[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

Aug. 22



BANGLADESH:

Son gets death penalty, mother life term in murder case


As a sequel to previous land dispute, bank official was murdered by his 
neighbours in his house at Chandanaish upazila on June 10, 2005.

A Chittagong court on Monday has sentenced a man to death and his mother to 
life term imprisonment for killing a neigbour over land dispute at Chandanaish 
upazila of Chittagong.

The convicts are Humayun Kabir and his mother Shamshunnahar.

Judge Rabiuzzaman of Second Additional District and Sesions Judge's Court 
passed the order in presence of the 2 convicts.

The same court also fined both convicts with Tk 50,000. In default, 
Shamshunnahar will have to serve an additional 6 months in prison.

According to the case documents, the victim Munir Ahmed was an official in 
Agrabad branch of Rupali Bank.

As a sequel to previous land dispute, the bank official was murdered by his 
neighbours in his house at Chandanaish upazila on June 10, 2005.

Of the 2 convicts, Shamshunnahar hit the bank official with a stick while her 
son Humayun struck him in the head with a spade. Critically injured, the banker 
was rushed to Chandanaish upazila health complex. Later he was shifted to 
Chittagong Medical College Hospital where he succumbed to his injuries on June 
29, 2005.

Tanvir Ahmed, son of the victim, filed a case against Shamshunnahar and her 2 
sons Humayun Kabir and Shaon.

The police, however, dropped Shaon from the charge-sheet and submitted it on 
April 19, 2006. The charge was framed against the duo on January 28, 2008.

The court delivered the verdict after taking deposition of 11 witnesses.

(source: Dhaka Tribune)






MALAYSIA:

Let's say no to the death penalty


First and foremost, I would like to thank Amnesty International Malaysia for 
inviting me to give a talk on the topic of the death penalty.

Amnesty International has been in the forefront of highlighting facts on the 
death penalty around the world, and why it should be abolished.

One worrying trend is the arbitrary manner the death penalty is dealt with, and 
lack of proportionality to the crime, due to questionable judicial processes, 
and prejudices inherent in the justice system of the state, besides social 
economic factors that deprive the poor of competent attorneys to represent 
them.

In Malaysia, the number of individuals currently under the death sentence is at 
least 1,043.

In a reply to Parliament on Nov 12, 2014, the home minister disclosed that 
there were 975 persons under sentence of death. Among these, 347 had filed for 
appeals (310 to the Federal Court, and 37 to the Court of Appeal), and 255 to 
the Pardons Board.

In May 2015, Prisons Department director Abdul Basir told the press that there 
were 1,043 death row inmates nationwide.

As of October 2013, 564 individuals had been on death row for over 5 years, 
representing just over 50 percent of all death row inmates.

In October 2012, the DPP commissioned Professor Roger Hood, Professor Emeritus 
of Criminology at the University of Oxford, to design and analyse the findings 
of a public opinion survey on the mandatory death penalty in Malaysia.

The survey of a representative sample of 1,535 Malaysian citizens from all over 
the country, was carried out by Ipsos Malaysia, a leading market research 
company.

The research was designed to elicit views on the mandatory death penalty for 
drug trafficking, murder and offences under the Firearms Act.

By using a series of scenarios, it showed the extent to which members of the 
public support the mandatory death penalty, when faced with the reality of 
having to judge whether the crime merits the death penalty.

In the findings, a large majority said they were in favour of the death 
penalty, whether mandatory or discretionary; 91 % for murder, 74 to 80 % for 
drug trafficking depending on the drug concerned, and 83 % for firearms 
offences.

Concerning the mandatory death penalty, a majority of 56 % said they were in 
favour of it for murder, but only between 25 and 44 % for drug trafficking and 
45 % for firearms offences. This was basically in theory.

Large gap

When asked to say what sentences they would themselves impose on a series of 
'scenario' cases, all of which were subject to a mandatory death sentence, a 
large gap was found between the level of support 'in theory' and the level of 
support when faced with the 'reality'.

