[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

Jan. 31



KENYA:

Nakuru cousins to hang for Sh300 robbery with violence


2 cousins who violently robbed an armed police officer of Sh300 will face the 
death penalty after the High Court dismissed their appeal.

The Magistrates' Court had sentenced Erick Njure and Patrick Muchoki to hang in 
2011 for robbery with violence. They were convicted of robbing Police Constable 
Kenneth Malakwen on October 27, 2011.

The court heard that the 2 men, armed with clubs, accosted Mr Malakwen, who was 
then attached to Parliament Police Station, on his way back to a hotel in 
Nakuru where he was spending the night.

They robbed him of Sh300 and a Ceska pistol that was loaded with 15 bullets.

The 2 were arrested a year later, on July 6, 2012, when they tried to steal 
from a shop in Karatina using the same pistol.

When the robbery failed, they hid in a house but were arrested after an 
informer tipped the police.

The court heard that the pistol serial number was circulated to police stations 
to identify who it had been assigned to.

Mr Njure, according to the testimony given in court, had told police officers 
that the firearm belonged to Mr Muchoki who had obtained it from Nakuru.

The 2 denied the charges brought against them.

Njure told the court that on the day of the 2nd robbery, he was working at the 
home of one Wangeci and that Muchoki joined him the following morning to help.

The court heard that police officers stormed their house, beat them up and took 
them to Karatina Police Station where they were allegedly compelled to sign 
some documents.

BEATEN UP

Njure's testimony was that he declined to sign and was driven to somewhere near 
a river in Sagana, where he was strangled into submission.

Muchoki said he was also beaten up until he put his signature on the papers 
given by the officers.

But Justice Jairus Ngaah found the State had proved its case against the 2 and 
that the police officer was robbed violently by the 2.

"In the complainant's case, he was attacked by a group of people who were armed 
with crude weapons; it is clear that at least 2 of the 3 strands of this 
offence, any of which is sufficient to prove it, were established. Here, I 
agree with the learned magistrate that the offence of robbery with violence was 
proved to the required standard," the judge ruled.

"Based on this doctrine of recent possession, the appellants were properly 
convicted of the offence of robbery with violence," he added.

The judge said although the pistol was recovered 8 months after the robbery, 
the 2 were unable to explain how they had acquired it.

"It followed that the burden fell upon the appellants to give a reasonable 
explanation as to how they came into possession of the gun, failure to which 
the trial court was justified in the ruling," he said.

(source: standardmedia.co.ke)






MYANMAR:

Man is sentenced to death after being caught with 2 bags of weed


A vegetable seller has been sentenced to death in Myanmar for 'trafficking' 
cannabis - after being caught with envelopes full of weed.

Nur Alam Mohd Hussain, 29, was caught with 5 pounds of weed - but claims he did 
not know what was in the bags, and thought it was stolen car parts.

Myanmar has extremely harsh drug laws - the country is the world's 2nd-largest 
producer of opium, after Afghanistan.

Judicial Commissioner Datuk Nordin Hassan said, 'The accused should have been 
able to smell the cannabis which was in large quantities. He had knowledge that 
the cannabis was for trafficking.'

He said, 'When the police raiding team surrounded him at the petrol station, he 
dropped the bag which had contained both the envelopes and ran. The accused 
said he ran because he was afraid that he was going to be caught by the police 
as the motorcycle he had ridden to the petrol station on was a stolen vehicle.'

The Straits Times reports that he was calm when his death sentence was read 
out.

High Times says that no one has been executed for drugs in the country in the 
years 2005-15, according to the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty.

(source: metro.co.uk)






JAPAN:

Victims' Families Marginalized Under Japan's Capital Punishment System


Does Japan's criminal justice system give sufficient consideration to the 
rights of the families of murder victims? A non-fiction writer who has 
interviewed numerous family members of murder victims challenges the case for 
abolishing capital punishment.

Questions of Atonement

I first began interviewing the surviving family of murder victims in the late 
1990s. Over the decades I have spoken with more than 100 people, and I have to 
the best of my ability tried to share their voices with broader society. 
However, one troubling question that has arisen in each interview is the issue 
of redemption.

