[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

May 6



PHILIPPINES:

92 migrant Filipinos on death row; 3,800 jailed----The Philippine government is 
urged to create 'a special body that looks into victims' assistance' in cases 
of Filipinos on death row



A week after Indonesia postponed the execution of Filipino worker Mary Jane 
Veloso, the Philippines said it is closely watching the cases of 92 Filipinos 
on death row around the world.

In an interview on ANC's Beyond Politics, Philippine Foreign Undersecretary for 
Migrant Workers' Affairs Jesus Yabes also said the country is ready to help 
3,800 Filipinos jailed in other countries.

"We monitor them, and we have a program of visits for the family," Yabes said 
in an interview aired Tuesday evening, May 5.

The Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) earlier said 88 Filipinos 
remain on death row, but Yabes said the DFA corrected this figure in a letter 
to Philippine President Benigno Aquino III on Tuesday afternoon.

Yabes explained that most of the Filipinos on death row were convicted for 
murder and drug-related offenses. One of them was convicted for espionage in 
Qatar.

He added that "only person right now" who faces imminent execution "is the one 
in Saudi Arabia."

He said the Philippine government vows to help any Filipino on death row 
"whether the person is guilty or not." He said, "So long as these are Filipinos 
who are abroad and are in stress situations, then we assist."

'Special body' for death row cases

Migrant workers' rights advocate Susan Ople pointed out, however, that the 
government needs to reform its processes to help migrant workers on death row.

"There's a lot to be done. Just handling the families alone, you really have to 
show a great degree of compassion," she said.

Ople cited the case of Veloso's mother, Celia, who drew criticism for 
denouncing the Philippine government even if it helped seek a reprieve for her 
daughter.

Sentenced to death for drug smuggling, Veloso was supposed to be executed on 
April 29, but Indonesia delayed her execution because of Aquino's last-minute 
appeal.

Ople said she understands the Veloso family's situation because the 30-year-old 
Filipino worker's case has been an "emotional roller-coaster for them."

To better handle cases like this, she urged the Philippine government to create 
"a special body that looks into victims' assistance" in "death row cases or all 
major cases."

There are roughly 10 million Filipinos working overseas - many as maids, 
laborers and in other low-paid jobs - because there are few job opportunities 
at home.

With many coming from poor farming areas and lacking in street smarts, they are 
easy pickings for international crime gangs on the hunt for drug mules, migrant 
workers' group Migrante said.

(source: rappler.com)

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

Family of Filipina on death row critical of Philippine govt



Without giving in to global pressure, the Indonesian Government demonstrating 
its sovereign authority and that it operates on the doctrine that its laws are 
supreme, executed 8 prisoners in its death row shortly after midnight last 
Wednesday. Back in the Philippines, her family and just about every Filipino 
who finds the death penalty barbaric are praying that she'd be granted 
executive clemency, the only way, it seems, she'd be able to extricate herself 
from her dire circumstances.

Coloma said Veloso was arrested in Indonesia for carrying illegal drugs.

Coloma said he hopes that the whole process would show a reason for the 
Indonesian government to give Veloso a chance to live. We are just waiting for 
their official notification," he said.

The task force was directed by Justice Secretary Leila De Lima to do case build 
up on the illegal drugs aspect of Veloso's case, considering that the human 
trafficking aspect is already pending with the department.

Sergio denied she helped dupe Veloso into smuggling 2.6kgs of high grade heroin 
contained in a suitcase into Indonesia.

As such, the spokesman said it was still possible that Veloso could be included 
in the next batch of death row convicts also convicted for illegal drug 
smuggling who are to be executed by firing squad under Indonesia's tough laws.

"Moreover, we are committed to pursuing the complaints filed against Mary 
Jane's recruiter as this was vital in securing the reprieve of Mary Jane. We 
will sit with PDEA and PNP on Wednesday (tomorrow) to discuss this West African 
syndicate or any other syndicate, for that matter, involved in victimizing our 
countrymen".

"Kristina had easily persuaded Veloso, a provincemate and godsister, to take up 
her offer to work as a housemaid in Malaysia. We heard that they will send 
their investigators here to question [Veloso] and also want her to testify via 
video conference," he said, adding that the Philippines government had agreed 
to cover all the expenses. It's inevitable to look into that link, " she said.