For example, of the 56 % who said they favoured the mandatory death penalty for 
murder, whatever the circumstances, only 14 % of them actually chose the death 
penalty for all the scenario cases they judged.

This was only 8 % of the total number of respondents. When interviewees were 
asked whether they would support the death penalty if it were proven that 
innocent persons had been executed, the proportion in favour for murder fell to 
33 %, for drug trafficking to 26 %, and to 23 % for firearm offences.

These findings suggest that there would be little public opposition to the 
abolition of the mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking, murder, and 
firearm offences. Public support for the death penalty for murder is also lower 
than is perhaps assumed, so may not be regarded as a definite barrier to 
complete abolition.

Research on death penalty overseas

A report released by death penalty information centre on April 18 through the 
prestigious National Research Council of the National Academies, based on a 
review of more than 3 decades of research, concluded that studies claiming a 
deterrent effect on murder rates from the death penalty are fundamentally 
flawed.

The report concluded: "The committee concludes that research to date on the 
effect of capital punishment on homicide is not informative about whether 
capital punishment decreases, increases, or has no effect on homicide rates."

Therefore, the committee recommended that these studies not be used to inform 
deliberations requiring judgements about the effect of the death penalty on 
homicide.

There are also various studies done in the United States, which highlight how 
the death penalty has been used unjustly against the black community

Jurors in Washington state are three times more likely to recommend a death 
sentence for a black defendant than for a white defendant in a similar case 
(Prof K Beckett, Univ of Washington, 2014).

In Louisiana, the odds of a death sentence were 97 % higher for those whose 
victims were white, than for those whose victims were black (Pierce & Radelet, 
Louisiana Law Review, 2011).

Since 1973, more than 150 people have been released from death row with 
evidence of their innocence (Staff Report, House Judiciary Subcommittee on 
Civil & Constitutional Rights, 1993, with updates from DPIC). From 1973-1999, 
there was an average of 3 exonerations per year. From 2000-2011, there was an 
average of 5 exonerations per year of defendant discrimination, or both (Prof 
Baldus report to the ABA, 1998).

Hardly a deterrent

The death penalty in Malaysia has been hardly a deterrent in reducing serious 
crimes. For example, the death penalty has not resolved the drug trafficking 
problems due to poor enforcement related to corruption, besides the inability 
of law enforcement officers to cripple influential syndicates which have global 
links, and their ability to pay lucrative amounts to drug traffickers around 
the world.

In the case of homicide, the rage of individuals whose minds are momentarily 
clouded, leaves them in a state where they do not think about the consequences 
of their actions, that could lead to a death penalty.

While there are legal dilemmas facing the death penalty due to arbitrary 
processes, there is a need to look into a broader dimension on whether the 
death penalty is the right choice for the state.

There is a need to understand that death penalty could never be proportional to 
the crime committed due to various factors such as how the crime was committed, 
the manner of how factual evidence was gathered, and the socio-economic 
situation of the perpetrator who might not have the means to hire a competent 
lawyer to represent him.

Being a member of Parliament and the secretary of the Parliamentarians for 
Global Action (PGA), I have highlighted the injustices related to death penalty 
in Parliament.

It is significant that the attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali has stated that 
the government plans to review the death penalty for certain crimes. Former 
minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nancy Shukri has assured me in 
Parliament that there is a comprehensive review of the death penalty.

These are encouraging signs that show that the effort put by MPs and Amnesty 
international, and NGOs concerned, are beginning to bear fruit.

>From the empirical research conducted, it can be concluded that the death 
penalty does not stand the test of due process and proportionality between 
crime and punishment.

The survey in Malaysia and research done overseas show there is a lack of 
definite conclusions on whether the death penalty in itself is able to deter 
crime, and there is discrimination affecting minority communities when it comes 
to the death penalty.

Also, the social and psychological factor of rage that blinds an individual 
from assessing the implications of the crime is not taken into consideration by 
the proponents of the death penalty.

We have to go beyond the reductionist mindset and take a broader dimension to 
solve violent crime in our society.

