[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

March 22



MALDIVES:

Maldives to begin final appeal of 2 high profile death sentences


Supreme Court is to begin this week the final appeal proceedings over the death 
sentences handed in 2 high profile murder cases.

Criminal Court sentenced Mohamed Nabeel, 22, a resident of Reef in Galolhu ward 
of capital Male, to death on October 22, 2010 after he was found guilty of 
stabbing to death 18-year-old Abdulla Farhad from Hulhudhoo ward of Addu city.

Ahmed Murrath was sentenced to death over the murder of prominent lawyer Ahmed 
Najeeb in 2012.

High Court had upheld the sentences.

Both the suspects had not exercised the right to appeal the appellate court's 
verdicts, prompting the prosecution to forward the cases to the Supreme Court 
late last year for a final review.

Regulations on death penalty that came into effect in 2014 require the 
prosecution to exhaust the appeal process -- the High Court and Supreme Court 
-- even if the convict wishes to not file for appeal.

According to the Supreme Court's schedule, the 1st hearing in Murrath's appeal 
would be held on Wednesday, while Nabeel's appeal proceedings would begin on 
Thursday.

Murrath's lover, Fathimath Hana had also been convicted and sentenced to death 
over the murder in 2012. But the appeal of her sentence is yet to be concluded 
by the High Court.

The announcements by the Supreme Court come a day after it began the last stage 
of appeal of the death sentence handed to Hussain Humam over the brutal murder 
of former Ungoofaru MP Dr Afrasheem Ali.

Humam was found guilty of the MP's murder and sentenced to death in January 
2015. He later appealed the sentence.

High Court had on September 7 upheld the death sentence handed to Humam.

The prosecutor general's (PG) office had in November forwarded the case to the 
Supreme Court to initiate the final stage of appeal after Humam failed to 
appeal the sentence against him within the appeal window.

Afrasheem was found brutally stabbed to death on the stairway of his apartment 
building in October 2012.

Criminal Court had acquitted Ali Shan of Hicoast in Henveyru district of 
Afrasheem's murder.

There are around 10 people on death row at present, but none of whom has 
exhausted the appeal process thus far. If Humam's sentence is upheld by the 
apex court, he would be the first of the inmates on death row to have completed 
all the 2 stages of appeal.

Authorities had pledged to implement the death penalty after the exhaustion of 
the appeal process.

(source: haveeru.com)






IRELAND:

An Irish dead man walking who survived death penalty


The bloody and divisive Irish Civil War resulted in the surprise restoration of 
the death penalty.

The last-minute decision to reinstate the ultimate deterrent would cost 29 
ordinary Irish citizens their lives after they were convicted of murder, until 
the death penalty was abolished in 1964 for everything but the murder of public 
figures.

Dozens more would have the penalty imposed on them only to receive last-minute 
commutations. Patrick Aylward was one such individual whose escape from the 
gallows became legendary.

In an increasingly urbanized society it can be difficult for the modern Irish 
person to comprehend the vicious feuds between rural farming families. Sadly, 
in the Ireland of 1922, these fights were all too common.

Patrick Aylward was 63 years old and a farmer from Mullinavat, County Kilkenny. 
He had returned to Ireland in 1921 after 39 years in Connecticut in order to 
nurse his elderly brother on their 25 acre holding. 50 yards away lived the 
Holden family, which included Patrick, Mary and their 8 children.

Relations between the two households had soured shortly after Patrick's return. 
He complained about the alleged trespassing on his land by animals belonging to 
the Holden family, even setting his dog on a goat belonging to Mrs. Holden. On 
another occasion, a missing fowl belonging to the Holdens was found dead in 
Aylward's shed. Mary would describe her neighbor as a violent and unpredictable 
man who had twice struck her with a stick.

Aylward disagreed, asserting that she was the aggressor and had attacked him 
several times. Her children also constantly annoyed his animals and used his 
well as a toilet. What started out as a minor disagreement was about to take a 
far more sinister turn.

