[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

the news will next be posted to this listserve on August 13

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



August 2




TRINIDAD:

41 murderers lose Privy Council appeal



The Privy Council has dismissed an appeal from a group of 41 convicted 
murderers, who were challenging a decision to commute their mandatory death 
sentences to terms of life imprisonment and 75 years in prison.

Delivering a 30-page judgement on Monday, the United Kingdom-based appellate 
court upheld the decision of the local Court of Appeal in the case, which was 
made in 2014.

The appeal centered around a class action lawsuit by 6 members of the group, 
who had challenged the ability of former president Noor Hassanali to use his 
constitutional power of pardon to commute their mandatory death sentences in 
1993 and 1998, following a Privy Council ruling in the Jamaican death penalty 
case of Pratt and Morgan.

That infamous case introduced a rule which prevents the State from executing 
people who have spent over 5 years in prison awaiting the results of the 
appeals over their convictions.

The convicted men who filed the claim on the others' behalf are Dexter Lendore, 
Evans Xavier, Allan Henry, Deshan Rampharry, Norbert Williams and Victor 
Baptiste.

In their judgement, the British law lords ruled that Hassanali was allowed 
under the Constitution to commute the sentences to give effect to its judgement 
for convicted persons who were affected. However, like the Court of Appeal, the 
Privy Council ruled that Hassanali had employed the wrong process, as he he was 
required to have the Mercy Committee consider each of their cases individually 
as opposed to grouping them together.

Despite their failed lawsuit, the group was given a lifeline as the law lords 
ordered that the case be sent back to the President and the committee for their 
consideration, but did not suggest that they would be automatically successful 
in getting their sentences reduced.

Lord Justice Anthony Hughes, who wrote the judgement, said: "Whether they (the 
sentences) differ will no doubt depend on the weight accorded in each case to 
the individual and to the general factors, and all substitute sentences will 
take into account the system of reviews which will attend them."

The Court of Appeal had made a similar order but it was stayed pending the 
determination of the appeal.

In their judgement, the Law Lords also rejected the men's submissions that 
their substituted sentences constituted cruel and unusual punishment, as they 
do not allow the possibility of eventual release. Hughes ruled that the claim 
was misconceived, as it failed to consider that under the Prison Rules all 
persons serving more than 4 years in prison were entitled to review of the 
sentence every 4 years.

"A prisoner is also entitled to petition the president for clemency, and on 
such a petition, where appropriate, the advisory committee and the minister 
advising the president must consider whether all the circumstances of the case 
call for continued detention or not," Hughes said.

Hughes also rejected the convicts' claims over the unfairness of the committee 
and the petitioning process.

The convicts were represented by Edward Fitzgerald, QC, Ruth Brander, Amanda 
Clift-Matthews, Gregory Delzin, Mark Seepersad and Theresa Hadad.

Peter Knox, QC, and Navjot Atwal represented the State.

(source: guardian.co.tt)








ISRAEL:

Knesset to Debate New Death Penalty for Terrorists Bill



A bill proposing an amendment to the Penal Law and the Anti-Terrorism Law, 
allowing the court to sentence to death terrorists who murdered innocent 
civilians will be added to the Knesset agenda soon by MK Nava Boker (Likud), 
Israel Hayom reported Wednesday.

The bill proposes adding two new articles to the Penal Law, the first of which, 
99 (a), states that "a person who committed acts of intentional killing in 
order to assist a terrorist organization or an enemy during hostilities carried 
out against Israel, following a call from a terrorist organization or an enemy 
state, whether the order to carry out the operation was given to him personally 
or he responded to a general and non-specific call to take violent action out 
of identification with a goal of the enemy or terrorist organization - will be 
sentenced to death or life imprisonment."

In a similar fashion, the amended articles which so far imposed only life 
imprisonment for acts of treason and/or terrorism, will now carry the death 
penalty as the 1st option before a judge.

The explanatory notes accompanying the bill state that "there is a legislative, 
social and public need for deterrent punishment that will contribute to social 
safety and the principle of protecting the state against and citizens by 
eradicating terrorist attacks."

