[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

Sept. 11


AUSTRALIA/INDONESIA:

Bali 9 executions left no lasting damage in Australia-Indonesia relations: 
Foreign Minister Julie Bishop


4 months after the Bali 9 executions, Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop 
has said diplomatic relations between Australia and Indonesia have been 
absolutely repaired.

Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran were executed by Indonesian authorities in 
April. Prior to that, Australian PM Tony Abbott reminded Indonesia of 
Australia's tsunami relief contribution and appealed for clemency.

Amid speculations of causing irreparable damage in the bilateral relations 
between the countries, Indonesia went ahead with the executions anyway. The 
Australian foreign minister has now said there was no "lasting damage" done.

Bishop's statement on Thursday revealed that she and her Indonesian counterpart 
Retno Marsudi are "text buddies." She has also said the lines of communication 
have opened up "at all levels."

"It is a broad, diverse and deep relationship. It has its challenges from time 
to time but the overall relationship is in good shape," The Australian quoted 
Bishop by saying. "The personal contact between Australian government ministers 
and our counterparts is very important and that's why Retno Marsudi and I keep 
in constant contact."

Indonesian Coordinating Maritime Affairs Minister Rizal Ramli said on Tuesday 
Australia was among 47 additional countries which would enjoy its visa-free 
policy. The latest move helps the number of countries with visa-free status 
with the Asian country go up to 92.

The decision was made to boost the tourism industry in the country. Rizal said 
3 countries with "drugs, economic or radicalisation problems" had been excluded 
from the original proposal of 50 countries.

"We hope this extension will double the country's foreign exchange income to 
US$20 million in the next 5 years," The Jakarta Post quoted him saying. 
Indonesia targets 20 million tourist arrivals in the next 5 years.

(source: ibtimes.com)






TAIWAN:

Man sentenced to death for killing woman with mallet


The Kaohsiung District Court sentenced a man to death for killing a retired 
teacher with an iron mallet in Kaohsiung last year.

The man, Liu Chih-ming, 38, was given the death sentence earlier this week.

The ruling can be appealed.

Prosecutors said Liu rode his motorcycle around the streets of Zuoying District 
in Kaohsiung in December last year to look for his ex-girlfriend, who broke up 
with him the previous month. He stopped by Lotus Pond, drank a bottle of 
Kaoliang and headed to a local temple.

Seeing a woman - a retired teacher surnamed Chen - open the driver-side door to 
her car after buying groceries at the market, Liu thought of hijacking her car 
so he could look for his ex-girlfriend. He forced his way into the car and 
struck Chen in the head with an iron mallet, which incapacitated her, 
prosecutors said.

He then pushed her into the passenger seat and attempted to drive the car away, 
but the vehicle's gear shift was locked, they said.

He demanded that Chen, who was still conscious, unlock the gear shift. When she 
did not respond, he struck her repeatedly in the head, prosecutors said.

An autopsy showed that Chen was struck 13 times in the head.

Liu stole NT$2,000 from Chen's purse, wiped the bloodstains from the car and 
fled from the crime scene on his motorcycle. He hid for 5 days before he was 
apprehended by police, prosecutors said.

Liu was found guilty of robbery, murder and other offenses. The court statement 
said that Liu killed Chen in a cruel manner, then tried to conceal his crime by 
destroying evidence and hiding from the law.

"The judge concurs with prosecutors in seeking the death penalty for Liu, 
because of the cruelty of the crime, and little likelihood of him making amends 
and reintegrating into society," the ruling said.

"Giving a life term or other prison terms in this case would not reflect the 
severity of the crime, and would fail to uphold justice and fairness in 
society," it said.

(source: Taipei Times)






BARBADOS:

The end of the noose?


The recent assertion of retired High Court judge, Mr. Leroy Inniss, that he is 
personally not against the imposition of the death penalty and believes that it 
should remain on the statute books, might afford some comfort to those who, 
perhaps not unreasonably, believe that this form of punishment is an effective 
answer to the current spate of slayings by the use of illegal guns.

A word of caution should be introduced to such persons at some stage however, 
given that the applicable jurisprudence, global trends and not least of all, 
our national treaty commitments all suggest a real unlikelihood that there will 
be a hanging anytime soon or at all.