On Saturday, April 21, 1923, Patrick Holden was out working while his wife was 
minding the children. At 5pm Mary put her 18-month-old son William to bed and 
departed the house to buy an outfit for another son's confirmation. Despite the 
lawless nature of the times, Mary saw fit to place 8-year-old Patrick in charge 
of the house in her absence. She told him to lock the door and stay inside. His 
younger sister Mary and brother Michael were also present. William, the 2nd 
youngest of the Holden family, suffered from rickets and was not able to crawl 
or walk but was sleeping peacefully when his mother left.

Some minutes afterwards, Patrick Aylward allegedly knocked at the Holden's 
front door. The children reluctantly opened the door and Aylward burst in 
shouting that he "would put an end to the trespassing." Aylward lifted William, 
who was still sleeping, and walked over to the fire. He then proceeded to hold 
the infant down over the burning grate. Patrick Holden allegedly endeavored to 
intervene but was powerless against the older man's strength.

Aylward stayed watching the crying infant as he burned on the fire, all the 
while using a stick to hold off the other children. Just as William's clothes 
caught fire, Aylward said "Don't let them goats into my haggard anymore" before 
striding out the door. The children quickly removed their infant brother from 
the fire and put him in a bucket of water to quench the flames. The 
severely-burned baby was then put back into his bed and the door was locked.

Patrick Holden Snr. arrived home within the next few minutes to be met with 
several hysterical children and a baby suffering from life-threatening burns. 
There were no garda??? in the area at that turbulent point in Irish history, so 
Holden instead sent for a doctor from Waterford. He duly arrived and found the 
baby in a state of collapse. William was charred black all over his body and 
died from toxemia 24 hours later.

The coroner's inquest took place just days after the death. Aylward appeared 
and denied having any knowledge of the burning. The coroner referred the case 
to the gardai nonetheless, but also had harsh words for the bereaved Holdens, 
telling them that he did not know whether to sympathize with them because they 
had abandoned their young children at home. Aylward was arrested on May 8. He 
replied "I did not do it."

The murder trial began on the November 26, 1923. The prosecutor stated that the 
prisoner was "charged with a crime which, if proved against him, was as 
terrible and hideous a crime as any one described as a human being could 
commit." Aylward maintained a cool demeanor throughout despite the gravity of 
the charges against him. He pleaded not guilty.

Dr. Matthew Coghlan appeared on the stand and told the court that the injuries 
to William Holden could not have occurred accidentally. When asked about the 
defendant, he described him as a "degenerate" who lived in squalor, referring 
to the Aylward homestead as a "manure heap and cesspool." He did insist that 
Aylward was sane and capable of distinguishing right from wrong, however.

Patrick Holden also took the stand and was described as an intelligent witness, 
despite never attending school and being unable to write his name. He described 
letting Aylward in and witnessing his neighbor grabbing William and putting him 
across the fire. Patrick attempted to aid his brother but was unable to do so. 
Michael Holden also recounted Aylward raising a stick at them and telling them 
as he left the house "Don't tell your mother or I'll kill you."

Patrick Aylward admitted that he had poor relations with his neighbor but 
insisted that he had not been in their house for 5 months before the incident 
when he had complained to Mrs. Holden about her children chasing his sow and 
swimming in his spring well. Her response was to hit him with a scrubbing 
brush. He retaliated by giving her a whack with his walking stick. He denied 
harming the children however, pleading "Don't you think I have a soul to save 
as well as everyone else, or what do you think I am?" Aylward insisted that the 
Holdens had told their children to lie about him. 2 witnesses, Aylward's 
brother and a friend, also vouched that the prisoner had been tending a sick 
cow all day and had not visited his neighbors.

The trial took just 1 day and despite the contentious and contradictory 
evidence the all-male jury needed just 10 minutes deliberation before passing a 
guilty verdict, with a recommendation to mercy. The judge announced his 
agreement and sentenced the prisoner to death. Aylward responded "I am not 
guilty at all. I have not been in that house for five months. May God forgive 
the woman who put the lie on me and God forgive the jury." His pleas fell on 
deaf ears and his execution was set for the December 27, putting him among 5 
convicted murderers to be sentenced to death in that month.

