[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

Dec. 15



CHINA:

How censorship aids China's execution machine


The executions of Nie Shubin and Jia Jinglong occurred more than 20 years 
apart, yet the Chinese authorities have used the plight of both men to send 
starkly different messages on the death penalty.

Nie Shubin, who was executed in 1995 for rape and murder, received a rare 
posthumous exoneration earlier this month. Officials made much of how this 
wrongful execution had been corrected and that lessons had been learnt. State 
media highlighted how the verdict was overturned based on a presumption of 
innocence, a principle that China's judicial system has only just started to 
recognize.

In 2005, a domestic media outlet revealed that another man, Wang Shujin, 
confessed to the murder and rape Nie had supposedly committed. The news sent 
shock waves throughout China, and has created immense public interest and media 
coverage ever since. It still took more than a decade of persistent campaigning 
by Nie's family, lawyers, journalists, and academics to finally clear his name.

This may seem like an advance for justice, but the authorities did not look 
kindly on another campaign this past month to spare the life of Jia Jinglong. A 
frantic last-ditch effort on Chinese social media eventually came to nothing. 
Jia, who killed a local village official, was executed on 15 November.

Not only were the authorities intent on ending Jia's life, they were intent on 
ending any debate about his plight that - in the view of many- would have 
warranted some leniency. The same type of activism that brought about a 
reversal in the verdict for Nie Shubin was not tolerated this time.

On the day Jia Jinglong was executed, the government's propaganda machine went 
into overdrive, with state-media describing the campaign to save his life as 
"attacking judicial authority." Social media posts were heavily censored and 
state-run press published threatening articles to intimidate Jia's supporters.

Jia, a farmer in China's northern Hebei province, killed a local village chief, 
He Jianhua, on 19 February 2015 with a modified nail gun.

The village chief had ordered the demolition of Jia's 3-story home, which he 
had just meticulously decorated to prepare for his upcoming marriage. Following 
the murder, Jia reportedly attempted to turn himself in. According to 
supporters, the courts should have considered these potential mitigating 
factors when deciding whether to execute him.

For Jia's supporters, China's default death penalty policy first set out by 
authorities in 2006 - "killing fewer, killing cautiously" - seemed to hold out 
a glimmer of hope that the Supreme People's Court might spare his life.

But state censors made sure that those living in mainland China, were not able 
to read many of the online articles presenting the legal case as to why Jia's 
life should be spared.

12 of China's most prominent legal scholars wrote a passionate open letter 
asking the country's Supreme People's Court to grant Jia a reprieve. But their 
open petition was censored - as were many other posts about Jia Jinglong that 
were shared on WeChat - China's main social media platform.

This censorship was accompanied by an ominous editorial in the People's Daily - 
the official mouthpiece of the Communist Party - signalling that the online 
debate had gone too far and that some people could be punished. It said that 
the scope of freedom of expression extended to people talking about cases in 
private or over meals, but not on the internet, where they could influence 
public opinion.

The editorial slammed those who spoke out while only "half-understanding" the 
case, and it warned of consequences for those who harmed the credibility of the 
legal system or harmed judicial authority by transmitting so-called "untruthful 
information."

Nie Shubin's case showed that the government is taking some positive moves by 
redressing emblematic cases of wrongful convictions, but the authorities still 
control the narrative.

China remained the world's top executioner last year. The true extent of the 
use of the death penalty in the country is unknown as the authorities hide data 
on death sentences and executions claiming it to be a state secret, manipulate 
public opinion on specific cases like the Jia Jinglong case, and thereby stymie 
rigorous debate and empirical analysis.

Such censorship is one of the most ironic and tragic aspects of China's death 
penalty system. The government demands that people "comprehensively understand" 
the details of a death penalty case before commenting, and yet the government's 
own laws and policies fuel the ignorance it criticizes.

It is this government secrecy, and not the valiant campaigns that attempt to 
save people like Jia Jinglong from execution, that cause the real harm to the 
credibility of China's legal system.

(source: William Nee, China Researcher, Amnesty International ---- Asia Times)






INDIA:

NIA wants death for Indian Mujahideen leader Yasin Bhatkal


The National Investigation Agency will seek a death penalty for Indian 
Mujahideen operative Yasin Bhatkal who was recently convicted in connection 
with Hyderabad Dilsukhnagar blasts. After convicting Yasin Bhatkal and others 
the court said that it would deliver its verdict on the quantum of the sentence 
on December 19.

