[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

June 25




PHILIPPINES:

Church, activists fear reimposition of death penalty ---- Reintroduction will 
see many innocent and poor people executed in the Philippines, they say


Church leaders and human rights advocates marked the anniversary of the 
abolition of the death penalty in the Philippines on June 24 amid concerns that 
capital punishment may soon be re-imposed.

"Innocent people will inevitably be executed for as long as the death penalty 
exists in law," said Rodolfo Diamante, executive secretary of the prison 
ministry of the Philippine bishops' conference.

Jesuit Father Silvino Borres, president of the Coalition Against Death Penalty, 
said that given the "imperfections" in the country's criminal justice system, 
the prospect of executing innocent people remains.

Incoming president Rodrigo Duterte announced this week his plan to revive 
capital punishment - death by hanging - which he said would serve as 
"retribution" for those who committed crimes.

The "death penalty to me is the retribution. It makes you pay for what you 
did," said Duterte.

Former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, a Catholic, signed a law abolishing 
capital punishment on June 24, 2006.

Crimes that had been punishable by death included murder, rape, kidnapping and 
drug trafficking.

Diamante said the church will lead the lobby in Congress against the 
restoration of capital punishment.

"We will also pursue a continuing public education program against the death 
penalty and for alternative options for life," he said.

The long-time anti-death penalty campaigner said the proposal to restore the 
death sentence is "anti-poor" and works against the marginalized and the most 
vulnerable sectors of society.

"Experience shows that most, if not all persons meted the death penalty are 
poor and uneducated, who cannot afford to retain prominent criminal lawyers and 
have no political connections," said Diamante.

(source: ucanews.com)






INDONESIA:

As Lindsay Sandiford turns 60, supporter claims there is hope for Redcar death 
row gran


As she marks what could be her final birthday, sources close to death row gran 
Lindsay Sandiford say she isn't about to be executed.

The convicted Redcar drug mule will spend her 60th birthday today in the 
squalid Indonesian prison she's languished in since she was sentenced to death 
in 2012.

There were fears that the birthday would be her last, with reports she may be 
among one of 16 people shot following the Muslim holiday of Eid.

However a supporter, who has flown to Bali to be with her on her birthday, has 
told the Gazette "Lindsay is not listed for execution."

Christie Buckingham of Bayside Church jetted in from Australia to spend time 
with her friend during what she said was a "very sensitive time" for the 
grandmother.

"At this stage she is concentrating on getting her appeal in place," she added.

Another senior source close to the case confirmed Sandiford is not scheduled to 
be 1 of the 16 prisoners executed in the latest round of executions.

"She is working on her appeal and still has legal avenues left which I expect 
her to use," said the source.

"Certainly there is no indication that she will be executed in the very near 
future."

The mum has been in Bali's notorious Kerobokan Prison since she admitted trying 
to smuggle cocaine worth 1.6m pounds on to the paradise island.

Despite her plight, it is understood she's shunned consular assistance since 
2014.

Instead she has received backing from thousands of Facebook supporters as well 
as the church.

There had been hope she could be spared a trip to a beauty spot dubbed "death 
island", where the Government carry out executions.

Indonesian authorities had halted executions for "economic reasons" but they 
resumed again this year, with 2 of the mum's Australian friends killed.

A Foreign and Commonwealth Office spokesman said: "We oppose the death penalty 
in all circumstances and have made repeated representations on the issue to the 
Indonesian government at the highest levels."

(source: gazettelive.co.uk)






GUYANA:

Statistics do not support the view that abolition of the death penalty does not 
affect the murder rate


Dear Editor,

In societies all over the world when the murder rate is deemed uncomfortably 
high citizens engage in fierce discourse on the merits and demerits of the 
death penalty; Guyana has been no different. Recently I have noticed that this 
discourse has been joined by a number of distinguished professionals and 
academics, who almost to a man state their opposition to the death penalty.

The Kaieteur News of June 13 informs is that Minister Ramjattan opposes the 
death penalty, arguing that he has "statistics to show that the use of such an 
extreme form of punishment does nothing to stop crime." Mr Ralph Ramkarran 
seems to have had the most to say on this matter. He echoes Mr Ramjattan's 
contention. He also claims that the "argument in favour of the death penalty 
has always been revenge." The truth is that the revenge argument is extremely 
old and is no longer seen as a serious argument. Since the 1970s modern 
criminologists are more inclined to talk about the death penalty as a deterrent 
instead. Mr Ramkarran shared many other views on this matter in his Sunday 
Stabroek column. However on those I will be silent for now, since they are 
controversial and a response would demand too much time and space.