The bill's sponsor, Knesset Deputy Speaker MK Nava Boker, said that she had 
decided to submit the bill because "the murderers of the Fogel family from 
Itamar now live in a 4-star hotel in an Israeli prison."

The Itamar massacre of March 11, 2011 was a terror attack on the Israeli 
settlement of Itamar in Judea and Samaria, in which 5 members of the Fogel 
family were murdered in their beds.

"I have no doubt that the death penalty for terrorists, along with other means, 
constitutes real deterrence and helps to eradicate terror in Israel," MK Boker 
stated, adding that "the time has come to put an end to our groveling before 
terror and our enemies. It is important that the family of a terrorist who 
sends its son to murder will know that he would receive the worst punishment of 
all and will not spend a few years in a four-star hotel in an Israeli prison 
and then be released in a swap deal and go back to murdering innocent 
civilians."

Following the recent massacre of 3 members of the same family in Halamish, both 
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman 
expressed support for the execution of the terrorist Omar al-'Abd from the 
nearby village of Qubar, who carried out the murders.

(source: jewishpress.com)








THE MALDIVES:

Halt executions now



Authorities in the Maldives must halt the 1st executions in more than 60 years 
as the government seeks to divert attention from a worsening political crisis, 
Amnesty International said today.

The Minister of Home Affairs has announced that executions will resume "in the 
next few days", leaving 3 men on death row who have exhausted their legal 
processes at imminent risk. No date for the executions has been specified.

"For more than 60 years, the Maldives led the way in the region by shunning 
this cruel and irreversible punishment. Now, when most of the world has rid 
itself of the death penalty, the country risks being on the wrong side of 
history and earning global notoriety for reviving its use," said Biraj Patnaik, 
Amnesty International???s South Asia Director.

Although the Minister of Home Affairs claims the move is motivated by 2 recent 
murders through stabbings, the announcement of the executions comes as the 
Maldives is roiled by political tensions. Last week, the military stormed 
parliament to stop proceedings as the political opposition was poised to bring 
forward a vote of no-confidence.

"The executions are a transparent ploy by the government to distract attention 
from its own woes. It is alarming that they would think of depriving people of 
their right to life just to ensure their own political survival," said Biraj 
Patnaik.

Amnesty International has serious concerns about the fairness of the 
proceedings that lead to the imposition of the death penalty in the country, 
including the use of an apparently coerced "confession" that was later 
retracted by one of the death row prisoners, Hussain Humaam Ahmed.

Last year, the UN Human Rights Committee requested the government of Maldives 
to stay the execution of Humaam, pending the consideration of an appeal filed 
on the prisoner's behalf. The same requests were issued by the UN body last 
month in the cases of the 2 other men, Ahmed Murrath and Mohammed Nabeel.

The Maldives has undertaken a binding commitment to cooperate with the Human 
Rights Committee - should the government go ahead with the executions, it would 
violate Maldives' obligations under international law, including to protect the 
3 men's right to life.

Ahmed Murrath and Hussain Humaam Ahmed were convicted of and sentenced to death 
for murder in 2012, and Mohammed Nabeel was convicted of and sentenced to death 
for murder in 2009. The Supreme Court upheld the men's convictions and death 
sentences in June and July 2016.

Amnesty International is absolutely opposed to the death penalty in all 
circumstances, regardless of the crime or the method of execution.

The 3 men have exhausted all domestic legal avenues. Following changes to the 
country's legislation, they have not been allowed to apply for pardon or the 
commutation of their death sentences from the executive - a right guaranteed 
under international human rights law.

"When lives are at stake, it is all the more critical that safeguards of due 
process are strictly observed. People's lives are too precious to be ended with 
cruel haste. The Maldives still has time to turn back, consolidate its positive 
record on the death penalty, and impose a full moratorium on its implementation 
as first step," said Biraj Patnaik.

Background

In 2014, the Maldives government under President Abdulla Yameen announced that 
executions would resume after more than 60 years without the death penalty 
being implemented.

