[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

July 27




UNITED KINGDOM:

Home Office suspends cooperation over US death penalty threat for Isis 
pair----Temporary concession comes after mother's legal challenge seeking to 
quash Sajid Javid's decision


The Home Office has bowed to pressure over 2 British-raised jihadis facing the 
possibility of execution in the US by temporarily suspending cooperation with 
the American authorities over the case, lawyers have said.

Although it is only a temporary concession, it marks the 1st breach in the UK 
government position. The Home Office could be forced to extend the suspension 
pending the outcome of a judicial review.

A Home Office spokesperson said: "Yesterday we received a request from the 
legal representative of the family of one of the suspects to pause the MLA 
[mutual legal assistance] response. We have agreed to a short-term pause. The 
government remains committed to bringing these people to justice and we are 
confident we have acted in full accordance of the law and within the 
government???s longstanding MLA policy."

The move came after the mother of El Shafee Elsheikh, 1 of the pair, launched 
an emergency legal challenge seeking to quash the British home secretary's 
decision to provide evidence that would be used at trial without the usual 
assurance that they would not face the death penalty. Sajid Javid's decision 
has been widely seen as undermining the UK's opposition to the death penalty.

Did the UK government do a dirty deal with Trump over the Isis suspects?

Ben Emmerson, the UN special rapporteur on counter-terrorism and human rights, 
writing in the Guardian, described the government as beating a tactical retreat 
on the issue, caving in to legal and political pressure.

Speaking later, he said: "This is a significant breakthrough, this decision by 
the government to pause at this point to enable the courts to rule on the 
application. It is an indication of how deep concern is here.

"The legal grounds for challenge are really very strong. I would expect this 
case to be brought on swiftly and the government will be required to disclose 
the minutes and notes of every meeting and conversation that may have taken 
place here and with the Americans."

Alexanda Kotey and Elsheikh, who were brought up in Britain but had their 
passports revoked, are accused of being part of the Isis cell labelled "the 
Beatles" by hostages and are suspected of involvement in multiple murders or 
abductions of hostages, including of the British aid workers Alan Henning and 
David Haines and the American journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff.

Kotey and Elsheikh were captured in February by Syrian Kurdish fighters, 
prompting sensitive negotiations between the UK and the US governments over 
where they should be prosecuted.

The other 2 members of the group alleged to have been involved in the killings 
are Mohammed Emwazi, believed killed in a US airstrike in 2015, and Aine Davis, 
convicted of being a member of a terrorist organisation and jailed for 7 1/2 
years by a court in Silivri, Turkey, in May 2017.

On Monday, the Daily Telegraph published a letter from Javid to the US attorney 
general, Jeff Sessions, disclosing an agreement between the 2 countries that 
the UK, rather than prosecuting the 2, would provide evidence to the US. Javid 
added that the UK would not seek its usual assurance that the death penalty 
would not be applied.

Gareth Peirce and Anne McMurdie, the lawyers representing Elsheikh's mother, 
wrote to Javid on Tuesday asking for his immediate undertaking that this 
cooperation be suspended or face an injunction.

In a press statement, the 2 lawyers said the mother had long made clear her 
opposition to the actions of Islamic State. "Her request is that the norms of 
internationally accepted due process form the basis of any trial of accusations 
concerning her son," they said.

"On 25 July government lawyers representing the home secretary gave an 
undertaking that no 'further' provision of assistance would take place. The 
exact time span of the undertaking was not specified in that letter. Since then 
it has been qualified as constituting at present only a very short-term 
promise."

Peirce and McMurdie sent to the government lawyers on Thursday detailed grounds 
as to why they regarded the minister's decision as unlawful, setting out an 
urgent timetable for the case to be put before the court and for an application 
for a full judicial review of the minister's decision.

The application raises questions of enormous constitutional importance, 
including the ability of a minister to agree such a change without reference to 
parliament, Peirce and McMurdie said. "Yet the minister's letter reveals a 
clear and dramatic departure from the UK's long-standing international and 
domestic commitment to oppose the continuing exercise of the death penalty," 
they said.

(source: The Guardian)

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

Is execution Britain's new populist ruse?