3 of the men would indeed be hanged. Aylward, however, was fortunate to receive 
petitions from numerous luminaries, including the Bishop of Ossory. His Grace 
petitioned government minister Kevin O'Higgins, questioning the guilt of the 
elderly man. He mentioned the Holden family's "bad moral character," and 
alluded to a previous incident when another Holden child had burned to death in 
suspicious circumstances in 1910.

It was announced just hours before the execution that Aylward's death sentence 
was to be commuted to one of penal servitude for life. The minister was not 
obligated to give a reason for this sudden commutation but a reasonable doubt 
was surely present. The government may also have been reluctant to execute a 
man solely on the evidence of children. Patrick Aylward served 10 years in 
prison and was released in 1932. He died 3 years later, still maintaining that 
he had taken no part in the burning of William Holden.

The death penalty remained in the Irish Constitution until 1990 and 28 men and 
1 woman would meet their death at the end of an Irish rope. Harry Gleeson was 
shamefully hanged for murder in 1941, a crime he did not commit. 20 years 
before, did Patrick Aylward come within hours of suffering a similar injustice? 
The truth may never be known.

(source: Colm Wallace has written a book "Sentenced to Death: Saved from the 
Gallows" about 30 Irish men and women who had the death penalty imposed on them 
between 1922 and 1985. It is being launched on the June 17 and is available for 
pre-order on books.ie or Amazon----irishcentral.com)


UNITED KINGDOM:

Free Talk on Japanese Death Penalty


A free documentary screening and public lecture on the Japanese death penalty 
is being hosted at the University of Portsmouth this week.

Dr Mai Sato, a lecturer in criminal law at the University of Reading, will give 
a talk after the screening of The Wavering Public? The Death Penalty, Justice 
and Public Opinion, which provides a rare insight into public perceptions of 
this controversial topic in Japan.

Dr Sato said: "Japan, unbeknownst to many, retains the death penalty, and still 
executes criminal offenders to this day.

"The Japanese government's official justification for preserving the death 
penalty is that the majority of the public is overwhelmingly in favour of this 
method of criminal punishment.

"They argue that support for the death penalty is so strong and entrenched in 
Japanese culture that abolition is not possible."

However Dr Sato's recent report, which analysed government data and 
investigated public opinion, found that contrary to the government's claim that 
there is an '80 % majority support' of the death penalty, the Japanese public 
is in fact largely ready for the abolition of capital punishment.

The documentary explores what the death penalty means to 135 ordinary citizens 
who are filmed discussing crime and punishment in a retentionist state - one in 
which much of the practice surrounding the death penalty remains secretive and 
discreet.

The free event is on Wednesday, 23 March from 6 - 7pm and will be followed by a 
drinks reception.

(source: aboutmyarea.co.uk)

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

BBC To Re-Tell Grisly Events Behind Rillington Place Murders----The tragic tale 
of miscarriage of justice contributed to the abolition of the death penalty.


A brand new BBC drama will retell the real-life grisly events behind the 
multiple murders committed by John Christie in Notting Hill in the 1940s and 
'50s, made famous by the 1971 film '10 Rillington Place'.

Tim Roth and Samantha Morton will star in 'Rillington Place', which starts 
filming today in Scotland.

The 3-part drama will follow the same events as the earlier film, which starred 
Richard Attenborough as the killer, and John Hurt as his neighbour Timothy 
Evans.

The subsequent tragic miscarriage of justice, which led to Timothy Evans being 
hanged for a crime he did not commit, contributed towards the abolition of 
capital punishment in Britain.

Tim Roth plays John Christie, who lived at the infamous address with his wife 
Ethel (Samantha Morton) from where he carried out the multiple murders.

Newly-weds Timothy and Beryl Evans, played by Nico Mirallegro ('The Village', 
'Common') and Jodie Comer ('Doctor Foster', 'Thirteen'), fall prey to 
Christie's influence after moving into a neighbouring flat.

The drama will be directed by Craig Viveiros, who enjoyed recent success with 
Agatha Christie adaptation 'And Then There Were None'.