The authorities have since amended legislation, clearing the way for executions 
to take place, including removing the power from the executive to grant pardons 
or commutations in intentional murder cases, a breach of their rights under 
international human rights law.

There are 20 people currently on death row, including at least 5 who were 
convicted and sentenced to death for crimes committed when they were less than 
18 years old. Under international human rights law, it is unlawful to execute 
juveniles for any crime whatsoever.

As of today, 141 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice; 
in the Asia-Pacific region, 20 countries have abolished the death penalty for 
all crimes and a further seven are abolitionist in practice.

(source: Amnesty International)








IRAN----execution

Prisoner Hanged in Public in Front of Large Crowd



A prisoner by the name of Hossein Sarooki was hanged in public in the city of 
Juybar on murder charges.

According to the state-run news agency, Jouybaran, the execution was carried 
out on the morning of Tuesday August 1 in front of a crowd of 5,000 people.

An informed source tells Iran Human Rights that Hossein Sarooki was 28 years of 
age at the time of his execution and was transferred to solitary confinement at 
Ghaem Shahr Prison on Monday in preparation for his execution.

(source: Iran Human Rights)

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

Iran executes 100 people in 1 month alone



The Iranian Human Rights Organization announced that the Iranian authorities 
executed over 100 people during the month of July.

In a report received by Al Arabiya, the organization reported that the Iranian 
authorities only declared 8 executions.

The report confirmed that the Iranian judicial authorities stopped execution 
just during the month of Ramadan in July, but resumed the executions again 
after the Eid.

This came at a time when the Iranian parliament approved a draft resolution on 
the review of the death penalty and commute it to prison sentences against 
traffickers and drug dealers.

Due to some administrative obstacles, the draft resolution was turned for a 
re-vote to the Judicial Committee of the Iranian Shura (parliament), according 
to the Iranian human rights organization.

The organization has repeatedly called on the judicial authorities to stop all 
executions and abolish the death penalty from the Iranian Penal Code.

Mahmoud Amiri Muqaddam, the spokesman for the Iranian human rights 
organization, said that if the new draft law was passes in parliament, those 
sentenced to death for drug crimes would only serve time in prison.

Muqaddam expressed his surprise that the authorities continue to carry out 
executions against those convicted of drug-related crimes, even though the 
death penalty had not been effective in combating the spread of drugs and 
reducing the phenomenon of addiction.

3 million addicts

Last month, for the 1st time in years, Iran's anti-drug committee revealed that 
the number of addicts in Iran exceeded 3 million, while study centers predicted 
that the number would be much higher.

"This increase in the number of addicts in recent years comes at a time when 
mass executions are increasingly rampant over drug crimes," says the Oslo-based 
human rights organization.

The organization has documented nearly 3,000 drug-related executions based on 
statistics from January 2010 to January 2017, where more than 2,993 people were 
executed for drug-related offenses.

In 2017 alone, more than 130 people were executed for drug crimes.

(source: alarabiyia.net)




MALAYSIA:

Murder trial of Filipino begins



The trial of a 37-year-old Filipino charged with the murder of his fellow 
countryman began at the High Court, Monday.

Ismail Rasad, a Bajau holding an IMM13 document, is accused of murdering one Md 
Adzmar Alex, 19, also a Bajau with IMM13 document, at 11.30pm on May 1 at 
Kampung Rampayan, Manggatal.

The offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code provides for death penalty upon 
conviction.

Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Gan Peng Kun told Judge Datuk Nurchaya Haji 
Arshad that the prosecution would be calling 12 witnesses.

Earlier, Gan told the court that the prosecution will prove by direct and 
circumstantial evidence that it was Ismail, who intentionally caused the death 
of Md Adzmar.

Gan said the post-mortem examination conducted on Md Adzmar's body found stab 
injuries in the neck and back.

The cause of death was a stab wound to the neck.

Ismail was represented by counsel Ram Singh and Timothy Daut.

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

Death for murdering taxi driver



The Federal Court here on Monday upheld the conviction and death sentence of a 
25-year-old Filipino for murdering a local taxi driver in Beaufort.