I shuddered at the news that Japan has finally hanged the remaining 6 sarin 
killers of 1995, as well as their leader. It was not the ghoulishness that 
dismayed me, but the return to fashion of execution under the guise of 
counterterrorism. Capital punishment has long been a populist cause. 4 years 
ago, a majority of Britons still supported its return, and even now public 
opinion is balanced.

What odds on its revival? This week the former foreign secretary Boris Johnson 
justified Britain cooperating in the American trial of 2 formerly British 
jihadis captured in Syria - even though their trial could result in their 
execution - on the grounds that Britain itself executed such people with drones 
in the Middle East, including "Jihadi John". He said: "I don't remember hot 
tears being wept for him." Such extra-judicial executions were "payback" for 
"credible accounts of bestial behaviour". They are fine.

Britain abolished the death penalty in 1969. Thirty years later it signed 
protocol 6 of the European convention on human rights, which prohibited capital 
punishment except "in time of war or imminent threat of war". Then in 2004 the 
UK acceded to protocol 13, prohibiting the death penalty "in all 
circumstances". Successive governments have refused the extradition of British 
citizens to anywhere that puts them at risk of torture or execution. Though the 
citizenship of the 2 jihadis has been revoked, they remain covered by British 
policy.

The decision not to seek assurances that the death penalty will not be used in 
this case is a move away from this position. The Home Office minister, Ben 
Wallace, has explained that the 2 men being held in Syria were suspected of 
Isis-related killings, but a British court might have trouble convicting them. 
Johnson elaborated on this excuse. He says the decision - which he took with 
the home secretary, Sajid Javid - not to oppose a trial in the US was based on 
a balance of risks. One was indeed that they might be executed in the US, but 
the other was that they might be released to "roam the streets" of Britain.

Better to outsource their trial and possible execution than leave British 
streets at the mercy of the crown prosecution service. I cannot imagine a more 
glib reason for overturning half a century of policy on capital punishment. 
This is judicial rendition. The government has now been forced to temporarily 
suspend cooperation with the US to allow a judicial review of its decision.

A widespread litmus test of a liberal state is that it does not deliberately 
kill its citizens, whatever the reason. o person should be considered beyond 
redemption, even if in custody. But liberalism goes further. The establishment 
in such states claims a prerogative to override public opinion on such an 
issue. But Johnson clearly sees executing jihadis, even abroad, as a cherry on 
a populist pie.

Britain's use of execution by drone strike has been justified by ministers on 
grounds of imminent threat to national security, and according to the rules of 
war. But a distant terrorist cannot meaningfully "threaten" a state, nor has 
Britain declared any war. The policy clearly defies the European convention, 
signed by Britain. Exploiting the word terrorism to extend executive discretion 
is now the occupational disease of power. Britain used to attack the former US 
president George W Bush for claiming a "war" to justify rendition and torture 
after 9/11. Yet British leaders since Tony Blair have persisted in similar 
language - that intervention in the Middle East is "a war to make British 
streets safer".

3 years ago, an RAF operative somewhere in Lincolnshire directed a drone to 
kill a Cardiff man in Syria, and then his wife and his 12-year-old child. 
Apparently they posed "a threat to national security", nothing more. This is 
the kind of language used by the Kremlin to justify its outrages. The regular 
use of air-guided bombs to kill people - some of them inevitably innocent - has 
no connection to the integrity of the British state. Such extra-judicial 
killings are less justified even than America's and Japan's, which at least 
follow judicial process. Drones hover over communities, raining terror and 
death on "guilty" and innocent alike, in flagrant defiance of the rule of law. 
Air strategy has not advanced since Dresden and Vietnam.

Whitehall's use of judicial rendition shows how easily policy can be perverted 
when divorced from a sense of proportion, poisoned by political inexperience 
and ambition. If Javid, Johnson and Theresa May really feel terrorism requires 
tighter laws, they should put them forward for public debate, as the Home 
Office has been doing regularly for decades. Legislative change by executive 
action is pure Bush-Trump.