(source: rapidnewsnetwork.com)








AUSTRALIA:

AFP refuse to apologise after Bali executions



The Australian Federal Police has insisted its entire handling of the Bali 9 
case was appropriate at every stage, and attacked criticism over the executions 
of Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran as 'in bad taste' and 'misinformed', saying 
it had no choice but to provide information to Indonesian authorities despite 
knowing the death penalty might result.

At a media conference this morning, AFP Commissioner Andrew Colvin, flanked by 
Deputy Commissioners Mike Phelan, who was involved directly with the case, and 
Leanne Close, refused to apologise to the families of Chan and Sukumaran, 
declined to rule out Australians being executed on the basis of AFP 
intelligence in the future, and insisted that asking Indonesian police to 
pursue the group was the best operational decision.

Phelan, specifically and in detail, rejected claims by the family of Bali 9 
member Scott Rush and barrister Robert Byers that the AFP promised to prevent 
Rush from travelling to Bali after Rush's father had provided a crucial 
tip-off.

He argued the AFP was already investigating the syndicate and Rush'744s 
involvement, and that it could not have arrested Rush or prevented him from 
travelling without reducing the chances of successfully prosecuting other 
syndicate members. No commitments were made to Rush's family, Phelan insisted.

Phelan and Colvin also argued that the AFP was correct to not wait until the 
Bali 9 returned to Australia before acting. They claimed that the drug couriers 
may have passed the eight kilograms of drugs they were importing to other 
aircraft passengers or corrupt airport insiders (a possibility admitted by 
Phelan as 'remote') and that the arrest of the group in Indonesia helped the 
prosecution of another 6 members of the syndicate in Australia.

Allowing the group to return to Australia might, Colvin and Phelan argued, 
would have allowed the drugs to be lost from the plane and would have reduced 
the chances of prosecuting syndicate organisers.

Key organisers of the syndicate, however, remain at large or were able to flee, 
but the AFP questioned whether the claim that the 'kingpins' remained free was 
accurate, repeatedly saying it had prosecuted a further 6 low-level members of 
the group here in Australia.

The AFP repeatedly came back to its insistence that its primary duty was to 
protect Australians from 'the scourge of drugs', with Close boasting that the 
AFP had in recent years stopped drugs worth '8 hits for every man, women and 
child in Australia'.

However, despite his repeated declaration that there was nothing inappropriate 
or wrong about the AFP's actions, Colvin refused in the face of repeated 
questioning to say the AFP would act in the same way again, suggesting it might 
behave differently if circumstances were repeated.

He claimed that the AFP was 'hampered' by restrictions on cooperation with 
death-penalty countries but that that was 'appropriate' given the government's 
stance on the death penalty.

Colvin said criticism of the AFP, suggestions it had blood on its hands, and 
that it had traded the Bali 9 in exchange for a better relationship with 
Indonesian authorities on terrorism, were 'in bad taste' and upset individual 
officers engaged in dangerous anti-drugs operations.

The AFP even rejected criticism that it had failed to explain itself, insisting 
its officers had answered questions in parliamentary committee hearings, court 
proceedings and media conferences, but had chosen not to do so recently out of 
concern for the government's efforts to obtain clemency for Chan and Sukumaran.

The broader message from Colvin, Phelan and Close was consistent with its 
previous position: the AFP did nothing wrong on the Bali 9 and it has nothing 
to be sorry for in the case.

(source: echo.net.au)

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

Narcotics, international law and the death penalty: The way forward



The tragic execution of Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran and before that, 
Nguyen Tuong Van in Singapore in December 2005, have highlighted the limited 
avenues available to a government that seeks to avoid the unjust imposition of 
the death penalty upon one of its citizens.

The events in Indonesia have also highlighted the arbitrary and capricious 
nature of the application of the death penalty with last-minute reprieves for 
Mary Jane Veloso and Serge Atlaoui being granted while Chan and Sukumaran were 
executed when serious and fundamental questions remained over their sentencing 
process.