(source: BBC news)






INDIA:

Time to re-look at sedition law, says law panel's new head Chauhan


There is a need to revisit India's controversial sedition law, the 
newly-appointed chairman of the Law Commission said, flagging a sensitive issue 
weeks after the arrest of several JNU students sparked a nationwide debate on 
nationalism and free speech.

"We should give it a fresh look. The Indian Penal Code was drafted almost 150 
years ago and the British rulers had a different purpose behind the law. It's 
time for us to examine whether the law holds good today or not," justice BS 
Chauhan told Hindustan Times.

JNU students' union leader Kanhaiya Kumar and 2 others were arrested in 
February over an event when anti-India slogans were allegedly shouted. They 
were among 6 students charged under the sedition law.

Justice Chauhan - a retired Supreme Court judge who took over as the chairman 
of the 21st Law Commission earlier this month - however, said misuse of a 
particular law can't be the sole ground to declare it unconstitutional or to 
repeal it. The commission advises the government on legal issues but its 
recommendations are not binding.

"Whatever recommendations we make would be after having a public debate 
involving law universities ... law teachers and after examining its definition, 
judicial pronouncements and taking into views of all concerned."

Several opposition parties have demanded that the sedition law should be thrown 
out as it was a relic of the Raj.

Justice Chauhan's statement comes a few days after the Narendra Modi-led NDA 
government told Parliament that the sedition law was a broad-brush measure and 
needed a review.

"Anybody who speaks against the government can be booked under sedition law. 
Amendments have been suggested because the definition is very wide. That is why 
concerns have been raised," minister of state for home Kiren Rijiju told the 
Rajya Sabha last week.

Home minister Rajnath Singh said the government would call a meeting of all 
parties to discuss the matter after the Law Commission submitted its 
recommendations.

Justice Chauhan and the commission's member, justice Ravi R Tripathi, said they 
would like the government to prioritise the issues it wanted the panel to take 
up.

Law on sedition

Sedition was not a part of the original IPC that came into force in 1862. It 
was added to the in 1870 and its scope and ambit was broadened in 1898 to deal 
with the freedom movement that was gaining ground.

According to Section 124A, a person commits the crime of sedition if s/he 
brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to 
excite disaffection towards, the government established by law in India. It can 
be by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible 
representation, or otherwise. The maximum punishment for sedition is 
imprisonment for life. Explanation 1 to Section 124A clarifies that the 
expression "disaffection" includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity.

Explanation 2 and 3 to Section 124A make it clear that comments expressing 
disapprobation of the measures of the government or an admin???istrative or 
other action of the government with a view to obtain their alteration by lawful 
means, without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or 
disaffection, do not amount to sedition.

The Supreme Court upheld its validity in Kedar Nath Singh versus State of Bihar 
in 1962.

A 5-judge constitution bench headed by then chief justice of India BP Sinha 
said though the section imposed restrictions on the fundamental right to 
freedom of speech and expression, the restrictions were in the interest of 
public order and were within the ambit of permissible legislative interference 
with the fundamental right.

The law struck the correct balance between individual fundamental rights and 
the interest of public order, the SC said.

The apex court, however, clarified sedition law would be attracted only if the 
offence was such that it could cause "public disorder" by acts of violence.

But despite the clarification given by the SC, sedition law has often been 
misused by various states.

Homosexuality

Asked if he favoured de-criminalising gay sex, justice Chauhan said: "There 
should be a public debate. England also debated the contentious issue for more 
than a decade before finally de-criminalising it. A commission was appointed in 
1957 to look into it and 10 years later homosexuality was de-criminalised."

He said discussions should happen and then Parliament should make a law in the 
light of public opinion.

Death penalty

Justice Chauhan -- who was a member of the SC bench that upheld Mumbai blasts 
case convict Yakub Memon's death penalty ??? said: "Let it be on the statute 
book. Where they (courts) feel death penalty is not required, let them give 
fixed term sentences such as 30 years or 40 years in jail."

Stating that the Mumbai blasts case was not a simple case of bombing but a war 
against the nation, he said that "even in that case we commuted the death 
sentence of so many convicts and upheld the death sentence of just one of 
them".