Dr Hinds is said to have based his objection to the death penalty mostly on the 
fact that it is disproportionally meted out to racial minorities and the poor. 
Dr Hinds is right; there is overwhelming evidence in both the USA and Europe 
supporting his contention. However, the presence of discrimination and bias in 
sentencing is not an argument against the death penalty. Rather it is more an 
argument for ending discrimination along racial and class lines in the 
administering of justice. Further, Dr Hinds was reported as saying he considers 
the death penalty primitive and therefore having "no place in a modern 
civilized society." This contention I will comment on later.

Since the 2 distinguished lawyers mentioned above both cling tightly to 
statistics on the death penalty which in the words of Mr Ramkarran "does not 
support the assumption that it reduces cases of murder," I will direct my 
attention to their claim first. A perusal of the literature will reveal a 
wealth of information and studies that suggest a different conclusion.

Singapore with the second highest per capita execution rate in the world up to 
1998 had one of the lowest murder rates in the world. Similarly Japan has the 
death penalty even though it uses same sparingly (only in cases of multiple 
murders; single murders rarely attract the death penalty), but it also has one 
of the lowest murder rates in the world. In fact Japan and Singapore hold 1st 
and 2nd place as the countries in the developed world with the lowest murder 
rates.

In the United States the state of New Hampshire had the lowest rate of murders 
(0.9 per 100,000 persons) for year 2014 even though the death penalty has not 
been abolished there. In the state of Maryland the city of Baltimore recorded 
below 200 murders for the year 2011, at that time Maryland still had the death 
penalty. However during the period January 2015 to the end of August 2015 
Baltimore had already recorded 215 murders; the state of Maryland abolished the 
death penalty in 2013. A study done in 2006 by Emory University in Atlanta 
found that "murder rates declined in counties where capital punishment was 
imposed" (Schmalleger, 2007). So in terms of statistics it is perfectly 
reasonable for those who support the death penalty to argue that its use or 
availability leads to a reduction in murders.

Here in Guyana President Granger has indicated an unwillingness to approve "the 
execution of any prisoner." While he did not, based on the report I read, 
elaborate and offer a reason for this unwillingness I suspect that his 
position, similar to that of Dr Hinds, is influenced by ethical considerations. 
On this I am at one with them. For me, when arguing against the appropriateness 
of the death penalty one is on surer ground when one expresses ethical concerns 
as the cornerstone for one's objections to this form of punishment, rather than 
reliance on statistics.

Morally how can the state support its claim of intolerance for killing 
perpetrated by others by itself carrying out acts of killing? The Jamaican 
criminologist Professor Bernard Headley puts it best: "If we are to expect all 
others in the society to respect human life and not deprive another of it, then 
the state must set the example." Secondly there is the uncertainty of the guilt 
of the condemned. Between 1989 and 2007 at least 143 state convicts were 
exonerated through the use of DNA tests in the United States of America. The 
death sentence once carried out cannot be reversed, it does not allow a society 
to correct its mistake. And since we claim to believe that it is best for 100 
bad men to go free than for 1 innocent person to be punished, we have no 
alternative but to support abolishing the death penalty. This is especially so 
here in Guyana since DNA testing is not readily available. In any case the 
presence of DNA evidence at a crime scene is not proof of guilt of a crime.

Editor, the debate on the appropriateness of the death penalty will rage on. As 
a country pressure will be exerted by those international organizations and 
nations which feel small countries must follow their lead. As the pressure 
mounts small nations like Guyana can take courage from Singapore's response. 
Fighting off the UN's criticism on his nation's high level of executions of 
those who commit serious crimes, Singapore's representative at the UN said "the 
right to life is not the only right, and it is the duty of societies and 
governments to decide how to balance competing rights against each other."

In the Kaieteur News of June 15 I noted that the British government by way of 
its Ambassador is encouraging the Guyanese government to abolish the death 
penalty. Through the years in my quest for understanding I have come to accept 
that in human affairs the solution to a problem is all too often the creation 
of another. If we agree that the death penalty is inhumane and unjust we are 
likely to move to imposing life sentences for murders, as is being done in most 
countries that have abolished the death penalty. With Guyana's high murder rate 
coupled with its recidivist rate of over 80%, who is going to help Guyana foot 
the bill for taking care of murderers for life?

Yours faithfully,

Claudius Prince

(source: Letter to the Editor, Stabroek News)






MALAWI:

Parliament Approves Bill Moved By MCP MP On Stiffer Penalties for Albino 
Killers


Members of Parliament (MPs) have passed a motion moved by Dowa East MP Richard 
Chimwendo Banda (Malawi Congress Party-MCP) to amend the Anatomy Act to attract 
stiffer penalties for perpetrators of abduction and killing of people with 
albinism.