Chief Justice Tan Sri Md Raus Sharif, Chief Justice of Malaya Tan Sri Ahmad 
Maarop and Federal Court Justices Tan Sri Hasan Lah, Tan Sri Abu Samah Nordin 
and Dato' Wira Aziah Ali, in affirming Joy Felix's conviction and sentence, 
ruled that there was no reason for the court to disturb the finding of the 
lower courts.

Joy, a labourer, was on May 26, 2014 found guilty by the High Court here of 
murdering one Chin Kin Fun, 42, while robbing him at 10.30am on March 14, 2012 
along Jalan Padas Valley in Beaufort.

The offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code carries the death penalty on 
conviction.

His appeal was rejected by the Court of Appeal on Sept 8, 2015.

Earlier, Joy's counsel Nelson Angang, who appeared together with counsel Chua 
Kuan E, submitted that there was no evidence by the pathologist as to whether 
the injuries inflicted on Chin were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature 
to cause death.

Angang, however, did not deny when the apex court brought up matters that Joy 
robbed Chin before the incident.

The apex court dismissed the appeal without hearing submission from the 
prosecution saying that there was no need for them to submit as the evidence 
was very clear.

(source for both: Daily Express)








SINGAPORE:

Court of Appeal to review own judgment in drug trafficker's conviction after 
psychiatric report



The Court of Appeal on Wednesday (Aug 2) ordered a rare review of its decision 
2 years ago to overturn the acquittal of a Nigerian man who brought nearly 2kg 
of methamphetamine into Singapore, enough to warrant the death penalty.

In a written judgment, Judges of Appeal Chao Hick Tin, Andrew Phang and Tay 
Yong Kwang said new evidence has raised "a powerful probability" that their 
decision to convict Ilechukwu Uchechukwu Chukwudi of drug trafficking was 
wrong.

They allowed the application by Ilechukwu's lawyers to review the conviction, 
because of "the unique turn of events."

This referred to a psychiatric report by the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) 
issued in March, in which psychiatrist Jaydip Sarkar said Ilechukwu suffered 
from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as "a result of childhood trauma ... 
of being nearly killed and viewing the killing of others."

The report, which was prepared by the prosecution for the court's sentencing, 
has raised "a matter which has a crucial bearing on our decision," the judges 
said. They were the same judges who had quashed Ilechukwu's acquittal in 2015.

According to Dr Sakar's report, Ilechukwu's PTSD symptoms were "triggered" 
after he was told by officers from the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) that he 
faced the death penalty for trafficking methamphetamine.

This could have "prompted him to utter unsophisticated and blatant falsehoods 
(to the CNB) in order to save his life," the psychiatrist said.

In quashing his acquittal in 2015, the Court of Appeal had said that 
Ilechukwu's lies were the result of "(a) realisation of his guilt," and that 
"tipped the scales" in favour of his conviction.

In spite of objections by the prosecution, the apex court said on Wednesday it 
"would be best" to "reconsider" all the facts of the case "after additional 
evidence ... has (been produced) and dealt with".

However, the judges made clear that they are "not making a finding that 
(Ilechukwu) does indeed suffer from PTSD or that he was affected by it when he 
made his statements (in which he lied) to the CNB."

"We are likewise not implying that he is innocent," the apex court said. "His 
guilt or innocence is a matter to be determined at the subsequent review of our 
decision (to convict him)," it added.

Ilechukwu's case will now be heard by a High Court judge, who will receive 
evidence from Dr Sarkar. The judge will decide on issues such as whether 
Ilechukwu was suffering from PTSD. And if he was, the period of time he 
suffered from the condition, its effects on him and the extent to which PTSD 
affected him when he gave his statements to the CNB.

The case will then be heard by the Court of Appeal again, which will "review" 
its decision to convict Ilechukwu.