NIA officials tell OneIndia that they would be seeking a death penalty for 
Yasin Bhatkal. The NIA in its chargesheet has detailed the manner in which 
Yasin went about recruiting youth and bombing cities. It also points out to an 
interesting meeting called the Usaba which led to the birth of the Indian 
Mujahideen.

Death for Yasin Bhatkal:

Yasin Bhatkal was a very dangerous operative. He killed dozens of people and 
showed no remorse, the NIA would argue while seeking a death sentence. The NIA 
would also argue that Yasin Bhatkal had shown no remorse for his acts and hence 
he deserves to go to the gallows.

The NIA also detailed in its investigation report the manner in which Yasin and 
the rest would meet and plan attacks. They formed a group called Usaba which 
later went to become the Indian Mujahideen.

A group of persons got together in Bhatkal and decided to start a group and 
called it Usaba. The word Usaba in Arabic means congregation. Usaba is a 
congregation of more than 11 persons but less than 40. The primary objective of 
the Usaba was to have a group of like minded persons with the same mentality 
and also same objective.

In this case a group of like minded youth got together and decided that they 
would have a common agenda and that would be to wage a holy war against the 
Hindus. The group got together and said that their only aim should be to wage a 
holy war and also stated that Jihad is an obligation from God to servants to 
establish an Islamic society. In this context there was a need to oppose the 
Indian Constitution, the Usaba also decided.

Friday meetings of the Usaba:

The meetings of the Usaba would take place every Friday at the residence of 
Iqbal Bhatkal in Bhatkal, Karnataka. The meetings would discuss weapons 
training, finances, spotting talents and also spiritual discourse. Discussions 
on procurement of weapons and logistics were also discussed.

This group of youth then decided that they would get in touch with their 
friends who had similar thoughts. In this context persons were Azamgarh in 
Uttar Pradesh, Darbhanga in Bihar and Pune in Maharashtra were called in to 
join the Usaba. Gradually the strength of this group grew from a meagre 8 
persons to 40. However this group decided that they would keep their group 
small and follow the real meaning of Usaba which did not exceed more than 40 
persons.

(source: oneindia.com)






BANGLADESH:

Court orders death sentence for 2 in murder of student Amit Saha in Dhaka


A Dhaka court has found 3 persons guilty in the 2012 murder of a student at the 
capital's Pallabi.

Eastern University student Amit Saha was found murdered at his home on Nov 21 
that year.

The court awarded death penalty to two of the convicts, Ashfak Ahmed Shihab and 
Al Amin islam Pintu while another Ruhul Amin Rubel has been given life 
imprisonment.

According to court documents, the convicts murdered the 20-year-old business 
student before hanging his body from a ceiling fan.

They made away with laptops, tablet computer and gold ornaments from the home.

(source: bdnews24.com)






KENYA:

AG makes submissions on death penalty case at Supreme Court


Attorney General Githu Muigai makes his submission at the Supreme Court on 
Tuesday.

Attorney General Githu Muigai on Tuesday made his submission as amicus curiae 
(friend of the court) at the Supreme Court in a case seeking to establish the 
constitutionality of the death penalty in the new constitutional dispensation.

According to mygov.go.ke, pertinent issues have been raised in the case pitting 
Francis Kariakor Murwawatetu and Others Versus The Republic of Kenya at the 
highest court among them seeking to establish the constitutionality of the 
death penalty, as well as the passing of the death sentence in criminal cases.

The case also comes up at a time when the United Nations General Assembly 
(UNGA) 3rd Committee recently deliberated on the global abolition of the death 
penalty.

The ruling on the judgment of the case by the full bench of the Supreme Court 
is widely anticipated as Kenya has not had any death sentence for the last 20 
years as the cases have been commuted to life sentence.

(source: hivisasa.com)






SOUTH AFRICA:

How the SACP imposed the death penalty on its own members


Maximum sentence for 'gross acts of betrayal' to be decided upon by a special 
tribunal set up by Party's PB (1986)

The following was published as an addendum to the South African Communist 
Party's Inner-Party Bulletin, January 1986:

GUIDELINES FOR THE IMPOSITION OF MAXIMUM SENTENCE

1. Capital punishment may be imposed when a member has committed an act of 
gross betrayal against the Party or any of its allies and which is calculated 
to seriously endanger the safety of structures or activists engaged in 
revolutionary work.