It is difficult to say whether a person convicted of murder is capable of 
making amends for their crime. Even suggesting that murderers should atone for 
their sins not with their lives, but through the act of repentance and carrying 
the weight of their actions for the rest of their days poses a direct challenge 
to the core arguments against capital punishment. During interview, people 
invariably would ask in frustration what this concept of atonement even means. 
While the question concerned the broader death penalty debate, there is no 
denying they also wished to know which side of the argument I fell on. Unable 
to provide an answer, I often simply fell silent. I have no doubt that my 
conversations with surviving family members were vital in shaping both my 
thoughts and doubts about Japan's system of capital punishment.

I remember speaking with the family of an elementary school girl who had been 
abducted and murdered. A man pretending to ask for directions had snatched the 
young girl off the street, then abused and brutally killed her before dumping 
her body. I vividly remember her mother and father, both of them younger than I 
was at the time, telling me in voices trembling with rage how ludicrous it was 
to think that a killer could atone for their crime in their lifetime. It was 
impossible, they argued, without experiencing such a devastating loss to even 
comprehend how preposterous a supposition this was. In their view, most people 
are unable to understand that the first step along the path to redemption 
begins with the family of the victim.

During my years of reporting on the case I saw the couple direct their fury not 
only at the perpetrator, but also at the lawyers and anyone else trying to 
prevent the death sentence from being handed down. This included people calling 
for the end of capital punishment and society as a whole. Japanese 
overwhelmingly support capital punishment, but I suspect that many family 
members of murder victims are skeptical of this support, feeling it is not 
grounded in any serious consideration of their plight.

Few Executions Carried Out

We tend to loosely and carelessly bandy about the idea of redemption. Somehow 
we have come to believe that criminals will naturally come to regret their 
crimes. Maybe this is because we hold in the back of our minds a picture of an 
inmate writing and sending and endless stream of letters of apology, repeatedly 
copying out Buddhist sutras, or living out their days as a model prisoner. 
However, none of these images are correct. Redemption for murder is an academic 
fantasy, not something that exists in the real world. I believe it is a myth 
cooked up by those of us lucky enough not to have had our lives transformed by 
a brutal homicide. The more family members of murder victims I meet, the more 
certain of this I become.

First off, the majority of family members have no interest in redemption for 
the perpetrator. They do not want apologies, which sound to them as false 
regrets. What they want is for the killer to be dead. This feeling, 
particularly in the most heinous cases, never diminishes, even if the murderer 
serves their sentence, turns over a new leaf, and becomes a saint. A victim's 
family does not merely want the perpetrator to pay with their life, but longs 
for them to be wiped from the face of the earth. In this sense, capital 
punishment allows them to achieve at least a modicum of closure.

I recognize that there is no way to bring an end to the mental and emotional 
duress of family members. However, only in knowing that the murderer no longer 
haunts the world can they finally direct all their attention at remembering 
their lost loved one. In reality, though, such longing for vengeance is rarely 
appeased as death sentences are handed down in only a handful of murder cases.

Lessons From the Hikari Murders

In April 1999 an 18-year-old man committed the shocking murder of a young 
mother and her 11-month old child in Hikari, Yamaguchi Prefecture. The youth 
broke into the woman's home, raped and killed her, and then strangled her baby 
daughter. The assailant was initially sentenced to life imprisonment, but in a 
2008 retrial the Hiroshima High Court condemned him to death. After several 
appeal attempts, the Supreme Court eventually upheld the sentence in February 
2012.

I interviewed Motomura Hiroshi, the husband and father of the victims, soon 
after the incident, and have written several books about the case. Motomura, 
who has gone on to become one of Japan's leading proponents of capital 
punishment, boldly declared during the trial that if the murderer was not to be 
sentenced to death then he wanted him set free so he could do the deed himself. 
As the appeal process drug on, Motomura came to believe that the facing 
execution is only way a criminal can be truly repentant. He spoke to me about 
his grim resolution to bear the responsibility for the loss of his wife and 
daughter, and in seeking the death penalty, the life of the 18-year-old who had 
killed them. In reaching this conclusion, he had repeatedly questioned whether 
he, as someone who knew the pain of having his own family murdered, could 
justly seek the death of another human being.