"TRULY EXCEPTIONAL CASE": JUDGES

Ilechukwu arrived in Singapore from Lagos, Nigeria on Nov 13, 2011, with a 
black suitcase in tow. He passed the suitcase to Singaporean Hamidah Awang, who 
placed it in her car and drove to Woodlands Checkpoint where the car was 
searched. The drugs were found hidden in the suitcase which had to be cut open.

Ilechukwu was arrested in his hotel room the next day.

A High Court judge acquitted him in 2014, accepting that the man did not know 
the suitcase contained drugs. The prosecution appealed and in 2015, the Court 
of Appeal overturned the acquittal and convicted him of trafficking 
methamphetamine.

"One of our reasons for following the appeal was that we found that the judge 
had failed to properly consider the impact of (Ilechukwu's) lies ... in his 
statements to the (CNB)," the apex court said.

Due to the amount of drugs involved, Ilechukwu could have been sentenced to 
death. To consider whether Ilechukwu had grounds to argue that he should 
instead be sentenced to life imprisonment, his lawyer Eugene Thuraisingam had 
asked Changi Prison's Complex Medical Centre for a psychiatric report on 
Ilechukwu.

Mr Thuraisingam also asked psychiatrist Ung Eng Khean, who is in private 
practice, for a 2nd opinion.

In response, the prosecution arranged for Ilechukwu to be assessed by the IMH, 
which produced the report that may now exonerate Ilechukwu.

In its written judgment on Wednesday, the apex court pointed out that this is a 
"truly exceptional" case and that other offenders should not expect similar 
treatment.

"An accused person who seeks a review of a concluded criminal appeal which was 
decided against him should not expect that a diagnosis that he was suffering 
from PTSD (or any other psychiatric condition), whether at the time of the 
offence and/or at the time he gave his statements to the investigating 
authorities, will automatically entitle him to a review," said the judges.

(source: channelnewsasia.com)

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

No Innocent Explanation? - Death Row Inmate's Lawyers use Evidence Adduced by 
the Prosecution to Seek Inmate's 2nd Acquittal



In a twist of Shakespearean proportions, Mr Eugene Thuraisingam, the lawyer for 
death row inmate Ilechukwu, has used evidence produced by the Prosecution to 
argue for his client's acquittal. The Defence counsel made the case that the 
results of a psychiatric assessment conducted by one Dr Jaydip Sarkar from 
Institute of Mental Health (IMH), which was sought for by the Prosecution, 
exculpated the Defendant.

The case of Ilechukwu Uchechukwu Chukwudi, a 32 year-old Nigerian National, was 
unusual even before the above-mentioned sequences of events had transpired. If 
he is to be acquitted tomorrow, it would mean that he has been acquitted twice 
for the same charge. He was first acquitted in the High Court in but then 
convicted again in the Court of Appeal.

He was first arrested in Singapore on the morning of 14th November 2011 for 
trafficking methamphetamine. He was arrested soon after the person he passed 
the controlled substances to and his co-accused, Hamidah Awang (whose sentence 
was eventually commuted to life imprisonment after receiving a Certificate of 
Substantive Assistance by the Prosecution), was arrested at Woodlands 
Checkpoint.

He entered Singapore from Nigeria a day earlier. He claimed that he was handed 
a laptop bag at Lagos Airport and was instructed to help bring it to Singapore 
and that he exercised due diligence by checking the bag before agreeing to 
transport it. At Changi Airport, his belongings were also subjected to a 
physical check by an officer and were passed through an X-Ray Machine but no 
drugs were found in the laptop bag. These statements were supported by 
objective evidence (i.e. CCTV footage) in his High Court trial. Although the 
Trial Judge, Lee Sieu Kin J, did find that there were inconsistencies between 
his statements, he attributed it to the Defendant being "defensive, and perhaps 
excessively so" and ultimately held that the Defendant was able to rebut the 
presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act. The learned 
Trial Judge concluded that the Defendant's actions prior to his arrest were 
inconsistent with a person who had knowledge of the drugs as he remained 
composed despite being delayed at immigration and having his luggage checked. 
On 8 January 2015, Justice Lee Sieu Kin acquitted Ilechukwu and convicted 
Hamidah, his co-accused.