Uniform civil code

He refused to comment on the issues of uniform civil code and discrimination 
against women in Muslim Personal Law, saying these issues are pending before 
the Supreme Court. He however, said gender discrimination was there in other 
religions' personal laws as well and Parliament should consider these issues.

Justice for poor

The Law Commission chairman said he would strongly recommend that judiciary 
reserve some of its time for poor litigants, particularly those languishing in 
jails. "There should be dedicated benches to hear bail matters of those 
languishing in jail for years," he added.

(source: Hindustan Times)






SINGAPORE:

Jackie Chan wants drug offenders to be executed?


This article was originally published by The Influence, a news site that covers 
the full spectrum of human relationships with drugs. Follow The Influence on 
Facebook or Twitter.

Singapore is not exactly notorious for rational law enforcement or 
compassionate drug policy. The city state of five and half million has strict 
laws governing everything from spitting to chewing gum in public. Seventy 
percent of executions in Singapore over the past few decades (happily, the 
number has dropped off steeply in recent years) are for drug offenses. And the 
government has been widely mocked for its simple-minded approach to drug 
enforcement.

Enter internationally beloved martial arts movie star and former UNICEF 
goodwill ambassador Jackie Chan. The Hong Kong native has become Singapore's 
1st celebrity anti-drugs ambassador. Why on earth would he associate himself 
with this regime?

Back in China, his own son, Jaycee Chan, was imprisoned for 6 months on drug 
charges. Chan referenced his son when explaining his new role:

I have always supported anti-drug causes, even more so now because my own 
family member is a victim. Right now he just holes up in his room, writing 
songs. He doesn't dare to face the world and the media. But I told him, you 
need to face them. Everyone makes mistakes - we just need to recover from them.

Jaycee Chan's "victimhood" comes in the form of merely testing positive for 
marijuana. Targeted as part of the Chinese government's crackdown on 
celebrities, Chan Jr. was lucky not to have ended up in China's sprawling 
"detoxification centers," which in many cases are simply repurposed gulags.

Far from criticizing China's witch-hunt, Jackie Chan has effectively endorsed 
it, as well as wrongly asserting that experimentation with drugs invariably 
leads to addiction. Chan has even gone so far as to advocate the death penalty 
for nonviolent drug offenses: "I approve the death penalty, for certain cases 
... For drugs, when you sell it, you are hurting thousands of people and 
children - those people are useless. I am not a judge, but some cases deserve 
heavy penalty."

Not such a nice guy after all.

(source: rawstory.com)


UNITED ARAB EMIRATES:

Terror charges downgraded against Canadian detained in UAE


Terrorism charges against a Canadian imprisoned in the United Arab Emirates for 
more than a year have been dropped, marking what his family called a major 
development in the man's case.

But Salim Alaradi's legal battle is far from over, as a state prosecutor 
announced at a court hearing Monday that the Libyan-born man had been charged 
instead with 2 lesser offences.

"What happened today is clear evidence that my father is innocent," Alaradi's 
18-year-old daughter Marwa told The Canadian Press. "The closer we get to his 
innocence the more the U.A.E. State Security plays games with his freedom."

Alaradi, who immigrated to Canada in 1998 from the U.A.E. but returned there in 
2007 to run a home appliance business, was on vacation with his family in Dubai 
when he was arrested in August 2014.

He was among 10 men of Libyan origin detained around the same time -- some of 
them have since been released.

When his trial got underway in January, the 48-year-old pleaded not guilty to 
the terrorism charges which related to funding, supporting and co-operating 
with terrorist organizations.

His Canadian lawyer said the dropping of the terror-related charges was a 
significant development.

"It was a real dramatic turn," said Paul Champ. "It seems that state security 
is trying to salvage this situation and save face when they know they really 
don't have anything against these men."

The lesser charges Alaradi now faces allege he provided supplies to groups in a 
foreign country without permission of the U.A.E. government and collected 
donations without permission of the U.A.E. government, Champ said.

"The most serious outcomes that we were most concerned about are off the table, 
whether it was life imprisonment or even the death penalty," Champ explained. 
"We're hoping that these might be viewed as relatively minor charges."