The application of the death penalty in the Asia Pacific is frequently 
inconsistent with international law. While international law does not 
necessarily prohibit the death penalty in all cases, there are a number of 
significant treaties and other international rules that expressly limit its 
application. In particular, the imposition of capital punishment for drug 
crimes is not permissible under international law to which Indonesia, and many 
other Asia Pacific countries, are subject.

Indonesia is a party to the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political 
Rights. The covenant was drafted in the recognition that, at the time of its 
conclusion, the death penalty was not prohibited by international law but that 
its application should be severely limited. It limits the application of the 
death penalty to "the most serious crimes".

Although drug trafficking is clearly "a" serious crime, it cannot be 
characterised as "the most serious crime". It does not inevitably lead to 
lethal consequences. The United Nations Human Rights Committee has made clear 
that only exceptional crimes may carry the death penalty, and the United 
Nations Economic and Social Council has defined the relevant crimes to be those 
which necessarily lead to lethal consequences as constituting a most serious 
crime. Narcotics control treaties in force throughout the Asia Pacific refer to 
lengthy imprisonment as the most appropriate punishment for drug crime.

In the case of Chan and Sukumaran, the fact that the drugs involved were to be 
trafficked to Australia, and not within Indonesia, meant that no Indonesian 
citizen faced any grave or lethal consequence as a result of their actions, and 
constituted a powerful basis to object to the application of a penalty of 
death.

The blanket rejection of clemency bids by President Joko Widodo without any 
consideration of individual circumstances, the rush to arbitrary execution 
while substantial and fundamental legal issues remained before Indonesian 
courts and tribunals, and the determination to execute after 10 years of 
imprisonment are additional reasons that Indonesia's conduct failed to comply 
with its most basic international legal obligations.

Despite the clear inconsistencies between international law and Indonesia's 
conduct, no international tribunal was able to rule on these matters. As 
Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has publicly stated, Australia unsuccessfully 
sought Indonesia's agreement to resolve these international legal issues before 
the International Court of Justice.

The lack of compulsory international dispute-settlement processes in these 
cases renders it imperative that Australia now take a leadership role in 
seeking a regional moratorium on the application of capital punishment for 
narcotics offences, if not more generally.

Amnesty International, which has maintained a lengthy campaign against the 
death penalty, has identified that well over half the countries in the world 
have now abolished the death penalty entirely. Abolitionist countries in the 
Asia Pacific now include Australia, Cambodia, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, 
Mauritius, Micronesia, New Zealand, Niue, Palau, Philippines, Samoa, 
Seychelles, Solomon Islands, South Africa, East Timor, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu. Of 
other countries in this region, Cook Islands, Fiji, Brunei Darussalam, 
Maldives, Myanmar, Nauru, and Tonga have essentially abolished the death 
penalty in all but the most exceptional cases.

That leaves a much smaller number of regional countries which retain the death 
penalty, of which China is the most prominent. Alarmingly, Papua New Guinea is 
actively considering reintroducing the death penalty.

A bipartisan consensus has emerged in recent days for Australia to do more to 
abolish the death penalty. A good place to start is within our region. Efforts 
must be directed at engagement through ASEAN and other regional fora. Our 
politicians and diplomats must speak with one voice, and with consistency, on 
the issue. Inconsistency limits Australia's ability to speak out on behalf of 
Australians abroad by removing the most powerful tool in the diplomatic 
armoury, Australia's consistent and implacable opposition to the death penalty.

The example of rehabilitation of Chan and Sukumaran and their ability to speak 
to future generations of youth is something which Indonesia should today be 
celebrating. Instead, it faces justified international condemnation, increased 
friction with its neighbours and a much diminished place in the world 
community. Whatever Widodo may think, that is not in Indonesia's national 
interest.

The time has come for Australia to seek to exercise real regional leadership on 
this issue and mount a sustained campaign for the abolition of the death 
penalty. That will ensure an ongoing legacy for these two Australians executed 
in Indonesia.

(source: Commentary; Dr Christopher Ward (barrister and ANU College of Law 
Adjunct Professor) and Professor Donald R. Rothwell (ANU College of Law) were 
advisers on international law to Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran----Brisbane 
Times)

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

United front against death penalty a myth



25 years ago a landmark Australian study was published which found the 
abolition of capital punishment was not in response to public opinion, but in 
spite of it.