The Prosecution later appealed to the Court of Appeal to overturn Ilechukwu's 
acquittal. The Court of Appeal heard the case on 9 April 2015 and overturned 
the Defendant's acquittal.

Paragraphs 87 to 88 of the Court of Appeal's Judgement,

We would still have hesitated to think that the Respondent's version of the 
facts is so incredible that it would ipso facto justify appellate interference. 
Had the case merely turned on the Judge's assessment on the credibility of the 
Respondent's oral testimony at trial (and nothing more), we might have declined 
to interfere.

What tipped the scales are the numerous lies and omissions made by the 
Respondent in his statements, for which there is no innocent explanation.

The Court of Appeal overturned the Defendant's acquittal as it found that there 
was "no innocent explanation" for the inconsistencies found in his statement. 
As the DPP did not grant him a certificate of substantive assistance, Ilechukwu 
now faces the mandatory death penalty.

The IMH Report

Prior to the Court of Appeal's decision to overturn the Trial Judge's ruling in 
June 2015, both the Defence and the Prosecution agreed that the Defendant's 
mental condition was not an issue. The Defendant's defence was consistent in 
that he maintained that he had a complete lack of knowledge that he was in 
possession of drugs. After the Trial Judge's acquittal, no question of 
sentencing arose. Consequently, the issue of whether the Defendant could avail 
himself to the partial defence of diminished responsibility was immaterial. 
During the Pre-Trial Conference for the sentencing hearing, the Prosecution was 
informed that the Defence intended to adduce a psychiatric report for the 
purposes of sentencing. At that stage, the prosecution had no objections and 
did not suggest that such a report should have been made at an earlier stage 
(an argument which was later raised in their submissions). They also did not 
indicate that they had intended to adduce their own psychiatric report in 
response.

However, after the Defence adduced a Psychiatric report by one Dr Ung Eng 
Khean, the Prosecution adduced a psychiatric report from Dr Sankar from IMH. On 
4 May 2017, the Court of Appeal heard a new appeal filed by Mr Eugene 
Thuraisingam on behalf of Ilechukwu. The appeal was premised on a psychiatric 
report adduced by Dr Sankar from IMH. Surprisingly, it was not the Prosecution 
but the Defence that sought to rely on Dr Sankar's report.

Dr Sankar diagnosed that the Defendant was suffering from Post Traumatic Stress 
Disorder (PTSD) during the time he provided his statements to the CNB. This 
was, the report states, because he was fearful for his life after hearing that 
the offence carried the death penalty.

The Defendant was also found to have been diagnosed with mental illness during 
his time in remand and was prescribed with numerous medications at different 
junctures. However, after a few visits to the Complex Medical Center, he would 
express that he was feeling better and did not want further prescriptions and 
medical attention. A few months later, he would relapse into his psychiatric 
illness and require medical attention again. This cycled repeated itself for a 
handful of times.

Strikingly similar reasons were produced for his resistance to psychiatric care 
by the reports produced by the Prisons, Dr Ung and Dr Sankar. In his report, Dr 
Sankar also ruled out, in no uncertain terms, the possibility that the 
Defendant was fabricating PTSD in the hopes of a favorable diagnosis.

"He... has never received any psychiatric treatment before." - Complex Medical 
Center Report

"He has no formal past psychiatric history.. it was uncommon in his familial or 
cultural setting to see a 'psychiatrist' or a 'counsellor.' - Dr Ung's Report

"The characteristics symptoms of PTSD were offered spontaneously and 
voluntarily and in response to open ended questions. He did not try and bring 
my attention to PTSD or dissociative symptoms at all and responded in detail 
only when asked. As such the validity of this diagnosis is not in question.

That he was not malingering the PTSD symptoms is also borne out by the fact 
that he did not wish for a mental illness tag and had repeatedly stopped 
prescribed medications in prison, based on his culturally based negative 
attitude towards mental disorders and a tendency to over-estimate his own 
ability. Such conduct is inconsistent with someone malingering in order to 
provide a justification or an excuse for their actions." - Paragraphs 91 and 92 
of Dr Sankar's Report

He then goes on to suggest that the inconsistencies and lies in the Defendant's 
statements could be attributed to his PTSD.