I believe what Motomura really sought was a seat at the table in deciding the 
ultimate fate of the young murderer. He wanted to have a say that was equal to 
that afforded the state and the defendant. I also feel that he harbors hope of 
a crime-free society someday where there is no longer any need for capital 
punishment.

An Issue of Justice

It is instinctive human reaction to seek retribution when a loved one is 
murdered and experts intensely debate whether reprisal should be considered a 
natural right of victims and their families. If surviving family member's hopes 
for enacting retribution on a murderer are restricted by the state to the death 
penalty, then we should be careful not to dismiss it as cruel, inhumane, or 
violating of human rights.

Capital punishment, as critics point out, is in essence state-condoned murder. 
However, it is predicated on a fundamental asymmetrical relationship between 
victim and killer. Can we easily dismiss executing a person guilty of homicide 
as a one-sided act by the state? It is natural that families of victims should 
long for retribution and look to the state to carry this out. Can we simply 
dismiss such a system as barbaric and misguided? I have misgivings about 
justice being served if capital punishment was abolished as there would no 
longer be a legal way to pay heed to the feelings and thoughts to victims of 
violent crime, including surviving relatives.

I feel the strong support for the death penalty among family members of murder 
victims in Japan stems not only from the harrowing experience of losing a loved 
one but also a profound dissatisfaction and distrust of the criminal justice 
system.

In the end, all forms of punishment are merely ways for the state to make 
criminals pay for their unlawful deeds. In reality, the state can carry out 
punishment without the defendant uttering a single word of apology. Victims and 
their families, of course, will do their utmost to ensure that the state levies 
the harshest punishment possible on their behalf. They cannot, however, settle 
the score with the perpetrator on their own. Even though they suffered at the 
hands of the offender, there is no legal way for them to join in determining 
and meting out punishment. Survivors harbor distrust and suspicion about the 
criminal justice system because it does not allow them to participate.

The State Versus the Victims

Japan for years has viewed the victims of crimes as little more than a piece of 
evidence in criminal trials. It has only been the last 10 years that the 
framework for victim participation in the legal process has been expanded, 
leading to stronger sentencing. However, even with new conventions in place, 
the legal system does not adequately reconcile survivors' desire for 
retribution. Overall, the systems and laws in place favor the rights of 
offenders and little has changed from the days when the involvement of victims 
and surviving family members in legal proceedings was tightly restricted, and 
even viewed with hostility.

The recent introduction of the lay judge system may have introduced greater 
public sentiment into Japan's legal system. However, it has conversely worked 
to reduce the ability of family members of murder victims to push for stronger 
sentences. This is because defending and prosecuting attorneys and the court 
decide on evidence and a trial scenario during pretrial proceedings, summarily 
playing these out in the courtroom. Sentencing is primarily determined by the 
bench rather than lay judges, and while the initial punishment is in principle 
expected to hold up against appeals, this has often proven to not be the case.

Most critically, Japanese defense attorneys still cannot break away from the 
traditional state-versus-the-defendant model. Under this mindset, lawyers see 
elevating the rights of victims as undermining a defendant's right to a fair 
trial.

This state of affairs further fans the fury of family members. The Japan 
Federation of Bar Associations has even created a manual advising lawyers in 
capital cases to do everything possible to keep the relatives of victims from 
speaking up in court, prevent their participation in cases, and block them from 
voicing opinions so as to protect the rights of defendants. To be fair, the 
JFBA's campaign against capital punishment does not reflect the thoughts of 
every lawyer in Japan, but the assertions about justice by defense lawyers who 
avidly adhere to these guidelines enrage crime victims and family members.

The arguments for avoiding the death penalty at all cost or for abolishing it 
outright may reflect humanistic sympathy for the life of the perpetrator. 
Contrarily, sympathy among proponent of the death penalty for the lives of 
victims is either cursory or lacking altogether.

