[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

Jan. 19




INDIA:

SC Allows Revival of Dismissed Petition of a Death Row Convict


Mohd Arif, a Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) terrorist and lone death row convict in the 
sensational Red Fort attack case, today got another opportunity to assail the 
award of capital punishment, as the Supreme Court allowed revival of his 
already dismissed review plea by agreeing to accord it a fresh hearing.

A 5-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur modified its 
September 2, 2014 verdict by which the benefit of open court hearing in a 
review petition was available to those convicts whose petitions were pending 
and also whose executions were not given effect.

The apex court, by a majority verdict, had then said that an outer limit of 30 
minutes be provided for oral hearing in such cases and made it clear that a 
condemned convict, whose review plea has been dismissed and sentence is still 
to be executed, can approach the apex court to re-open his case.

"It will also apply where a review petition is already dismissed but the death 
sentence is not executed so far. In such cases, the petitioners can apply for 
the reopening of their review petition within one month from the date of this 
judgement. However, in those cases where even a curative petition is dismissed, 
it would not be proper to reopen such matters," it had said.

Mohd Arif alias Ashfaq, a Pakistani who has already exhausted his review and 
curative remedies, today sought another chance to argue in open court his 
review plea saying that those pleas were dismissed before the historic verdict.

His counsel said that Arif's was the case falling in a solitary category and he 
will be the only person who will be deprived of the benefit of the judgement 
that the review plea of a death row convicts should be heard in open court by a 
bench having corum of 3 judges.

Allowing his plea, the bench also comprising Justices J S Khehar, J 
Chelameswar, A K Sikri and R F Nariman said, "the petitioner is entitled for 
re-opening of the review petition which is already dismissed".

The bench said that Arif's counsel can supplement the grounds taken in the 
review petition.

The apex court took on record the submission of Additional Solicitor General 
Tushar Mehta that there has been departure from ordinary course in hearing 
review petitions in death penalty cases and he does not dispute that some of 
the grounds can be supplemented by the convict.

"Such being the case that even the curative petition filed by the convict has 
been dismissed by circulation without giving him oral hearing in open court," 
it said, adding that the petitioner cannot be deprived.

Before the September 2014 verdict, the review and curative petitions of death 
row convicts were not heard in open courts but decided in chamber proceedings 
by circulation.

Arif's review petition was dismissed on September 2, 2014.

The apex court on April 28, 2014 had stayed Arif's execution in the case. 3 
people, including 2 Army jawans, were killed in the December 22, 2000 Red Fort 
attack.

On August 10, 2011, the Supreme Court had upheld Arif's death sentence and 
dismissed his appeal challenging the capital punishment awarded to him by a 
sessions court, which was affirmed by the Delhi High Court.

(source: outlookindia.com)

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

A death-row convict gets a fresh lease of life ; SC to re-hear ?Red Fort attack 
convict Mohd.


On 2 September 2014, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court had deprived a 
death-row prisoner of the opportunity of open hearing of his review petition by 
3 Judges of the Supreme Court, even while extending this right to other 
death-row convicts, whose earlier review petitions might have been dismissed by 
Judges in chambers. The reason which the bench offered then was that the 
prisoner, whose review as well as curative petitions were dismissed earlier, 
was not eligible to be considered for a 2nd hearing of his review petition in 
the open court.

The opportunity of open hearing of a review petition in the open court by three 
Judges (rather than by just2) means much for a death-row convict, who clings to 
whatever hope that a legal system would offer till his last breath. The 2014 
verdict appeared unjust because it deprived the opportunity of open hearing of 
review petition of the convict only on the ground that his curative petition 
was dismissed, although the same verdict upheld his challenge to the Rule which 
deprived such a hearing.

The prisoner, Mohd Arif is a Pakistan national, and had been convicted and 
sentenced to death for conspiracy in the Delhi Redfort attack case. The Supreme 
Court's 2-Judge bench had confirmed his death sentence in 2011. The bench 
comprised of Justice V Sirpurkar and Justice T S Thakur, presently the CJI.