The most significant aspect of the survey is that Malaysians in general would 
support the abolition of the death penalty if the facts surrounding this 
capital punishment are disseminated through forums of this nature, with civil 
society, public intellectuals, and members of Parliament playing their roles.

The media should also play its rightful role in this process of education 
towards abolishing the death penalty.

(source: M KULASEGARAN is for MP Ipoh Barat. The above was taken from on his 
speech delivered at the 'Abolition of Death Penalty' event organised by Amnesty 
International of Ipoh yesterday----malaysiakini.com)






INDONESIA:

Facing the firing squad: the agonising wait on death row at Indonesia's island 
prison


We were sheltered in a car at Port Cilicap, the gateway to Indonesia's Nusa 
Kambangan island prison, with few places to take cover outside. It was a 
torrential downpour so heavy you could barely see your hands in front of your 
face.

It was 11:30pm on July 28, so heavy was the rain that speculation was mounting 
the firing squad could not complete its gruesome duty that day. The targets 
tied to wooden posts, either kneeling or standing, would be too hard to see.

But by 2:30am, as thunder cracked over the prison island, we received word that 
the executions had taken place as planned.

In the hours ahead we would establish it had been a day of confusion, 
mismanagement and deep human suffering.

We'd arrived at Cilacap earlier that morning knowing the inmates had been given 
72 hours notice, meaning they should face the firing squad sometime after 
midnight on the Friday.

Not long after at the prosecutor's office, the families began to emerge after 
being told the executions would take place that evening, short of the 72 hours 
notice required, a self-imposed rule Indonesia seems to largely disregard.

The raw grief was palpable. So hard to watch and to hear.

The family of Pakistani man Zulfikar Ali had just been told he would soon die. 
His wife could barely stand.

Earlier that week I had visited the Pakistani embassy where, unexpectedly, I'd 
established there was a widespread deep and real question mark over Ali's 
innocence.

I sat with the deputy head of mission while he explained that while Pakistan 
supports the death penalty, there had been at least 2 extensive reports showing 
Ali was innocent.

So much so that even the former Indonesian president Bacharuddin Jusuf Habibie 
appealed to President Widodo to save this man's life.

Later on the prison island, the families gathered in a specially erected tent 
to sit and wait until the deed was done.

The lightning and thunder prevented them from hearing the sound of gunfire.

Father Charlie Burrows went to the prison that evening to counsel 2 Catholic 
inmates, who both survived.

"They were all in their cells ... and obviously we could see it wasn't going to 
happen because it was too late and time was going on," Father Burrows told me.

3 Nigerians and 1 Indonesian, all involved in drug crimes, were executed.

Another 10 inmates, who had just lived through what they believed to be the 
last moments of their lives, were not.

"It all happened pretty quickly in the end," said Father Burrows.

"All the spiritual accompaniers went together to the shooting place, with the 
ones who were actually active, and we were all asked to wait there and we said 
a few prayers together."

Father Burrows described the mental state of the 4 men in those final moments.

"There was a lot of anger -but eventually, usually they realise that they're 
going to die, so it's best you try and die with dignity."

Indonesia provided no clarification as to why some of the inmates were spared 
that night, and whether the excruciating day for inmates and families would be 
relived in the future.

No apology, no explanation, no reason.

(source: Samantha Hawley, abc.net.au)






PHILIPPINES:

Death penalty will set PH in wrong direction, says AI


Since President Duterte took office on June 30, this country has seen so many 
people killed by vigilante death squads. The "kill list" tallied from that time 
by the Philippine National Police presents an appalling death toll of 465 
extrajudicial executions.

The President has acknowledged abuses in the war on drugs, but is not backing 
down from a shoot-to-kill order against drug dealers. He has also ordered the 
reinstatement of the death penalty as a deterrent to crime, which he has 
pledged to eradicate in the first 3 to 6 months of his presidency.

Mr. Duterte has explained these draconian measures that have given the 
Philippines the international reputation of being Asia's latest killing field, 
reminiscent of the genocidal slaughter of up to half a million Cambodians by 
the Khmer Rouge when they occupied Phnom Penh in 1975.