2. Except in an emergency situation under field conditions in which a delay in 
acting would cause irreparable harm to our revolutionary cause, the following 
procedures shall apply in all capital cases:

a) The PB shall set up a special tribunal consisting of at least three (3) 
comrades who shall investigate the capital charge. The tribunal shall, 
circumstances permitting, ensure that the person charged is fully informed of 
all the evidence on which the charge is based, and is given every reasonable 
opportunity to state his or her case.

b) The tribunal shall at the end of its deliberations place before the PB a 
written Report containing a record of the proceedings, its verdict and the 
reasoning on which it is based. A recommendation of Capital punishment shall be 
by majority decision of the tribunal.

c) On receiving such a recommendation the PB may institute whatever further 
enquiries it deems necessary and/or may, by unanimous decision endorse the 
tribunal recommendation and issue such orders as may be necessary for its 
implementation*

(source: politicsweb.co.za)



SYRIA:

Tunisia says 47 Tunisians indicted in Syria, some sentenced to death


The Tunisian Ministry of Foreign Affairs denied yesterday reports that 100 
Tunisian prisoners had been executed by Syrian authorities.

The ministry's clarification comes as local media sources circulated reports 
that the 100 Tunisians had been given the death penalty as punishment for 
"terrorism" after being imprisoned for 2 years.

However according to the press service of the Foreign Affairs Department, only 
47 Tunisian prisoners attended Syrian courts and "only a few have been 
sentenced to death," Faisal Dhaou, the press attach??? for the ministry, said.

"The department does not have accurate data on the number of Tunisians fighting 
in Syria or the Tunisian prisoners who have not yet been tried," he explained.

It is unclear what the Tunisians were doing in Syria upon their arrest but the 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs reiterated that it is in constant contact with its 
consulate in Damascus to inquire about the fate of Tunisians in Syria.

(source: middleeastmonitor.com)






PHILIPPINES:

Solon: House has 'overwhelming' support for death penalty bill


A principal author of the proposal for the reinstatement of the death penalty 
is optimistic they will get a majority vote from their colleagues in the Lower 
House.

"I am pretty sure that the majority of the members of the House of 
Representatives are supportive of the legislation seeking the reimposition," 
Capiz Representative Fredenil Castro said in an interview with ANC's Headstart 
Thursday.

"We are within the range of 300, and out of this 300, without exaggerating, I 
think we will get an overwhelming majority," he added, noting that his "gut 
feel" is that it will be more than 260.

House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez has previously said the House plans to approve 
on 3rd and final reading a bill that would bring back the death penalty before 
it goes to a Christmas break, but congressmen came forward to say they will 
debate in plenary when they come back in 2017.

With several solons speaking out against it, speculation rose that there was 
not enough support from members of the House, hence a push back on the 
deadline--an opinion Castro said he does not subscribe to.

"We cannot stop them from making noise, but actual vote is different from 
making noise in the House," he said.

Castro also asserted that they are moving the discussion of the bill at the 
plenary to after Christmas so it won't be interrupted by a recess.

"I suggested that I will not subscribe for myself delivering my sponsorship 
speech shortly before our Christmas break because I want to maintain a 
continuous discussion by the people, by the media, and all stakeholders on the 
propriety and impropriety of reimposition of the death penalty," he said.

"I don't want an interrupted momentum. This legislation is very important and 
therefore there should be continuity in the discussion and monitoring of our 
people on the progress of this bill in the plenary," he added.

Death penalty in the Philippines was abolished under the 1987 Constitution--the 
1st Asian country to do so--but was reinstated under President Fidel V. Ramos 
in response to increasing crime rates.

It was again abolished under President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, during when the 
harshest penalties were life imprisonment and reclusion perpetua.

In the 2016 elections, however, candidate Rodrigo Duterte was vocal about the 
restoration of death penalty and made it one of his priorities when he ascended 
to the presidency.

Among those who filed House Bill No. 1 that is seeking to restore the death 
penalty was Castro, who voted for its abolition in 2006.