Alaradi has always admitted he helped raise funds and secure supplies for the 
new transitional council in Libya after the ouster of longtime Libyan leader 
Moammar Gadhafi in 2011, Champ noted.

"That was fully supported by the U.A.E. government and all western governments 
at the time," he said. "Since there has been increased unrest in Libya starting 
in 2012, Mr. Alaradi has nothing to do whatsoever with the political situation 
there."

The U.A.E. was part of the NATO-led coalition that ousted Gadhafi and has taken 
a keen interest in the country's future since.

Alaradi's case has drawn growing international attention since he and his 
co-accused went on trial.

UN human rights experts last month demanded the U.A.E immediately release him 
and his fellow detainees.

The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention also examined the men's cases and 
cited advocates for the detainees alleging that the men had been deprived of 
sleep for up to 20 days, beaten on the hands and legs and suffered "electric 
shocks with an electric chair."

The scrutiny seems to be having an impact, Champ said.

"I think the contrast between the human rights violations that are occurring 
against these men and the reputation that the U.A.E. likes to project to the 
world is really what's on display here," he said. "Hopefully we're going to see 
a fair process the rest of the way here and Mr. Alaradi will be acquitted."

A spokeswoman with Global Affairs said Canada was urging the U.A.E. to ensure 
Alaradi received a fair and transparent trial.

"The government of Canada is seized of the seriousness of Mr. Alaradi's case 
and is fully engaged in efforts to ensure a prompt and just resolution," said 
Rachna Mishra, who noted that Canadian officials "at very high levels" have 
raised concerns about Alaradi's well-being.

Alaradi will be back in court on April 11.

(source: cp24.com)






EGYPT:

Request to remove judge in 'Rabaa Operations room' case refused----On Sunday, 
the trial was suspended to allow for reviewing the request to remove the judge


The controversial "Rabaa Operations Room" case is to be retried after the Cairo 
Court of Cassation accepted appeals on verdicts issued against 38 defendants in 
the case.

The Cairo Appeals Court refused Monday a request demanding the removal of the 
judge in the 'Rabaa Operations room' retrial, leading to the continuation of 
the case after it was suspended for one day.

The demand was presented to the court by the defence team of Mohamed Badie, 
supreme guide of the now-banned Muslim Brotherhood, arguing the flawed legal 
status of the court. As a result of the refusal, Badie will have to pay a fine 
of EGP 2,000. On Sunday the court decided to look into the demand and suspended 
the retrial.

The retrial involves at least 50 defendants, including prominent Muslim 
Brotherhood members, such as former spokesmen Mahmoud Ghozlan and Gehad 
El-Haddad. A number of the detainees in the case have gone on hunger strike, 
including US citizen Mohamed Soltan, who was reportedly on hunger strike for 
over 300 days. Soltan is currently in the US after being deported following his 
rescinding of his Egyptian nationality.

The defendants in the case include 14 journalists and media workers, 13 of whom 
received life sentences and one who received the death penalty. These include 
board members of the Rassd news network Abdullah Al-Fakharany and Samhy 
Mostafa, along with the head of Al-Aqsa channel, Ahmed Sebai, who was sentenced 
to life in prison.

The prosecution accused the defendants of setting up an "operations room" for 
the Rabaa Al-Adaweya sit-in in 2013 and giving orders to the protesters, which 
created "nationwide chaos".

Also on Monday, Badie stood trial in front of a court at the Police Academy in 
the case involving post-Rabaa Al-Adaweya sit-in violence in Ismailia. Badie is 
charged with inciting supporters to burn government buildings. The case will 
continue on Tuesday.

He is also a defendant in several cases where he is charged with committing and 
inciting violence.

(source: Daily News Egypt)


SAUDI ARABIA:

Sick public beheadings & female beatings which aren't ISIS - but UK's FRIENDS 
Saudi Arabia----BRITAIN'S special relationship with Saudi Arabia has been 
brought into question ahead of a sickening documentary exposing the brutal and 
oppressive life under the totalitarian nation.


The shock footage shows numerous public beheadings

Horror footage, revealed in a documentary to be broadcast tomorrow, shows five 
headless bodies - said to belong to robbers - hanging on a pole as a reminder 
to the public not to step out of line.