He has justified these massacres, saying that most drug dealers and addicts 
slain in gun battles had put up a fight, but he was sure some were "salvaged" - 
a local term for extrajudicial killings by law enforcers. The excuse has 
alarmed human rights activists who denounced it as "at least, legally 
questionable," as an attempt to whitewash law enforcement agents' involvement 
in the killings, or to look for scapegoats in the witch-hunt for those 
responsible for the summary executions.

Mr. Duterte has been battling with international organizations condemning his 
controversial crime war that has claimed 1,000 lives. He hit out on Wednesday 
at "stupid" UN criticism, warning it not to interfere in Philippine domestic 
affairs. "Why should the United Nations be so easily swayed in the affairs of 
this republic? There were only 1,000 killed," he said.

"What's the problem? You inject politics. Only 1,000 died, and you put my 
country in peril, in jeopardy?" he said. He should have been asked: Why are you 
not bothered by the killings of Filipinos on the basis of nothing more than 
suspicion of having committed crimes. He told foreign human rights watchdogs 
"not to investigate us as though we are criminals" and warned they would not be 
treated well in the Philippines.

Amnesty International (AI) has told Mr. Duterte he must fulfill his 
inauguration pledge to uphold the country's commitment to international law and 
lead a break with the country's "poor human rights record."

Lend substance to words

"President Duterte was elected on a mandate to uphold the rule of law," the 
London-based AI said. "It is encouraging that he spoke of honoring the 
Philippines' obligations under international law in his inauguration speech. 
But now that he is in power, he needs to lend substance to those words and 
break with his earlier rhetoric. Throughout his campaign, the President made 
inflammatory remarks that, if translated to policy, would mark a sharp 
deterioration in the already problematic human rights situation in the 
Philippines. President Duterte's promises to adhere to the rule of law must be 
translated into actual policy and implemented in practice," AI said.

Since winning the election, AI noted, Mr. Duterte has "triggered widespread 
alarm" by calling for the restoration of the death penalty, vowing to preside 
over a wave of extrajudicial executions, threatening journalists and 
intimidating human rights defenders.

Regional leader

"This is a context where a climate of impunity for human rights violations 
prevails in the Philippines, including for torture and ill treatment. Only 1 
police officer has ever been brought to justice under laws criminalizing 
torture, and few have been held accountable for killing journalists ...

"Among President Duterte's many troubling positions is his intention to restore 
the death penalty. Doing so would reverse a decade-long ban in the Philippines 
of this cruel and irreversible punishment. For this [position] the Philippines 
is a regional leader, as it went against the grain of other countries in the 
region.

"President Duterte has said that he intends to apply the death penalty to a 
range of crimes including offenses that do not meet the threshold of 'most 
serious crimes,' which is the only category of crimes for which international 
law allows the death penalty.

"There is no evidence that the death penalty serves as any more of a deterrent 
than prison. At a time when this cruel and inhuman and degrading punishment has 
been abolished in the majority of the world's countries, reimposing it will set 
[the Philippines] in the wrong direction."

(source: opinion.inquirer.net)






INDIA:

Jigisha Ghosh murder case: 1 convict awarded death sentence, life imprisonment 
for other 2


The Delhi court on Monday pronounced its quantum of sentence in the Jigisha 
Ghosh murder case awarding life imprisonment to 1 of the 3 convicts and death 
sentence to the other 2.

Out of the 3 convicts, Ravi Kapoor and Amit Shukla have been sentenced to death 
penalty and Baljeet Malik sentenced with life imprisonment.

Jigisha Ghosh was kidnapped on March 18, 2009 after her office cab dropped her 
near her home in Vasant Vihar, South Delhi at around 4 am.

Her body was recovered after 2 days on March 20, 2009 in Haryana's Surajkund.

On March 23, 2009, the Delhi Police arrested 3 men in connection with the case 
who were convicted on July 14, 2016.