He explained, the time then is different from the present. "Every time I watch 
the news in the evening, I am shocked - my conscience could not accept the way 
crimes are being committed in our country," he said.

He also insisted, Duterte "will have an influence over the decision-making of 
the members of the supermajority," but the president's support will simply be a 
"coincidence" since they "will follow what is dictated by [their] conscience 
and will follow what is good for the country."

The bill is currently being opposed by the Catholic Church, human rights 
groups, and even some lawmakers, who assert that death penalty is not a crime 
deterrent.

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

Amnesty Int'l to solons on death penalty push: Use your conscience


A human rights watchdog is urging Philippine lawmakers to vote with their 
conscience, not with their political affiliations on deciding on the proposed 
restoration of death penalty in the country.

Amnesty International (AI) Philippine Vice Chairman Atty. Romeo Cabarde Jr., 
also said Thursday they will continue to lobby against the bill even though it 
has already passed the House of Representatives sub-committee on judicial 
reforms.

"The human rights organization Amnesty International will continue to call on 
our representatives to heed the call of conscience and human rights and human 
dignity," he said in an interview with ANC's Headstart.

He added, they are also calling on solons to vote "in accordance to what is 
enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and what is our 
commitment in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights."

Cabarde vowed to monitor the bill's progress and continue to oppose it, 
emphasizing that instead of doing the country good, it will lead to the 
"detriment" of the Philippines.

They are also encouraging local groups to oppose death penalty.

"I hope our members in the Congress will truly stand by the name upon which 
they are called, as representatives of the people, and they will listen to what 
the people want," he said.

In an earlier part of the interview, Capiz Representative Fredenil Castro, 
principal author of the bill, said he is confident of the "overwhelming" 
support for the bill's passing.

Cabarde said they cannot yet verify if indeed a large chunk of the floor shall 
vote in favor, but noted that it is "alarming" that the Congress will play "the 
numbers game" and will manage the passage based simply on numbers.

"But I hope that the congress will look at the intrinsic merit, intrinsic value 
of the bill more than just party loyalty or party affiliation of the members of 
congress," he said.

"We will continue to lobby and convince members of congress to vote against the 
death penalty," he added.

AI is condemning the 3 forms of punishment stipulated in the proposed law, 
namely lethal injection, firing squad, emphasizing that they would be 
"repetition of what we had in history."

"We know that the Philippine history, dating back to as early as the Spanish 
colonization, out history is replete with very repressive forms of death 
penalty - from its initial purpose of silencing Filipino resistance to being a 
deterrent to a crime," said Cabarde.

"We feel that these are barbarous methods, these are inhumane and these are 
violations of our fundamental human rights and over the time, over the course 
of history, these forms of death penalty have not really served its purpose," 
he added.

Cabarde also highlighted that once legislated, killing now will become 
"institutionalized."

"There seems to be a disconnect between the message of the proposed bill and 
what we want people to learn from it because why do we have to tell people 
legally through death penalty that killing is wrong by also killing people," he 
said.

(source for both: abs-cbn.com)

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

'Lawmakers won't toe the line on death penalty'


2 lawmakers on Wednesday claimed members of the House won't toe Speaker 
Pantaleon Alvarez's line on the death penalty bill, and that voting would 
depend on conscience, not party affiliation.

Party-list Representatives Jose Atienza of Buhay and Alfredo Garbin of Ako 
Bicol made the stance a day after Alvarez declared that lawmakers belonging to 
the majority bloc would have to vote in favor of the death penalty bill, a pet 
measure of President Rodrigo Duterte.

The House justice committee approved on December 7 a bill seeking the 
reinstatement of capital punishment for heinous and drug-related crimes in 
which the possession of 10 grams of narcotics could be considered drug 
trafficking.

"I don't see it being on a party basis, even if the speaker pushes for it. The 
members will use their conscience.

Many of them are Christians, Catholics. This is not only a legal issue. It is a 
moral issue. How can you allow life to be treated as if it is a commodity that 
the government can take, to think that it is not the government who gives a 
life?" House Deputy Minority Leader Atienza told reporters.

"Are we not scandalized enough with the 5,000 people who have been killed? We 
must first solve the bigger problem here: our weak criminal justice system," he 
added.