They were said to have been left there for days.

In another brutal example of Saudi Arabia oppression a woman is held down on a 
roadside while a policeman decapitates her with a sword.

The victim, who screams "I did not do it" just before her executions, had been 
convicted of killing her stepdaughter.

The documentary includes interviews with those living under the brutal 
dictatorship, where women are considered 2nd class citizens.

They bravely speak out against the regime risking the wrath of the state where 
blasphemy is punishable by stoning.

Leading politicians have recently criticised Britain's relationship with the 
Islamic state and the latest revelations will put even more pressure on the 
Government to act.

In January Liberal Democrat Tim Farron called for a debate on the issue after 
it was revealed 47 prisoners were executed in 1 day.

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

New documentary features public beheadings in Saudi's 'brutal' regime -- The 
documentary called Saudi Arabia Uncovered also features never seen before 
footage from the country.


A woman clad in black burqa is surrounded by Saudi policemen on a street in 
Mecca, they hold her down to the ground as she desperately screams 'I did not 
do it', her voice almost like that of a trapped animal. One of the men dressed 
in white robes then brandishes a sword as she continues screaming. He beheads 
her with one stroke and her blood is splattered across the road and the screams 
die. This is a real and chilling public execution that is just one of the stark 
brutal scenes in a new documentary that aims to expose some 'brutal' realities 
of Saudi Arabia.

The woman was convicted for killing her stepdaughter and decapitated in the 
middle of a road. The video had caused much anger in the country, not over the 
beheading but over the fact that it was recorded and could be seen by her 
family. A new documentary called 'Saudi Arabia Uncovered' which will be aired 
this week for the first time, is the effort of men and women who did extensive 
undercover reporting to show the world the brutality of Saudi regime.

While most of us have heard that Saudi Arabia is notorious for its public 
beheadings, watching the blood-curdling life executions, make it more real and 
terrifying.

The film shows how those accused of crimes are made an example of and the 
public is not allowed to forgive or forget their crimes easily. The legal 
system in Saudi Arabia is based on Sharia and the death penalty is handed out 
for a number of crimes including adultery, murder, armed robbery, drug-related 
offences, alleged sorcery, rape and apostasy from Islam.

Another footage in the documentary shows five bodies hanging from a pole that 
is held in mid-air by 2 red cranes. They were a gang of robbers who were first 
executed and then their bodies were tied and suspended from the pole for days 
as a chilling reminder for citizens to see what happens to those who choose a 
life of crime.

While some of the footage in the documentary are already in public domain, it 
features some rare and never seen visuals and tells the untold stories of men 
and women who dared to raise their voice against the regime and paid with their 
lives for their courage.

The film is already facing pressure and a Saudi women's rights activist Loujain 
al-Hathloul has been receiving death threats for being a part of the 
documentary. Hathloul had earlier been jailed for posting a video of herself 
driving a car, as women are not allowed to drive in the country despite having 
attained the right to vote, if only recently.

The yet to be aired documentary could rattle the power corridors in the highly 
secretive and notorious Muslim country and it would not come as news if Saudi 
authorities try to pressure its allies from banning the screening of the film 
in coming days.

The documentary not only speaks of the barbaric crime and punishment systems 
but also exposes what is being taught to young boys and girls inside Saudi 
mosques.

A cameraman who was shooting secretively asks a boy what he is taught and pat 
comes a horrifying reply, 'All Christians must be punished with death until 
none of them are left, they should all be beheaded.'

The film also shows a preacher who was secretly filmed giving hate-filled 
messages about non-Islamic religions and asking Allah to finish all those that 
do not believe in Muslim faith.

The documentary is being produced by ITV and the Public Broadcasting Service 
and will be aired in US on March 29.

(source for both: The Express)






PHILIPPINES:

Pro and con of death penalty: Poe, De Lima give their view


Presidential candidate Sen. Grace Poe said her interaction with the public 
during provincial sorties had prompted her to reassess her stand on the 
reimposition of the death penalty.