Indeed, it would appear as if the authorities have conceded defeat on the 
issue. In the first place, we took a giant step backwards earlier this year 
with our repeal of the mandatory death penalty for murder convictions. And 
officialdom has not displayed any indecent haste in attempting to negate the 
consequences of the notorious decision of the Judicial Committee of Her 
Majesty's Privy Council in Pratt v Morgan that effectively renders 
unconstitutional the execution of the death penalty if not carried out within 5 
years of its imposition.

Clearly, this would have required an acceleration of the investigative, 
judicial and appeals process in respect of such sentences. However, according 
to credible reports, business in the criminal court system remains as usual.

More over, this jurisdiction was called upon earlier this month by the 
Inter-American Court of Human Rights [IAHCR] to explain its indolence in 
complying with a 2009 order by that tribunal to abolish the death penalty in 
keeping with its undertakings under the American Convention on Human Rights. In 
response, it seems from reports, our representatives could pray in aid only a 
crowded legislative agenda and the provisions of section 26 of our Constitution 
that legitimises all pre-Independence law even if it is in textual conflict 
with the fundamental rights provisions of the Constitution. This provision 
itself has already been the subject of adverse comment by that same judicial 
body.

The truth is that for all the learned and other disquisitions on the utility of 
maintaining the death penalty in our legislation, we are fighting a battle 
against the odds; including substantial doubt as to its effectiveness in 
moulding societal behaviour; the inclination of superior courts; our 
voluntarily ratified international obligations; and a hemispheric imperative of 
abolition.

The battle may also be one against time. It is now the case that an entire 
generation has elapsed since the death penalty was last instituted locally and, 
to our best knowledge, there is at present no individual convict against whom 
such a sentence may be carried out.

His Honour Mr Justice Inniss (ret'd) is of the mind that it might be good "to 
let it remain there ... in case you think you have to use it". We can 
understand this view that converts the possibility of state execution into a 
deterrent for those inclined unlawfully to take a life and as a tool to which 
the authorities may have recourse at some time in future.

We are still to be persuaded of the effectiveness of such a proposal, however. 
Even as we write, the death penalty is still on the books although in a 
slightly adjusted form to be availed of when the circumstances require. It is 
decidedly not the case that this reality has had any palliative effect on 
incidence of unlawful homicides in our neck of the woods.

(source: Editorial, The Barbados Advocate)

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

Abolish death penalty


A quarter of a century ago a top law enforcement official in Barbados made a 
bold, albeit private, prediction. It was: "You will never see another execution 
in our country."

How come?

For one thing, he replied, capital punishment solves nothing. It may satisfy 
people's need for vengeance but it doesn't deter crime.

For another, both major political parties, the Democratic Labour Party and the 
Barbados Labour Party, which take turns running the country, are opposed to the 
death penalty. So while they have suspended carrying out executions and judges 
go through the motions of sentencing convicted murders to death, governments 
and the opposition wouldn't take the next logical and correct step and remove 
it from the statute books altogether.

How come?

Public opposition to the death penalty wouldn't get them many votes. England, 
which introduced capital punishment in Barbados and its Caribbean neighbours 
more than 150 years ago, finally abolished it there in 1969, 5 years after the 
last executions were carried out there in 1964.

The issues of capital punishment and what to do about the rising tide of gun 
violence and related deaths have come roaring back in Barbados. Just the other 
day, retired Justice Leroy Inniss put it on the table for discussion. It has 
triggered a rising chorus "bring back the gallows".

Don't be surprised if there is an accompanying chant of barbarism: impose 
lashes with the cat-o-9 tails. That may be next.

But what have we learned about the use of the death penalty in recent years?

A stubborn and enduring bit of mythology is that capital punishment deters 
killings.

United Nations sponsored global research has shown that the deterrence effect 
isn't support by fact.

Texas, a death penalty state in the United States with a high rate of 
executions also has a homicide rate that is higher than states that have 
abolished it.

Then there is the simple fact that most homicides are crimes of passion 
committed without by people who know the victims. They act without thinking 
about being punished.