The former Manila mayor was referring to the 5,000 drug suspects who were 
killed in police operations or by vigilantes since President Duterte assumed 
office last June 30.

Not commensurate

The vote on death penalty will transcend political affiliation, said Garbin, 
also a deputy minority leader.

"Why? Get this: Anybody can just plant 10 grams of illegal drugs on somebody 
and that person in possession can be charged without bail and could be 
sentenced to death. Yes, death penalty could deter crime, but our justice 
system should be reformatory in character," he said.

"The penalty of death is not being commensurate with the crime committed," 
Garbin added.

The bill lists 21 "heinous crimes," including treason, qualified piracy, 
qualified bribery, parricide, murder, infanticide, rape, kidnapping and serious 
illegal detention, robbery with violence against persons, destructive arson, 
plunder and car theft.

'Sunset provision' eyed

For House Minority Leader Danilo Suarez who is one of the authors of the death 
penalty bill, the chances of the restoration of capital punishment will improve 
if its implementation will be limited to the Duterte presidency, which ends in 
June 2022.

"As it is, the voting will be close, but the death penalty will still win by 
plurality. But I have to tell you that a lot of bishops have asked me to 
reconsider my position, and so I thought of inserting this sunset provision of 
implementing the death penalty only until the end of President Duterte's term," 
Suarez said.

"If we go with this [window], we could see later on that it will be able to 
reduce crime incidents and eliminate lawless elements. But if it turns out to 
be the other way around and fails to curb criminality, there's a remedy. This 
sunset provision could appease the Catholic Church," he added.

Speaker Alvarez is adamant that Congress will be doing the right thing in 
restoring the death penalty, despite the staunch opposition of the Catholic 
Church.

"Just imagine those people who commit heinous crimes. They are like demons. 
Now, why would the Church protect evil? Why would they let evil triumph over 
good?" he said.

"Satan comes in many robes," Alvarez added.

(source: Manila Times)

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

Death penalty has no moral necessity - Ifugao lawmaker


Representative Teddy Brawner Baguilat of the Lone District here said the 
reimposition of the death penalty is "a backward step without moral necessity," 
and urged the public to join the call to stop hasty moves by the House of 
Representatives in reviving the law.

Baguilat cited the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines' firm stand 
that the abolition of the death penalty by the 1986 Constitution was "a very 
big step toward a practical recognition of the dignity of every human being 
created in the image and likeness of God, and the value of human life from its 
conception to its natural end."

"Thus to reimpose the death penalty would mean a backward step without moral 
necessity," he said.

In 2006, the capital punishment was suspended by then-President Gloria 
Macapagal-Arroyo with the support of a Congress noted to be overwhelmingly 
supportive of the tenet that life has value.

Baguilat, a member of the opposition bloc in Congress known as the "Magnificent 
7," said the Constitution requires that there must be a compelling reason to 
reimpose the death penalty but that he finds "none."

He added that the better move today is to strengthen the justice system to make 
sure that justice is served quickly and that real criminals will go to jail.

"As it is, everybody is saying that the justice system is flawed. We need more 
reform to avoid wrongful convictions. Without reforms, the poor will again bear 
the consequence of the weakness and inconsistency in the application of the 
criminal justice system," the lawmaker said.

According to Baguilat, the plan to railroad passage of the death penalty is a 
grave cause for concern considering that it had already been established that 
imposing the capital punishment would not deter proliferation of crime.

"We need to strengthen [the justice system]first to make a more lasting impact 
on criminality. I have never believed in legislating this ultimate 
retribution," he said, adding that there is no credible data showing that the 
death penalty is a crime deterrent.

"That is why I am again appealing to my colleagues in Congress to not rush into 
passing such a bill and instead allow extensive and intelligent discussion," 
Baguilat said.

Apparently as part of the campaign against illegal drugs and criminality, the 
House majority led by House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez remained resolute in 
immediately passing a law that will bring back the death penalty.

President Rodrigo Duterte has consistently said that he wanted the death 
penalty law as part of the package of measures to stop the proliferation of 
drugs and criminality.

"I have always said that I am supportive of the President's campaign against 
drugs and criminality. But there is the right way to do it and reimposing the 
death penalty, which will violate our international commitments, is not the 
right way," Baguilat pointed out.

(source for both: Manila Times)