The paper by 2 academics from the Australian National University confirmed that 
"political elites" in the States had imposed their will against community 
wishes, but predicted that over time abolition might have the effect of 
shifting public opinion away from capital punishment.

This was despite their study of national opinion polls that showed public 
support dropped to about 40 % after the Ronald Ryan hanging in Victoria in 
1967, but recovered to the high 60s by the time WA became the last State to ban 
the death penalty in 1984.

I was provoked to write this column by a peculiar article on the ABC's The Drum 
website headed "Death penalty: are we really united in our opposition?"

Who's the "we" that "our" ABC suggests is united?

In the article, another ANU academic, political scientist and former journalist 
Norman Abjorensen voices concerns that Nationals maverick Barnaby Joyce had 
broken some assumed consensus around the execution of Andrew Chan and Myuran 
Sukumaran by calling for a discussion about the death penalty.

"How does this square with the supposed steadfast opposition from Prime 
Minister Tony Abbott and Foreign Minister Julie Bishop," Abjorensen asked.

"Were they sincere in their appeals for clemency or was it just a cheap and 
cynical political stunt for a hardline Government to look compassionate?"

Abjorensen quoted an exchange between the last Victorian premier to send a man 
to the gallows, Liberal Henry Bolte, and former Labor leader Clyde Holding:

"For f... sake, Henry, can't you see that every time someone is hanged, it's 
one of you bastards hanging one of us."

That led Abjorensen to his real point: "The fact of the matter, as the late 
Holding so succinctly pointed out, is that one side of politics, the 
conservative side, has always been pro-capital punishment while the other, 
Labor, has resolutely been opposed to it. It always had a class element to it."

Well, that was not the finding of the 2 ANU researchers Jonathan Kelley and 
John Braithwaite in their study.

"Whereas the US experience suggests a general (if slight) affinity between 
political conservatism and support for the death penalty, in Australia the 
picture is mixed," they wrote. "Supporters of the conservative parties are no 
different from Labor supporters, once other demographic and attitudinal 
variables are taken into account."

The researchers noted the death penalty was abolished by different parties in 
different Australian States.

"We found that resentment towards outgroups is the aspect of conservatism that 
most strongly explains support for capital punishment," they wrote. Principal 
in the outgroups identified by the ANU pair were criminals - and drug dealers 
are squarely within that grouping.

Abjorensen noted John Howard supported the death penalty for the Bali bombers 
in 2003 but declined to add that Labor leader Simon Crean also agreed and that 
in 2008, as the 1st executions approached, Kevin Rudd said those convicted 
"deserve the justice that will be delivered to them".

Warning of a growing "populist" capital punishment sentiment, he quoted a 
Morgan poll from last year showing 52.5 % support the death penalty for deadly 
terrorist acts in Australia.

That was up from only 23 % in 2009, confounding the predictions of the earlier 
ANU study. WA, by the way, was at 59 %, 2nd only to Tasmania on 63.

But Abjorensen declined to mention a Morgan poll in January specifically about 
the Bali nine drug smugglers in which 47 % of Liberals opposed the Indonesian 
executions and 42 % of Labor voters favoured them.

It clearly didn???t fit his class warfare script. And nowhere does he mention 
the democratic principle of the will of the people.

That January poll for the ABC's Triple J, which reported 52 % support for the 
executions, led to a contorted article in the Fairfax press branding it "crude 
and misleading". Morgan replicated the findings in another survey 2 months 
later.

So it appears not much has changed in 25 years. The political elites - which 
now clearly include a lot of journalists - impose their views about capital 
punishment on an often differing public.

It becomes a problem for journalism when there is an attempt to create the 
perception of a united national position when the evidence points to none.

(source: Opinion, Paul Murray; The West Australian)








INDONESIA:

The Indonesian case for executing for drug traffickers



It is deeply regrettable that certain individuals must face the death penalty 
in Indonesia as a result of drug trafficking crimes.

We understand the impact and deeply sympathise with the families and friends of 
those who have departed under the death penalty, both of foreign nationals and 
Indonesians alike.