Next is a miscarriage of justice. When courts make mistakes and order innocent 
people to be executed, we can't bring the wrongfully convicted back to life 
after execution. Scores of people have been exonerated after they were first 
found guilty of murder.

The finality of the death sentence prevents us from telling the convicted we 
are sorry. Admittedly, the jump in killings in Barbados in recent years is 
making us nervous wrecks.

But the truth is that life in prison without any possibility of eventual 
freedom is a far tougher punishment and a much better solution. Going to prison 
for life isn't a walk in Queen's Park on Christmas morning.

The Government should put a legal stamp of approval on its capital punishment 
moratorium by enacting legislation that abolishes it, once and for all. It 
wouldn't be greeted with universal acclaim but it is the right thing to do.

(source: Barbados Nation News)


IRAN----execution

Iranian Authorities Hang Schoolteacher Accused of Drug Trafficking


The death sentences for Mahmoud Barati and 10 other prisoners were reportedly 
carried out at Ghezel Hesar Prison on Monday September 7.

Before his arrest in 2006, Mahmoud Barati was an elementary school teacher and 
father to a 3-year-old son. He made ends meet by working a 2nd job as a taxi 
driver. His son, now 12 years old, is left wondering why his father was killed 
by Iranian authorities.

Mahmoud's brother, Ahmad Barati, was arrested first. In the city of Robat 
Karim, Iranian authorities charged Ahmad with possessing and trafficking half a 
Kilogram of crack. Fearing that Ahmad would be executed, Mahmoud and his mother 
and sister traveled to the Tehran region to do whatever they could to help. 
After several months of pursuing Ahmad's case, the 3 of them were also arrested 
by authorities and accused of drug possession.

A Barati family member who asked to be anonymous tells Iran Human Rights: "The 
drugs seized from Ahmad by authorities weren't even his, he was selling it for 
a friend. Mahmoud tried to pressure the owner of the drugs to help save Ahmad 
from death row, but the owner of the drugs was also arrested for drug 
possession. The drug owner suspected that Mahmoud had snitched on him, so he 
retaliated by telling the authorities that he had bought his drugs from Mahmoud 
and his sister and mother. That's how Mahmoud and his sister and mother were 
arrested by authorities."

The confirmed source describes to Iran Human Rights the situation for Mahmoud 
during his interrogations: "They placed pressure on him in various ways to 
force false confessions. The interrogator told Mahmoud that he must confess 
now, and that he would get a chance to explain the truth later in court. The 
interrogator said that if Mahmoud complied, his sister and mother would be 
freed. Mahmoud agreed and confessed to whatever the interrogator wanted. When 
Mahmoud tried to explain in court that the accusations against him are false, 
his testimony was not considered by the Judiciary. When the owner of the drugs 
finally realized that Mahmoud had not snitched on him, he wrote a letter to 
authorities confessing to his mistake, but the authorities did not consider the 
letter. In 2011, the owner of the drugs, who was also on death row, wrote a 
second letter to authorities. The same day he released the letter, authorities 
took Mahmoud and the drug owner to the gallows and carried out the execution 
order for the drug owner - the second letter had caused authorities to suspend 
Mahmoud's execution order. The letter was sent to the Revolutionary Court for 
consideration in overturning Mahmoud's death sentence, but nothing changed."

Ahmad Barati is currently on death row and is reportedly held in exile in the 
Central Prison of Tehran.

"Mahmoud Barati is one of many prisoners in Iran who was charged with a drug 
related offense in an unfair trial and then later hanged to death," says 
Mahmoud Amiry-Moghaddam, the spokesperson for Iran Human Rights.

UNODC Helping to Legitimize Executions for Drug Related Offenses

While executions for drug related offenses continue in full force in Iran, the 
United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime has renewed and increased cooperation 
in the fight against drugs with the Iranian authorities. On numerous occasions 
Iran Human Rights has asked the United Nations and governments who fund UNODC 
programs to make their funding conditional on an end to the death penalty for 
drug related offenses.