Strengthening Victims' Rights

The decisiveness of the death penalty places the onus on the state to ensure 
that those prisoners it executes are guilty beyond a shadow of doubt. While 
concern of wrongful conviction voiced by death penalty opponents is valid, such 
arguments are also true of other types of crime. Family members of murder 
victims certainly find the prospect of a killer going cheerfully about their 
lives while an innocent person was punished unbearable, and as much as anyone 
they want to see an end to wrongful convictions.

I also recognize that certain conceptual arguments for abolishing the death 
penalty - arguments driven solely by legalistic logic - are more persuasive 
than those for keeping the system of capital punishment in place. The risk of 
false convictions and the question of whether the death penalty acts as a 
deterrent against violent crime are issues that defy simple answers. Likewise, 
there is a lack of transparency in the way the current system is implemented. 
In fact, it has only been a few years since the media was finally allowed to 
document the interior of an execution chamber. There is still no press coverage 
of executions, however, and the lives of death row inmates and their final 
moments remain shrouded in an impenetrable veil. From the outside, there is no 
way to ascertain what is actually taking place inside the system.

Japan is in the minority of countries left in the world today that retain 
capital punishment. European and other nations have taken the lead in 
abolishing the death penalty and providing for the rights of both victims and 
criminals. These countries have a history of guaranteeing public trust in the 
criminal justice system by making the victims of crime participants in criminal 
procedures. Japan took its 1st steps in this direction in 2004 with the 
enactment of legislation that promotes comprehensive and systematic measures to 
support the rights of crime victims. Before Japanese debate whether to keep the 
death penalty, though, it is more important that we clearly establish the 
rights of victims and their families to participate in the criminal justice 
system.

(source: Fujii Seiji, nippon.com)






CAMEROON:

Journalist Ahmed Abba could face death penalty in Cameroon


The case of Ahmed Abba, a Hausa-language correspondent with Radio France 
Internationale in the country's Far North region, typifies a failure that the 
Cameroonian government needs to get right if it hopes to win the trust and full 
support of its citizens and the international community in its fight against 
Boko Haram. Abba could face the death penalty if convicted under Cameroon's 
controversial 2014 anti-terror law.

Cameroon has remained in a protracted battle with the Boko Haram Islamist 
militant sect since 2014 when the group began attacking the government. The 
International Crisis Group reports that there have been no fewer than 460 
attacks and scores of suicide bombings leading to at least 15,000 deaths and 
hundreds of thousands of refugees and internally displaced persons.

The Cameroonian government, in its attempt to confront Boko Haram, has resorted 
to deploying repressive measures that violate the rights of its citizens, whom 
it is supposed to be protecting. Authorities are desperately trying to censor 
the public's right to information by targeting journalists reporting on the 
security situation in the country.

The case of Ahmed Abba, a Hausa-language correspondent with Radio France 
Internationale in the country's Far North region, typifies a failure that the 
Cameroonian government needs to get right if it hopes to win the trust and full 
support of its citizens and the international community in its fight against 
Boko Haram.

For 18 months, Abba has been in prison awaiting a verdict in his military 
trial. The government of President Paul Biya, an autocratic leader in power for 
34 years, is persecuting Abba in reprisal for his reporting on the plight of 
people living in the Far North, the poorest of Cameroon's 10 regions, having 
the lowest school enrolment rate, and the worst affected by activities of both 
Boko Haram and security forces.

Abba was arrested on July 30, 2015 as he left a security press briefing, and 
held incommunicado until October 19, 2015. Officials did not take a statement 
from Abba until November 13, 2015. Abba was later charged with "complicity" 
with and "non-denunciation of acts of terrorism". His trial only began in 
February 2016; but his case has been postponed 11 times due to a military 
tribunal that continues to grant extended time to prosecutors who have failed 
to provide any evidence incriminating Abba.

"We are defending this journalist who was doing his job and is detained in 
conditions that we cannot accept," said Jean-Marc Ayrault, French Foreign 
Affairs minister, in December 2016 while calling for his release.