"The defendant was suffering from acute symptons of PTSD with dissociation 
around the time that he made the inconsistent and unreliable statements 
(between 14 and 21 Nov 2011) This could be a relevant factor in providing an 
unreliable account."

".. an overestimation of threat to his life which could have prompted him to 
utter unsophisticated and blatant falsehoods in order to save his life."

Dr Sankar's report, which included highly detailed and cogent reasons for his 
diagnosis and rigorous scientific testing, was not without it's caveats as far 
as the Defendant was concerned.

He highlighted Ilechukwu's attempt to "under-perform" on cognitive tests. The 
following excerpt from his report was cited by the Prosecution in their 
submissions.

"His performance in TOMM and DCT (tests to determine the effort put in) 
suggested that he may not have put in his best effort. He scored particularly 
poorly in tests of information and processing... As such, the findings must be 
handled with caution."

However, the Prosecution's submissions omitted the paragraph that followed.

"Finally a comment on the issue of exaggerating cognitive impairments on 
certain neuropsychological tests. It is possible that the demonstrated 
inconsistency could be due to a range of factors, including poor motivation, 
depressed mood secondary to PTSD, attentional (sic) problems and fatigue, 
rather than solely due to malingering."

Questions on the objectivity and credibility of Dr Sankar's report, which were 
not raised by the Prosecution, will, in all likelihood be quashed by his 
credentials and the fact that it was the Prosecution, not the Defence, that 
sought his opinion. The Prosecution, in its submissions, argued that Dr 
Sankar's report cannot be considered as it failed the 2-tiered test set out in 
Kho Jabing (2016) at [44], in that it must be sufficient, in the sense of being 
"new" and "compelling" and that it must show that the decision under challenge 
(i.e. the finding that there was "no innocent reason" for the Defendant's lies) 
was "demonstrably wrong."

In response, the Defence argued that it the material was indeed sufficient. 
They submitted that it was "new" because prior to the Court of Appeal's 
conviction, there was no need for a psychiatric report and the fact that he 
already had access to psychiatric care in the prisons. As to whether Dr 
Sankar's report was "compelling" and whether it showed that the Court's 
decision was "demonstrably wrong", his objectivity and rigorous scientific 
testing that led to his diagnosis were underscored.

Prima facie, Dr Sankar's report corroborates the Trial Judge's assessment that 
the Defendant was being defensive and suggests that, contrary to the Apex 
Court's finding, there may have been, after all, "an innocent explanation" for 
the inconsistencies and omissions in the Defendant's statements that led to his 
conviction. This would then give rise to a real possibility that the Court of 
Appeal's decision to overturn the defendant's acquittal amounted to a 
miscarriage of justice.

The Court of Appeal will deliver its judgement on 2 August 2017 at 0940hrs.

(source: The Online Citizen)








SYRIA:

Cyberactivist secretly executed in Syria detention: widow----A prominent 
cyberactivist who was detained on the 1st anniversary of the 2011 uprising that 
sparked the Syrian civil war was secretly executed nearly 2 years ago, his 
widow said.



A prominent cyberactivist who was detained on the 1st anniversary of the 2011 
uprising that sparked the Syrian civil war was secretly executed nearly 2 years 
ago, his widow said. Bassel Khartabil Safadi, an open-source software developer 
who put his skills to use to promote free speec h during the uprising, was put 
to death in October 2015, 2 1/2 years after his arrest.

Bassel Khartabil Safadi, an open-source software developer who put his skills 
to use to promote free speec h during the uprising, was put to death in October 
2015, 2 1/2years after his arrest, Noura Ghazi Safadi said.

That month, rumours had begun circulating that he had been sentenced to death 
after being transferred from the regime's notorious Adra prison near Damascus 
to an unknown location. His widow gave no indication on her Facebook post late 
Tuesday how she had confirmed her husband's death.