We also understand, and would like people to be aware of the impacts and 
sympathise with the victims, and their families and friends, of drug abuse.

Indonesia is facing a crisis situation of drug abuse on a massive scale.

Currently an alarming number of 4.5 million people in Indonesia are suffering 
from drug-related problems.

A large portion of these people find their homes in rehabilitation centres, 
despite limited capacity, to try to restore their "normal lives".

Among those, 1.2 million people cannot be cured. Every day there are 33 to 50 
people who die from drug-related causes, amounting to around 18.000 people 
every year.

Drug use is spreading at a shocking rate to all parts of the society including 
to children as young as primary school students. Indonesia is profoundly 
grieved by the severe consequences that result from this massive drug-abuse.

Faced with this harrowing situation, Indonesia is resolutely determined to 
continue to combat drug-trafficking, a crime punishable by death limited to 
drug producers, syndicates and drug dealers.

In August 2014 there were 67,786 convicted drug-offenders in Indonesian custody 
who are not under the death penalty.

It is important to stress that the death penalty is carried out only after all 
legal defences provided by law are exhausted, and only after a verdict has a 
permanent legal force and clemency is denied.

We do not deny that the death penalty is a harsh form of punishment, but the 
grave consequences of drug-related crimes are far reaching and harsher. The sad 
reality is that serious drug offences have called for an equally serious 
measure of penalty.

Like most of New Zealanders, there are millions of Indonesians are against the 
death penalty.

Opinion polls by Media Indonesia in 2006 show that, 78 % of Indonesians were in 
favour of the death penalty for drug traffickers and 22 % were against it. A 
poll by Kompasiana in December 2014 showed that 83 % in favour and 17 % are 
against. Polling by Forum in Januarythis year resulted in 87 % in support and 
13 % against.

Although these opinion polls may not be entirely accurate in representing the 
views of the 250 million people of Indonesia, they nonetheless reflect the 
on-going debate in the country on the issue of the death penalty.

It is worth adding add that the death penalty is not something that Indonesians 
take lightly; it is extreme and unfortunate.

However, it needs to beconsidered in light of the on-going crisis. A crisis 
that Indonesians are experiencing and dealing with, a crisis with severe and 
long-term effects on our young generation and the future of the nation. 
Unfortunately the severity of this crisis is all too familiar and real.

The heated debate over the death penalty is unprecedented in Indonesia.

The outcome is up to the nation to decide. Indonesia is open to any views or 
concerns that have been expressed on the matter as it gives us perspective on 
the pros and cons of our law, but in the end only Indonesia can decide whether 
to retain or abolish its death penalty law in accordance to what is acceptable 
to its people and the durability of its application.

Presently, there is no legal process envisaged to change the law, and there is 
evidently increasingly stronger support for the death penalty from the public 
as one can observe from the opinion polls.

Indonesia's criminal justice system, like that of a number of other big 
democracies, recognises the death penalty for cases of 'most serious crimes'.

So far, there is no authoritative intergovernmental agreement in the United 
Nations on what constitutes a 'most serious crime'. It therefore falls within 
the sovereignty of each country to determine what it considers a 'most serious 
crime' and whether the death penalty is applicable in response to such crime.

Indonesia believes that the application of capital punishment in the country is 
within the scope and consistent with article 6(2) of the International Covenant 
on Civil and Political Rights, and that this issue is an inalienable component 
of legal sovereignty of a country.

It serves as a strong deterrent against what the country regards as one of the 
most serious crimes.

In light of this, the concerns or objections that have been voiced against 
Indonesia's death penalty law may be more helpful if conveyed in the context of 
capital punishment in general, regardless of where it is practised or what 
crimes it is applicable to.

(source: Commentary; Jose Tavares is the Indonesian ambassador to New 
Zealand----Stuff News)

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

France, EU continue aid programs despite executions



France has reiterated its commitment to maintaining a relationship with 
Indonesia, including by providing grants and loans in a number of different 
fields, despite the possible execution of 1 of its nationals in the country. 
According to French Ambassador to Indonesia Corinne Breuze, French aid programs 
for Indonesia will continue regardless of the possible execution of French drug 
convict Serge Atlaoui, who was spared from the firing squad last week.