The non-transparent and unfair detention and trial of people detained for 
drug-related charges has been opposed by many human rights organizations. 
Prisoners in Iran are issued trumped-up charges and sentenced to death in 
Revolutionary Court trials where they are not given the right to appeal. The 
trials are carried out behind closed doors and the lawyer and the accused are 
never given enough time to defend their side. Defendants are systematically 
psychologically and physically tortured under custody and are not given access 
to an attorney. Many defendants are arrested and sentenced to death for drug 
related offenses, even though authorities have no tangible evidence of the 
defendant ever possessing narcotics.

According to Iran's anti-drug laws, a person who possesses more than five 
Kilograms of opium or 30 Grams of heroin, morphine or cocaine may be sentenced 
to death.

Days before Iranian authorities hanged Mahmoud Barati and ten other prisoners 
to death, human rights groups, including Amnesty International, issued 
statements calling on the Iranian authorities to halt the schoolteacher's 
execution.

(source: Iran Human Rights)






INDIA:

Mumbai train bombings: 12 face death penalty over 2006 terror attacks ---- 
7-year trial ends with suspects guilty of murder and criminal conspiracy over 
attacks in which 188 people died


An Indian court has convicted 12 people over the bombings of seven Mumbai 
commuter trains that killed 188 people and wounded 800 others in July 2006.

The accused were found guilty of murder and criminal conspiracy charges and 
will be sentenced on Monday. They could face the death penalty.

The trial in Mumbai lasted more than 7 years. Prosecutors say the conspiracy 
was hatched by Pakistan's Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and 
carried out by Lashkar-e-Tayyaba operatives with help from the Students' 
Islamic Movement of India, a banned militant organisation.

The Lashkar-e-Tayyaba is a Pakistan-based Islamist militant group. Pakistan has 
denied the Indian claims.

(source: The Guardian)

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

Court awards death penalty to rapist


The special session judge has sentenced a rapist to death penalty besides a 
fine of Rs. 50,000. The incident occurred in the year 2013, when the rapist 
killed a 10 year boy after sodomising him.

According to police sources, on 17 November 2013, a boy aged 10 year was found 
missing under the police station Khimlasha. Police registered a case of 
kidnapping and started investigations. Later as the body of boy was found on 20 
November, the police registered the case under section 363, 364, 377, 302 and 
201 of IPC and also child protection act of 2012 of section 4.

The police arrested Sachin Kushwaha (28) for committing the crime. After 
hearing the case, the session and special judge Anil Verma, pronounced the 
sentence on Thursday, awarding culprit Sachin Kushwaha a death penalty and a 
fine of Rs. 50,000.

(source: The Free Press Journal)






NIGERIA:

Govs reject death penalty for looters


Many governors, who spoke with The PUNCH, on Thursday, out rightly rejected the 
suggestion that looters of the nation???s resources be sentenced to death.

Organised labour- the Nigerian Labour Congress and the Trade Union Congress-at 
the beginning of the week said looters should be given the death sentence in 
order to serve as deterrence to others.

Labour said it was only by killing looters that the anti-corruption crusade 
being championed by President Muhammadu Buhari could succeed.

But most governors, who reacted to the labour suggestion on Thursday, said the 
death sentence would be too harsh.

Ogun State Governor Ibikunle Amosun said he would rather canvass that looters 
be sentenced to life imprisonment, rather than the death sentence prescribed by 
the organised labour.

Amosun said this while addressing the state workers who had marched to the Oke 
Mosan state secretariat in Abeokuta to give their backing to Buhari's 
anti-corruption crusade.

The state chapters of the NLC and TUC organised the rally.

The governor said, "Everybody knows President Muhammadu Buhari is transparent 
and meants well for the nation and would never want to hear anything about 
corruption.

"Even under 100 days in office, electricity is improving. People know that if 
you try it you are gone. I always say this, whether you are a governor, 
permanent secretary or labour leader, you cannot be corrupt under a leader that 
is not corrupt, because you will be punished.

"Unfortunately as a governor, I cannot be saying that capital punishment should 
be meted out to corrupt public officials. Because I cannot say that, that is 
why I will say that anybody that is found wanting, whether you are governor or 
any other public officer should be jailed for life."

He however said that not only politicians should shun corruption but every 
Nigerian.

"It is not only politicians that should shun corruption, workers too should not 
be corrupt," he said.

His counterpart in Plateau State, Simon Lalong, also said he would rather 
prefer life imprisonment to death penalty.