(source: newx.com)






IRAN:

Recent Public Hangings Contribute to Public Intimidation as Crackdown Continues


There has been renewed focus on Iran's misuse and overuse of the death penalty 
during the month of August, since a mass execution of Sunni Kurds was widely 
described as one of the worst mass executions in recent years. The situation 
was made worse by allegations that at least some of those victims had been 
convicted on the basis of forced confessions and had been tortured immediately 
prior to their executions.

Rather ironically, the mass execution came close on the heels of reports that 
Iran's rate of executions had been lower in the 1st half of 2016 than in the 
1st half of 2015. Despite the improvement, it was determined that approximately 
230 executions had been carried out between January and the beginning of July, 
leaving little doubt that the Islamic Republic would retain its title as the 
country with the largest per capita rate of executions in the world.

In 2015, the total year-end figure was very nearly 1,000 people, with the vast 
majority of them being non-violent drug offenders. And although the first 
months of 2016 seemed to mark a substantial decrease, some Iran experts 
explained this away on the basis of the fact that executions frequently slow or 
stop during national elections and the holy month of Ramadan, both of which 
took place in the 1st half of the current year.

Indeed, Iran's attitude toward the death penalty had evidently not-changed, as 
evidenced by the fact that during that time, new death penalties were passed 
against defendants who were below the age of majority at the time of their 
offenses. This is in clear violation of international norms, as outlined in two 
human rights documents to which Iran is a signatory.

The first weeks of August seem to have given the impression that not only has 
Iran's attitude toward executions not changed, neither has its long-term 
practice. In this regard, the August 3 mass execution does not stand alone. 
Numerous executions have been recorded since then. The National Council of 
Resistance of Iran reported that in addition to the 20 Sunni Kurds, at least 16 
other individuals were put to death just between the August 2 and 6.

Now, according to brief reports by the website Iran Human Rights, at least 
seven more Iranians were hanged just on Tuesday and Wednesday of this week. Of 
the 5 people whose death sentences were confirmed in 2 different localities on 
Wednesday, the 2 who were hanged in the city of Bandar Abbas were hanged in 
public. The same may be true of 3 Ahwazi Arab prisoners whom Iran Human Rights 
described as "victims of the Iranian government's systematic repression in the 
ethnic regions of Iran." The Judiciary had slated their execution to be carried 
out in public, but the actual location had not been confirmed after the fact.

Public hangings are a common occurrence in Iran, but it is comparatively 
unusual for there to be 5 in 1 day, in 2 different localities. If it is 
confirmed that this is what took place on Wednesday, it will provide additional 
support to the claims that the Iranian regime is engaged in more aggressive 
intimidation as it evidently continues a crackdown on political dissent and 
secular or pro-Western sentiment.

The NCRI claimed on Thursday that such dissent has become "predominant." It 
quoted Tehran Prosecutor Abbas Jafari-Dolatabadi as saying this, in the context 
of a report showing that 4,400 clothing stores had been forced to close last 
year after theocratic authorities determined that they offered "indecent 
apparel violating public morality."

The NCRI also reported that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei had issued a statement 
on state television in July reiterating the nation's commitment to a crackdown 
on such "violations." "Any discussion over the voluntary or mandatory nature of 
the hijab is deviatory, and does not have any place in the Islamic Republic," 
he said. Khamenei has also spearheaded efforts to discourage women from 
entering the workforce and to encourage them to begin families at an early age.

This has apparently coincided with various other forms of discrimination, 
whether carried out by government institutions or hardline civilian groups. As 
one of the latest examples of this, IranWire reported on Thursday that a highly 
ranked Iranian women's soccer team had been banned from competition. The 
provincial government initially cited budgetary problems, even though funding 
had been increased for a less successful male team.

Subsequently, the justification for the ban was changed to reflect issues of 
public morality, suggesting that some members of the team had been lesbians. In 
Iran, homosexuality remains a serious crime, representing 1 example of Iran's 
extremely liberal application of the death penalty

(source: irannewsupdate.com)