"[Atlaoui's legal] process is ongoing but we are still working with Indonesia, 
which is a very important partner. We signed a strategic partnership in 2011 
and we are still cooperating on many issues of mutual interest," Breuze told 
The Jakarta Post on the sidelines of the European Union's (EU) Blue Book 2015 
launch in Central Jakarta, on Tuesday.

She said that France was currently working with Indonesia in many different 
fields, including science and education, coastal and coral ecosystem 
protection, as well as environment and climate change.

With respect to the latter, the envoy said France was working with the National 
Development Planning Board (Bappenas) in drafting Indonesia's national 
contributions for the upcoming UN Conference on Climate Change in Paris, 
France, later this year.

According to the newly launched Blue Book 2015, France disbursed almost euros 4 
million (US$4.46 million) in grants and another euros 130.5 million in loans 
for Indonesia in 2014.

Breuze said France would contribute at least euros3 million in grants for 
scientific support this year, while also giving loans to banks and state-owned 
electricity company PLN.

"We are going to sign a new loan in a few days with PLN, but I can't announce 
it now," she said.

Breuze signaled that French-Indonesian relations would remain normal, while the 
French government continued to cooperate closely with Indonesia to find a 
solution to Atlaoui's death sentence.

"[Atlaoui] lodged an appeal and that's still ongoing, and the lawyers are still 
working because we have some issues on the judicial aspect, that he should not 
be executed before the other convicts in the same case, because there were many 
involved," she said.

The ambassador previously said that the execution of Atlaoui would have 
"consequences" for the bilateral relationship between France and Indonesia.

Atlaoui was arrested in 2005 when the National Police raided a secret factory 
producing ecstasy in Tangerang, Banten.

He received the death penalty 2 years later in 2007 for the possession of 138 
kilograms of crystal methamphetamine, 290 kg of ketamine and 316 drums of 
precursor substances.

The Frenchman was given reprieve last week after his lawsuit to challenge 
President Joko "Jokowi" Widodo's clemency rejection was taken up by the Jakarta 
State Administrative Court (PTUN).

Meanwhile, acting EU ambassador to Indonesia Colin Crooks also reiterated the 
European community's continued partnership with Indonesia, despite its 
outspoken stance on capital punishment.

"We very much regret [...] the executions that took place last week. We 
continue to urge the Indonesian government to impose or reintroduce a 
moratorium on the use of the death penalty because we feel it's not effective 
as a response to the drugs issue," Crooks said on Tuesday.

"You have to distinguish between that and the work that we do on development 
cooperation. We have a very good partnership; it's in our interest, ultimately, 
for Indonesia to continue to develop in terms of human development, democratic 
development and market development."

Data from the Blue Book 2015 said that the EU donated euros 570 million to 
Indonesia last year.

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

Greater Jakarta: Nigerian may face death for drug possession



Prosecutors indicted Elele "Uzo" Uzoma Alpha, a 33-year-old Nigerian, on 
multiple charges of crystal methamphetamine, or meth, possession during a 
hearing at Depok District Court on Tuesday.

Prosecutor Arnold Siahaan said Uzo was charged with violating a number of 
articles of the 2009 Narcotics Law, which carries a maximum sentence of death. 
"Based on the confiscated evidence, Uzo may face the death penalty," he said as 
quoted by tribunnews.com.

4 kilograms of meth and 4 grams of marijuana were found in Uzo's apartment at 
Margonda Residence, Depok, in December 2014. He was initially arrested for not 
having a Temporary Stay Permit (KITAS) during a raid.

A subsequent urine test came up positive for narcotics.Yayan Kusnaedi of the 
Depok branch of the National Narcotics Agency (BNN), meanwhile, alleged that 
Uzo had received the drugs from a convict named Tobi at Cipinang Penitentiary.

(source for both: The Jakarta Post)








TURKEY:

43 years ago, Deniz, Yusuf, Huseyin----43 years ago, on 6 May 1972, Deniz 
Gezmis, Yusuf Aslan and Huseyin Inan were hanged in Ankara.