Most MPs spokes in supported the bill, saying people found guilty of killing 
persons with albinism should be slapped with life imprisonment or face the 
death penalty.

Chimwendo Banda said the bill will help punish people involved in rituals and 
deter unauthorised possession of human tissues.

He noted that in view of the continued killing of people with albinism and 
cognisance of the fact that the current penal provisions aimed at deterring 
would-be offenders are not having the desired effect, the amended of the 
Anatomy Act would help deter all would-be offenders from committing such 
offences.

Salima North West MP, Jessie Kabwila (MCP) said the bills will demonstrate the 
kick-start of solving the problem of ritual murders.

"We don't have the luxury of waiting," said Kabwila.

"This is a bill which should have been passed yesterday," she said.

Mulanje South MP, Bon Kalindo who has been advocation for death penalty and 
earlier on marched 'half-naked' to push for the same, supported the bill.

"Time has come , we need to do something," he said.

Kalindo said the bill should be supported even by government despite 
originating from opposition lawmaker in a private members motion.

Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs Samuel Tembenu said the Anatomy 
Act is part of the larger Bill whose drafting has been concluded.

"We are developing a proper and appropriate legislation that will cover all 
issues," said Tembenu.

The minister added that the Disability Act, Human Trafficking, Child Justice 
Act and the Anatomy Act would also be amended in the Penal Code.

The faculty of law at the University of Malawi's Chancellor College recently 
faulted the Anatomy Act for the seemingly lighter sentences meted to 
perpetrators of crimes against people with albinism.

(source: Nyasa Times)






IRAN/UNITED KINGDOM:

Husband of woman detained in Iran criticises Foreign Office


The husband of a British-Iranian woman who has been detained without charge in 
Tehran for 83 days has spoken of his anger over the Foreign Office's handling 
of the matter, saying he feels "gamed" by officials who value trade above the 
welfare of British citizens and objected to his going public with the case.

Richard Ratcliffe told the Guardian he felt trade relations had been 
prioritised over the welfare of his wife, Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, and their 
2-year-old daughter Gabriella. "I don't think Nazanin and Gabriella's case, nor 
any of the others, is a top priority at the moment," he said, referring to 4 
other British passport holders he understands are being detained in Iran. "The 
top priority of the Foreign Office is trade."

Zaghari-Ratcliffe, who works for the Thomson Reuters Foundation as a project 
manager, was arrested at Tehran's international airport by members of the 
country's Revolutionary Guard on 3 April. She had been about to return to the 
UK from a family visit in her home country. This month the Revolutionary Guard 
released a statement accusing her of fomenting a "soft overthrow" of the 
Islamic Republic, which her husband described as "farcical".

The 37-year-old charity worker has since been held in solitary confinement 
under interrogation and refused access to a lawyer. If convicted of espionage 
charges she could face up to 20 years in prison or the death penalty.

Ratcliffe did not meet Foreign Office officials until after he had made his 
wife's case public in May, 36 days after her arrest, and then only at his 
request. "It felt almost like the Foreign Office resented me for going public. 
I was angry, and I felt gamed," he said.

"We would have a series of calls and there would be a sort of strange dynamic 
where occasionally it felt like they were almost trying to get me on record as 
having said how helpful [they had been]. It's like dealing with a fucking 
insurance company trying to get out of paying a claim. This is a really odd 
definition of support, isn't it? It is a really odd dynamic to be covering your 
arse that early on."

Ratcliffe describes the government's position as: "'This is a delicate matter, 
we'll hope the Iranians will be nice.' It's like, delicate? I mean, if this was 
your wife? They can use political capital to force the situation. But there has 
been no public statement of criticism by a senior politician, and the Iranians 
notice that."

Zaghari-Ratcliffe is 1 of 3 female dual-citizenship foreign nationals to have 
been detained by the Revolutionary Guard in the past 3 months. But whereas 
since March the US state department website has warned dual-passport holders 
not to visit Iran, the Foreign Office website does not.

Gabriella's British passport was confiscated by the Iranian authorities, and 
she is being looked after by her grandparents. Under Iranian law only her 
father or mother can bring her home. Zaghari-Ratcliffe is being detained 620 
miles from her daughter in Kerman prison.

A Foreign Office spokesman said: "We have been supporting Mrs 
Zaghari-Ratcliffe's family since we were first made aware of her arrest. 
Minister for the Middle East, Tobias Ellwood, has met personally with the 
family to reassure them that we will continue to do all we can on this case."

The matter is understood to have been raised with Iranian officials, including 
by the foreign secretary with the Iranian foreign minister.

(source: The Guardian)