Abba could face the death penalty if convicted under Cameroon's controversial 
2014 anti-terror law. The international community needs to intensify its 
engagement with Cameroon as Abba appears in court for the 12th time on February 
2, 2017. He told the Committee to Protect Journalists, through a proxy, that he 
has no confidence in a trial set up by the same military persecuting him.

"This is an unfair trial. I have never been told who I know that I did not 
denounce, or who are my accomplices," Abba said. "I could get justice in a 
civil court, maybe, but not in a military court. Right now I don't know my 
fate."

Abba is one of many journalists paying the price for reporting on conflict and 
security in Cameroon. 3 other journalists - Baba Wame, Rodrigue Tongue, and 
Felix Cyriaque Ebole Bola - arrested in 2014 are also been prosecuted in a 
military tribunal for failing to disclose information and sources to the 
government. The trio were investigating allegations of complicity of security 
forces with an armed group from Central African Republic destabilising 
Cameroon's East region.

In August 2015, Simon Ateba, a freelance Nigerian-based Cameroonian journalist, 
was arrested and detained 4 days on accusations of espionage for his 
investigations into abysmal conditions of refugees in the Far North region. In 
April 2014, Denis Nkwebo, the president of Cameroon's press union, had his car 
bombed. Nkwebo has received repeated threats for his reporting on Cameroon's 
security forces.

One unreported face to Abba's persecution is the tragedy his family is living. 
Rakiatu, Abba's wife, lives in Maroua, the Far North regional capital, which is 
over 1,100 kilometres driving distance from Yaounde, Cameroon's political 
capital, where Abba is imprisoned. She has not seen her husband since December 
2015. In great penury, she said she is barely surviving. With sobs over the 
phone, Rakiatu called for her husband's release.

"If anyone cares, please help me, help my husband. He is innocent. I know one 
day we all will die. But don't let my husband die in prison," Rakiatu said in 
an interview with the Committee to Protect Journalists.

Abba lost his father months into his birth, and from early youth had been the 
breadwinner of his family. His mother recently died from grief, his sister 
Yagana, who lives in the Nigerian northern city of Maiduguri, told the 
Committee to Protect Journalists.

"Our mother died from pain because of Ahmed in prison. She cried every day. I 
cry every day because I am afraid. I don't know what will happen to Ahmed. 
Please help him. Please help save my brother," Yagana said.

Journalists and human rights activists from around the world are unanimous in 
calling on Cameroon authorities to release Abba unconditionally. Journalists 
should not be forced to disclose information they uncover in their work or act 
as government informers. A journalist's responsibility is to hold the 
government accountable to the people. Journalists should never be persecuted in 
reprisal for their journalism.

The Cameroonian government is presently in a state of another conflict that is 
threatening the stability and unity of the entire country. In Anglophone 
regions of Cameroon, the government is contending with escalating civil 
disobedience from English-speaking Cameroonians in the North West and South 
West regions who say the Francophone central government has marginalised them.

In another wrong response, authorities and security forces have again gone the 
route of attacking its citizens and using repressive force to address labour 
strikes, protests, and sit-ins. The government has arrested journalists 
covering protests, suspended dozens of newspapers' and broadcasters' permission 
to operate, permanently banned newspapers from publishing and their publishers 
from practicing journalism, and sanctioned dozens more journalists. The speaker 
of the National Assembly in November 2016 called the use of social media "a new 
form of terrorism". The government shut down the internet in the Anglophone 
regions on January 17, 2017 after outlawing 2 prominent Anglophone groups.

It is pertinent for Cameroon authorities to realise that an attack on a 
journalist for doing his work is an attack on the society's right to be 
informed on issues of public interest affecting their common wealth.

It is not too late for Cameroonian authorities to do what is right by first 
acquitting and discharging Ahmed Abba of any wrongdoing, and desisting from 
further acts fostering a crisis of press freedom and fundamental rights abuses 
that threatens to engulf the Republic of Cameroon.

(source: Op-Ed; Peter Nkanga from the COMMITTEE TO PROTECT JOURNALISTS 
(CPJ)----dailymaverick.co.za)