43 years ago, on 6 May 1972, Deniz Gezmis, Yusuf Aslan and Huseyin Inan were 
hanged in Ankara. Their trial had began on July 16, 1971. Gezmis and his 
comrades were sentenced to death on October 9 for violating the Turkish 
Criminal Code's 146th article, which concerns attempts to "overthrow 
Constitutional order". According to legal procedure, a death sentence must be 
endorsed by Parliament before being sent to the President of the Republic for 
final assent. In March and April 1972 the sentence was placed before Parliament 
and in both readings the sentence was overwhelmingly approved.

After joining the Workers Party of Turkey (Turkiye Isci Partisi), Gezmis 
studied law at Istanbul University in 1966. In 1968, he founded the 
Revolutionary Jurists Organisation (Devrimci Hukukcular Kurulumu) and the 
Revolutionary Student Union (Devrimci Ogrenci Birligi).

He became increasingly politically active, and led the student-organised 
occupation of Istanbul University on June 12, 1968. After the occupation was 
forcibly ended by the law, he spearheaded protests against the arrival of the 
US 6th Fleet in Istanbul. Deniz Gezmis was arrested for these actions on July 
30, 1968, to be released on October 20 of the same year.

As he increased his involvement with the Worker's Party of Turkey, and began to 
advocate a National Democratic Revolution, his ideas started to circulate and 
inspire a growing revolutionary student base. On November 28, 1968, he was 
arrested again after protesting US ambassador's visit to Turkey, but was later 
released. On March 16, 1969 he was arrested again for participating in 
right-wing and left-wing armed conflicts and imprisoned until April 3. Gezmis 
was re-arrested on May 31, 1969. The university was temporarily closed, and 
Gezmis was injured in the conflict. Although Gezmis was under surveillance, he 
escaped from hospital and went to Palestine Liberation Organization camps in 
Jordan to receive guerrilla training.

On March 4, 1971, Deniz Gezmis and comrades kidnapped 4 U.S. privates from 
TUSLOG/The United States Logistics Group headquartered in Balgat, Ankara. After 
releasing the hostages, he and Yusuf Aslan were captured live near Siavs 
following an armed stand-off with law enforcement officers.

Their trial began on July 16, 1971. Gezmis was sentenced to death on October 9 
for violating the Turkish Criminal Code's 146th article, which concerns 
attempts to "overthrow Constitutional order". According to legal procedure, a 
death sentence must be endorsed by Parliament before being sent to the 
President of the Republic for final assent. In March and April 1972 the 
sentence was placed before Parliament and in both readings the sentence was 
overwhelmingly approved.

On May 4, President Cevdet Sunay after officially consulting the Minister of 
Justice and Prime Minister Nihat Erim, refused to grant Gezmis a pardon. He was 
executed by hanging on May 6, 1972 in Ankara Central Prison along with Huseyin 
Inan and Yusuf Aslan.

Deniz Gezmis was born in Ankara on February 24, 1947. One of the 
revolutionaries in Turkey who dedicated their lives to the socialist cause. In 
his last letter addressed to his father just before the hanging, he was 
explaining the spirit of sacrifice by the revolutionary movement of Turkey: 
"Men are born, grow up, live and die... The important thing is not to live for 
a long time, but to do more things in the lifetime... My friends who were ahead 
of me did not show hesitancy before the death... You should not have any doubt 
that I will not have hesitation...."

Today Deniz Gezmis, Yusuf Aslan, Huseyin Inan and the many revolutionaries like 
them will be remembered in several places.

(source: firatajans.com)



AFGHANISTAN:

Afghan Court Sentences 4 To Death For Mob Killing Of Farkhunda



An Afghan judge on May 6 sentenced 4 men to death for participating in the mob 
killing of a woman who was falsely accused of burning pages from the Koran in 
Kabul.

The 4 civilians were among 49 defendants, including 19 police officers, on 
trial in a case that sparked outrage and street protests in Kabul after video 
of the March 19 attack on Farkhunda, 27, appeared on the Internet.

Farkhunda was beaten and bludgeoned to death by an angry mob near the Shah-e 
Do-Shamshera Shrine in the Afghan capital, then lit on fire and dumped into the 
Kabul River.