"Words are difficult to come by while I am about to announce, on behalf of 
Bassel's family and mine, the confirmation of the death sentence and execution 
of my husband," she said.

"He was executed just days after he was taken from Adra prison in October 2015. 
This is the end that suits a hero like him. "This is a loss for Syria. This is 
loss for Palestine. This is my loss."

Safadi, who was 34 at the time of his death, was born to a Palestinian father 
and a Syrian mother. He was well known as an advocate for freedom of 
information and greater access to the internet.

In 2010, he launched Aiki Lab, which brought together engineers, artists and 
hackers in Damascus, and also contributed to open-source projects including 
Creative Commons and Wikipedia. "Because of Khartabil's work, people gained new 
tools to express themselves and communicate," British newspaper The Guardian 
said in a 2015 profile.

Syria had no internet access until 2000, and state censorship and monitoring 
have remained rampant. Safadi's expertise was particularly important after the 
uprising against President Bashar al-Assad broke out in March 2011. Calls for 
demonstrations were often issued through Facebook pages, and activists 
broadcast news and videos through social media. International human rights 
groups have long pressed for information on Safadi's fate.

In a 2016 appeal for his release, Human Rights Watch said it believed his 
detention was "a direct result of his peaceful and legitimate work for the 
promotion and protection of the right to freedom of expression ."

More than 300,000 people have been killed in the civil war that erupted after 
the uprising, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

The Britain-based monitoring group estimates that more than 60,000 of those 
have been executed or tortured to death in regime prisons.

(source: al-monitor.com)








INDONESIA:

Indonesia executed Nigerian despite case being unresolved, watchdog 
says----Humphrey Jefferson, who was convicted of drug offences, was seeking 
clemency when he faced firing squad, ombudsman finds



An official watchdog has found that Indonesia executed a Nigerian man last year 
while his case was unresolved, leading to renewed calls for a halt to a system 
holding hundreds of prisoners on death row.

Indonesia's ombudsman found that Humphrey Jefferson was seeking clemency when 
he faced a firing squad along with 3 others in July 2016, meaning that he still 
had a chance to be pardoned. The 4 were all convicted of drug trafficking.

It is believed authorities are preparing for more executions and a group of 
prisoners, including Frank Amado, an American citizen, were transferred to 
"execution island" earlier this year.

2 UK citizens - Gareth Cashmore and Lindsay Sandiford, both convicted of 
trafficking - also await their fate on Indonesia's death row.

"This shows that the attorney general did violate the law last year," said 
Ricky Gunawan, the director of the Community Legal Aid Institute, which 
represented Jefferson and petitioned for the ombudsman investigation.

"They have been eager to organise a new round of executions, but this shows 
that last year's proceedings were a mess. Because of the ruling they will have 
to be extremely careful if they choose to go forward."

The Community Legal Aid Institute, along with Human Rights Watch, has called 
for an end to the death penalty in Indonesia. Human Rights Watch published a 
statement on Monday saying: "Indonesia should restore the unofficial moratorium 
on the death penalty and ensure the rights of criminal suspects, including 
those implicated in drug crimes, are respected rather than steamrolled."

The Indonesian president, Joko "Jokowi" Widodo, has stepped up his rhetoric in 
the country's war on drugs, saying recently that police should shoot drug 
dealers on the spot if they resist arrest.

Indonesia ended an unofficial 4-year moratorium on executions in 2013. 18 
prisoners have been executed since Jokowi took office in 2014. Most of the 
sentences are carried out against foreigners and Indonesia has repeatedly 
resisted appeals even from friendly governments - such as Australia - for 
mercy.

The Indonesian attorney general's office has denied it violated protocol but is 
legally required to respond to the ombudsman's findings, Gunawan said.

Jefferson was executed alongside 2 other Nigerians and an Indonesian.

In addition to finding that Jefferson's clemency request was not respected, 
Indonesia's ombudsman found authorities did not comply with rules requiring 
them to issue notification 72 hours before carrying out his execution.

(source: The Guardian)