The Supreme Court subsequently dismissed his review and curative petitions. In 
2014, he challenged constitutionality of the Supreme Court Order XL, Rule 3, 
according to which, review petitions were heard in circulation in the chambers 
of the Judges. He contended that the Rule denied the death-row prisoners an 
opportunity of open hearing of their review petitions, and therefore, was 
violative of Article 21. The Constitution bench upheld his contention through a 
majority judgment (Justice J Chelameswar was the sole dissenter), but found him 
ineligible for the remedy which he won for other death-row convicts solely on 
the ground that he had also exhausted the curative remedy.

The majority judgment then was authored by Justice Rohinton Nariman.

On 19 January, another Constitution bench corrected its error, by accepting his 
petition seeking a review of the 2014 verdict. This bench comprised of all the 
four Judges who were part of the 2014 bench, and as Justice RM Lodha who had 
presided over that bench had retired, CJI Thakur, who incidentally confirmed 
his death sentence in 2011, was the 5th Judge to hear and decide his 2015 
review petition.

In the order issued today, the Court accepted the contention that dismissal of 
the curative petition should not have deprived the opportunity of open hearing 
of the review petition of the death-row convict.

As in the case of other death-row convicts, Arif will now get one month time to 
get his review petition reopened, and get it listed for hearing in an open 
court by 3 Judges of the Supreme Court. He will also get another opportunity of 
filing a second curative petition, in case the 3-Judge bench dismisses his 
second review petition.

The 2014 bench had made it clear that the right of a limited oral hearing in 
review petitions where death sentence was given, would be applicable only in 
pending review petitions and such petitions filed after the judgment. The bench 
extended the remedy to cases where a review petition was already dismissed but 
the death sentence was not executed. In such cases, the petitioners could apply 
for the reopening of their review petition within 1 month from the date of that 
judgment, it was held by the bench. The bench added without justification: 
"However, in those cases where even a curative petition is dismissed, it would 
not be proper to reopen such matters".

Today's bench has now corrected this erroneous addition.Arguing for the 
petitioner, Senior Advocate R Basant stated that the case had come to him 
through the Centre on the Death Penalty at National Law University, Delhi. He 
said the Advocate-on-Record in the case had approached the Centre on the Death 
Penalty expressing his inability to find a Senior Advocate for the oral 
hearing. When the Centre on the Death Penalty briefed him on the matter, he 
submitted that he felt that the case raised issues that deserved the attention 
of the Bench. It was also submitted to the court that the Centre on the Death 
Penalty had supplied him with research that Mohd Arif would be the only person 
amongst current death row prisoners in India who would be adversely affected by 
the exception carved out in the 2014 judgment.

(source: livelaw.in)






PAKISTAN----executions

3 death row convicts hanged in various cities


3 death row prisoners were hanged on early Tuesday morning in the jails of 
Attock, Mianwali and Jhang, Dunya News reported. The dead bodies of the 
prisoners were handed over to their families.

According to details, death row convict Sultan was executed in the District 
Jail Attock. Sultan had killed his wife in 2007 over a family dispute. Death 
row prisoner Ghulam Gilani was hanged in the District Jail Mianwali in a double 
murder case. Ghulam Gilani had killed 2 of his nephews over a family dispute in 
2004.

Another death row convict was executed in the District Jail Jhang. Prisoner 
Allah Ditta was hanged for murdering his friend over a small dispute in 1999. 
(source: Dunya News)






ITALY:

Italian teenagers would bring back the death penalty


1/2 of all Italian 16-year-olds would like to bring back the death penalty. 
They think it should be exemplary and feared by all. 2/5 of them even think it 
should apply to minors, while 43% think it should also apply to those with 
diminished responsibility. They would apply corporal punishment not just to 
murderers but also to those convicted of particularly serious offences, such as 
paedophiles and rapists. They also take a hard line with immigrants, who 51% of 
young Italians see as just a problem, with 19% saying Italy should not accept 
them and 30% saying that those with the proper papers should be allowed in - 
but only temporarily. They are more open to soft drugs, with 41% in favour of 
legalisation, and civil unions accepted by 74% of the total, for both 
heterosexual and homosexuals. These figures come from analysis by Skuola.net, 
based on some recent web surveys for teenagers.

(source: west-info.eu)