Reading out the sentence on live television, Judge Safiullah Mujadidi said the 
4 were guilty on charges including murder, burning Farkhunda's body, and 
violence against women.

He sentenced 8 other civilian defendants to prison terms of 16 years, 
convicting them of violence against women and other crimes for their roles in 
the attack.

18 defendants were found not guilty due to lack of evidence -- rulings that 
drew criticism from members of a fact-finding mission set up by Afghan 
authorities.

Mission members told RFE/RL they would appeal those 18 verdicts, saying the 
defendants should be held responsible for standing by and doing nothing.

The police officers' verdicts and sentencing are scheduled for May 10.

The officers, who were on duty in the area at the time of the attack, are 
accused of standing by and doing nothing to prevent the assault or stop it once 
it began. Farkhunda had told women at the shrine not to waste their money on 
amulets being sold by male fortune tellers and faith healers.

Witnesses said the men responded by falsely accusing her of burning the Koran, 
which sparked the brutal attack against her.

Police later confirmed there was no evidence to support the Koran-burning 
allegation.

The killing prompted unprecedented protests across Afghanistan.

It also sparked a civil society movement to limit the power of clerics, 
strengthen the rule of law, and improve women's rights.

However, some public and religious figures said the killing would have been 
justified if Farkhunda had in fact damaged a copy of the Muslim holy book.

(source: Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty)








HUNGARY:

Hungary Seeks EU Debate on Restoring Death Penalty



A debate about restoring the death penalty has been a recurring issue with 
Hungary's prime minister since a 2002 bank robbery in which eight people were 
killed.

Now, spurred by the April 22 stabbing of a young tobacco shop assistant but 
also aware of gains by the far-right Jobbik party, Prime Minister Viktor Orban 
has again called for the issue to be kept "on the agenda.''

The idea drew stern condemnations from the European Union, where the death 
penalty's ban is a cornerstone of human rights policies, and where Orban last 
week reassured Martin Schulz, president of the European Parliament, that 
Hungary had no plans to restore capital punishment.

In a way, however, Orban has achieved his aim - on Thursday, the European 
Parliament's civil liberties committee will discuss "the possible effects'' of 
an EU member reintroducing the death penalty.

After his phone call with Schulz, Orban said that he would "never agree'' with 
the EU about not being allowed to even discuss capital punishment.

"In relation to Brussels, a debate about democracy has come about,'' Orban said 
in an interview on Echo TV. "Where are we living? In the Middle Ages, where 
they declare that there are taboos that are not worthy of debate?''

Orban has also framed the matter as a security issue, saying that the 2010 
introduction of a three-strikes law and life sentences without the possibility 
of parole were insufficient deterrents for criminals.

But his Fidesz party's loss of popularity after easily winning three elections 
last year and the strengthening of Jobbik also played a role in Orban's 
decision to revive the death penalty topic, said analyst Kornelia Magyar of the 
Magyar Progressive Institute.

"This is a very old formula used by Fidesz, especially when it senses the 
strengthening of the far right,'' Magyar said. `"It is unlikely to work, and I 
would be surprised if Fidesz successfully drew voters away from Jobbik with 
this issue.''

Even if Fidesz had no intention of restoring the death penalty, raising the 
matter could easily be counterproductive, Magyar said.

By bringing up the death penalty, "Fidesz has made its own supporters and 
voters in general more receptive to far-right issues,'' Magyar said.

Hungary will hold a general election in 2018.

A poll by the Tarki research institute showed support for Fidesz among likely 
voters falling from 45 % in November to 38 % in April, while in that same 
period Jobbik rose from 21 % to 24 %. The poll taken April 16-23 of 1,004 
Hungarians had a margin of error of 3 % points.

In 2002, weeks before leaving office after his 1st term, Orban said that while 
he had earlier opposed capital punishment, the killing of 8 people during a 
bank robbery in the town of Mor had changed his mind.

The last execution in Hungary was carried out in 1988, and the country 
abandoned the death penalty in 1990, soon after the fall of communism.

After the gruesome slaying of a police psychologist in 2012, lawmakers from 
Fidesz also called for the death penalty to be reconsidered, while Orban last 
year said the issue was "well worth a Mass.''

(source: Voice of America)