change depending on who is facing capital 
punishment and what their crime is.

Most people hold inconsistent views on the death penalty, says Patrick Stokes, 
Senior Lecturer in Philosophy at Melbourne's Deakin University.

'Accusations of hypocrisy'

"Most people don't like the death penalty but think maybe certain people should 
be put to death, or they don't want the death penalty here but are less 
concerned about overseas, or they don't like the thought of Australians being 
executed, say, in China or Malaysia or Indonesia but are not concerned about it 
being applied in places like the US, or Iran or Japan or Saudi Arabia," he 
says.

"It's an area where most people don't have a clear, principled position but a 
fragmented reaction to cases as they arrive."

Working harder to abolish the death penalty rather than just winning a reprieve 
for sentenced Australians would shield Australia from accusations of hypocrisy 
or "special pleading", says Lowy executive director Dr Michael Fullilove.

Asia is the obvious place for Australia to begin - it is home to "the world's 
worst offenders" on capital punishment, like China. Mr Fullilove says Australia 
should forge a regional alliance with countries in the region that have 
abolished the death penalty: Cambodia, Nepal, East Timor, Bhutan and the 
Philippines. It should also make the issue not just a principle, but a 
priority.

"We should aim to become a leader in the international movement against the 
death penalty," he says.

(source: BBC news)

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

Bali 9: AFP has a bob each way on death penalty call----Australian Federal 
Police details how the investigation into the Bali 9 unfolded, and assert that 
officers could not have prevented the deaths of Andrew Chan and Myuran 
Sukumaran.

AFP 'know they did wrong': lawyer



Now that the Australian Federal Police has expanded on its role in the Bali 9 
arrests, some things are substantially clearer.

But the most central question remains contestable. That is, should the AFP have 
handed over its nationals to a foreign criminal justice system that could (and 
did) see some of them executed?

Speaking up for the AFP after a decade of official reluctance, even 
Commissioner Andrew Colvin has in effect, answered yes, and no. Yes our 
judgments were sound, but no, we probably would not arrive at the same decision 
now.

Colvin did a solid job of defending his organisation by providing useful 
context, additional detail, and the policing version of the "fog of war" 
argument ??? ie that in determining the point of interception in a serious 
transnational crime, police must treat variables as real even if later they 
turn out to have been unwarranted.

Allowing syndicate members to re-enter Australia for example, could go awry if 
there are corrupt co-conspirators within police, airlines, or customs at either 
end, or if hand-offs occur mid-flight transferring the contraband to other 
passengers.

To those who say authorities should have stopped Scott Rush and other Bali 9 
members from even travelling to Indonesia, both Colvin and Deputy Commissioner 
Mike Phelan say the AFP had no evidence with which to effect any arrests - no 
surveillance, no physical evidence and only the most fragmented intelligence. 
In April 2005, they did not know who was involved, how many, who was in charge, 
or even what drug was to be imported.

Yet this is only a partial explanation. It is true arrests were problematic, 
but even the dullest of drug mules would surely abandon a crime once told they 
were being watched.

To those who say the AFP should have kept its intel from the Indonesians, 
Colvin said the variables (above) were just too great and included the danger 
that eight kilograms of heroin could reach the Australian streets.

The problem in trying to balance all of this is that even the AFP acknowledges 
its re-drafted operational guidelines now militate against sharing information 
when the death penalty could result. And those guidelines achieve that change 
without impinging on its ability to fight transnational crime.

At the very least, this establishes prima facie that the former guidelines were 
too loose and that the AFP used that latitude.

Colvin and Phelan, the officer who made the fateful call to alert Indonesia in 
April 2005, have clearly wrestled with the gravity of that decision and resent 
the harsh commentary since.

Phelan acknowledges that the risk of capital punishment was in his mind when he 
alerted his Indonesian counterparts. Yet neither says an apology to the 
families is necessary, nor offers assurances against repetition.

On the face of it, the policing arguments appear persuasive. On closer 
inspection, less so, and some are even contradictory.

(source: Sydney Morning Herald)