Lalong's Director of Press Affairs, Mr. Emmanuel Nanle, told our correspondent 
that "in all his discussions, Lalong has never mentioned death sentence. He has 
always preferred life imprisonment to taking human life because to him life is 
sacred."

Also both governors of Ekiti and Rivers states, Ayodele Fayose and Nyesom Wike 
respectively, out rightly rejected death penalty for looters.

Fayose, who reacted through his Chief Press Secretary, Mr. Idowu Adelusi, said 
jail sentence was better and capable of reforming thieves.

"In countries where death penalty was introduced, it has not stopped looting. 
In advanced countries like US, jail sentence is the penalty. What we need is 
proper moral education to change orientation of the people. Jail sentence is 
better; it can reform," he told one of our correspondents in Ado Ekiti, the 
state capital.

Wike said that Nigeria had enough laws to deter people from fleecing the 
nation.

The governor, who spoke through his special adviser on media, Opunabo 
Inko-Tariah, said that the labour unions merely made the recommendation because 
of the impunity with which public office holders loot the nation's treasury.

He said, "Nigerians have a role to play by deriding looters and not to praise 
them for their fiscal irresponsibility. There should be a strong punitive 
measure to discourage looting because of its domino effects. When a treasury is 
looted, there won't be money for the provision of necessities such as 
hospitals, roads, etc.

"Maybe because it happened in Ghana and the economy improved, the labour 
organisations want it in Nigeria. But that was a military regime and Jerry 
Rawlings was a military man. However, the extant laws on looting need serious 
and urgent review, even if the death penalty is discouraged."

Governor Olusegun Mimiko of Ondo State said he was comfortable with whatever 
the people want in relation to punishment for looters.

Mimiko, who spoke through his information commissioner, Kayode Akinmade, said 
if it was the wish of the people of the country that looters should be killed 
by law, "so be it" but that the process of law must be followed in carrying out 
such executions.

He said, "We are not under a military rule; this is democracy and we have 
constitution that we follow. If it is put in the Constitution of the Federal 
Republic of Nigeria, irrespective of whether you are a governor or not, so be 
it. If that is what Nigerians want, it is okay.

"Everybody is against corruption, but there is a process of making law. Thank 
God we have a National Assembly and the state assemblies who are representative 
of the people. If such bill could be sent to the national and state assemblies 
and be passed into law, it must become a law.

"If the process is followed and it is the wish of Nigerians that looters be 
killed, why not? Let it become a law. It is a fact that Nigerians are not happy 
with this corruption tag, which has slowed down our economic development but if 
we have a law that will bring about capital punishment for the looters, it is 
okay."

Governor Rauf Aregbesola of Osun State on Thursday declined comment on whether 
looters should be sentenced to death or not.

Aregbesola's media aide, Semiu Okanlawon, when contacted, said he did not know 
the mind of his principal on the matter and promised to contact the governor 
and get back to our correspondent but Okanlawon had yet to keep the promise as 
of the time of this report.

Subsequent calls to his mobile telephone line also did not connect.

The Special Adviser (Media and Public Affairs) to Governor Adams Oshiomhole of 
Edo State, Mr. Kassim Afegbua, told one of our correspondents on the telephone 
that his principal needed to personally examine the issue of whether to accept 
death penalty for looters or not because "it requires a process."

"It has to go through a bill. It has to be an act of parliament and a lot of 
things would go into it," he said.

Enugu State governor's Senior Special Assistant on Public Affairs, Mr. Louis 
Amoke, said he would also need to consult his principal, Governor Ifeanyi 
Ugwuanyi, to get his position on the matter.

"I will have to get in touch with him to know his position on the matter, it is 
very sensitive and I will not talk without finding out from him," Amoke told 
our correspondent.

As of the time of this report, Amoke said he had yet to have a contact with the 
governor.

The Governor of Nasarawa State, Umaru Al-Makura, however, said he supported 
that capital punishment be meted out to corrupt public office holders.

"I really agree with the NLC over call for capital punishment for any public 
office holder who is found guilty of looting public funds," the governor said 
in an interview with one of our correspondents.

(source: Punch Nigeria)