During the 2nd PiliPinas Debate in Cebu on Sunday, Poe and Davao City Mayor 
Rodrigo Duterte declared their support for capital punishment, while rivals 
Vice President Jejomar Binay and Liberal Party standard bearer Mar Roxas were 
opposed.

Poe said she was previously opposed to the return of death penalty which was 
abolished by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in 2006.

She said she changed her mind after going around the country the last few 
months, during which the public pulse was overwhelmingly for the return of the 
death penalty but only for a select group of criminals.

"I believe that if we cannot stop the rise of criminality in the country and we 
have to impose strict rules, I am [for the reimposition of the death penalty] 
only for heinous crimes, drug pushers and repeat offenders," Poe said in an 
interview after the debate.

The senator said she believed there were some people who could not be 
rehabilitated and must be made an example "no matter how much it would hurt 
inside" to instill fear in others.

Fix justice system first

Poe, however, said she would not rush the reimposition of the death penalty 
because she wants to fix the justice system to ensure the poor would not be 
abused by the rich and powerful.

She said she would make sure that the poor would have access to legal 
representation by increasing the budget of the Pubic Attorney's Office to 
attract more brilliant lawyers to work for the state.

"It is up to Congress to do that because a president cannot just go out and 
reimpose it. If we cannot stop crimes, we have to have this in place," she 
said.

But former Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, a Liberal Party senatorial 
candidate the reimposition of the death penalty, saying the state had the 
responsibility to offer reformation programs for all criminal offenders.

"No empirical evidence anywhere [in the world] has suggested that the death 
penalty deters crime," De Lima said in a statement.

"The death penalty should be abolished not only because there is no correlation 
between this punishment and crime deterrence, but also [because] its effects 
are basically irreversible," she said.

De Lima, a former Commission on Human Rights chair, said criminals should be 
given a chance to "become reformed members of society."

Punishment enough

Putting individuals behind bars for life without parole is punishment enough 
for those involved in the illegal drug trade, human trafficking, sex-related 
offenses, serial killings and mass murders, she said.

Instead of implementing the death sentence, she said the government should 
institute measures for a "modern and simplified criminal code" to ensure higher 
conviction rates of cases brought against perpetrators of heinous crimes.

"We should also note that the CHR has said that most of those convicted belong 
to the lower classes, the poor and disadvantaged, financially unable to pay for 
their own counsel, relying only on the courts to provide them with legal 
counsel," De Lima said.

She noted that a study conducted by the Free Legal Assistance Group showed that 
more than half of those who were on death row were poor.

"(W)e need to ensure the justice system indeed works by having a truly 
independent judiciary which can decide on cases with the highest integrity and 
ensure a speedy trial," De Lima said.

She said the government should also hire "efficient prosecutors who can closely 
collaborate with investigating bodies and other law enforcement units for a 
strong case buildup, and a law enforcement sector that will implement the law 
to the letter."

(source: inquirer.net)






BANGLADESH:

2 get death penalty for killing street boy


A Dhaka court has sentenced 2 people to death for brutally killing a street boy 
13 years ago. Dhaka First District and Sessions Judge SM Saiful Islam passed 
the order on Monday in the presence of the convicts.

The convicts are Md Anwar Hossain alias Md Rajib alias Golam Rabbani alias 
Sankar Chandra Devnath and Md Zakir Hossain. According to the case statement, 
Sankar along with Zakir picked up a street boy from Kamlapur Railway Station 
alluring that he would be given new clothes. Later, he was taken to Bhawal 
forest of Gazipur and killed the street boy on April 9, 2005.

"They split the body into 2 parts. Later, they were held by police at Kamlapur 
Railway Station while returning to Dhaka with the head of the body in a bag," 
read the statement.

Sankar was a tailor by profession. He was tailoring at Narindra Tailors in Old 
Dhaka. Sankar was involved in a conflict with another tailor Abdur Rab, tailor 
master of Suja Tailors located near at Grand Hotel in Paltan in the capital.

Sankar killed the boy to realize Tk50,000 extortion from Abdur Rab showing the 
head of a body. Before that, he was caught red handed by police with the head 
of the body of the ill-fated street boy.

(source: Dhaka Tribune)