Returning jihadis clearly pose a challenge to the security services. Those 
services have been massively enhanced to meet it, and I am sure are up to the 
task. To equate knife attacks and hate speech with treason against the state, 
as did Tory MP Tom Tugendhat this week, is ludicrous. This is the language of 
authoritarian chauvinism. Exaggerating the "terrorist threat to Britain" has 
become a nationalised industry. It is undermining British justice, flouting 
British values, corrupting British policy and jamming central London with 
hideous fortifications. May once said: "We will not give in to the terrorists." 
She has done just that.

(source: Simon Jenkins is a Guardian columnist)

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

Church of Scotland urges UK government to seek assurances terror suspects will 
not face execution


The Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, has agreed to provide evidence from British 
intelligence services to support the prosecution of 2 alleged terrorists in the 
United States without seeking assurances that the accused would not be subject 
to the death penalty. The Church of Scotland urges the UK Government to seek 
assurances that the men will be held accountable if found guilty but will not 
be subjected to the death penalty.

The Rev Dr Richard Frazer, convener of the Church of Scotland Church and 
Society Council said the General Assembly clearly stated its opposition to the 
death penalty in 2008.

"We affirm that all are made in the image of God, and that each one of us is 
more than the worst deed we have committed," Dr Frazer said.

"The murders that Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh are believed to have 
committed on behalf of ISIS are abhorrent and fail to recognise the God given 
humanity, not only of their victims, but of us all. Nonetheless, even in the 
event of such heinous crimes we believe that capital punishment does not 
provide an answer.

"We must ensure that our reaction to the unspeakable horror of what these men 
are accused of is not governed by a desire to mete out equal horror in the form 
of the death penalty, nor should we in any way run the risk of creating a 
scenario in which they are understood as martyrs for ISIS and its agents.

"Over many years the UK Government has worked closely with other governments to 
seek the end of capital punishment worldwide. We would urge the UK Government 
to review its decision on this matter and seek assurances that Alexanda Kotey 
and El Shafee Elsheikh, while being held accountable for their alleged crimes, 
will not face capital punishment."

The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland voted against the death penalty 
in 2008, saying: "In light of the life, death and resurrection of the Lord 
Jesus Christ affirm that capital punishment is always and wholly unacceptable 
and does not provide an answer even to the most heinous of crimes; and 
encourage the Church and Society Council to work with other churches and 
agencies around the world to advance this understanding, oppose death sentences 
and executions, and promote the cause of the abolition of the death penalty 
worldwide."

The Church of Scotland is a member of the Joint Public Issues Team, which also 
includes the Baptist Union, the Methodist Church and the United Reformed 
Church. The churches are all agreed in asking the UK government to reconsider 
its decision.

* Church of Scotland http://www.churchofscotland.org.uk/

(source: ekklesia.co.uk)

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

Boris Johnson appears to support the death penalty without trial


The former foreign secretary, Boris Johnson suggested in an article for the 
Spectator today that the UK Government took drone strikes not in self-defence 
of an imminent threat to the UK, but instead as "payback" or revenge.

Boris Johnson is suggesting that the Government has consistently misled the 
public over their justification for the use of lethal force. He is effectively 
sanctioning the death penalty without trial, further undermining decades of UK 
opposition to the practice and putting UK personnel at risk of criminal 
liability.

The Government must urgently clarify their policy on this crucial area of 
national security, rather than leaving the public and Parliament to try and 
piece it together from the contradictory statements of ministers and former 
ministers.

(source: reprieve.org.uk)






SUDAN:

Freedom for teacher who faced execution for criticizing government


Following news that the Sudanese authorities have released from prison and 
dismissed the trumped-up charges against human rights defender and teacher 
Matar Younis Ali Hussein, Amnesty International's Director for East Africa, the 
Horn and the Great Lakes Joan Nyanyuki said:

"Matar Younis is a courageous human rights defender and one of the rare voices 
speaking for the oppressed people of Darfur. His release is a positive 
development, although he should never have been arrested in the first place. He 
was targeted simply for speaking up against human rights violations.

"Rather than trying to intimidate and harass him, the Sudanese authorities 
should take note of his human rights work to improve its troublesome human 
rights record and create an environment where people can freely exercise their 
right to freedom of expression.

"Sudanese authorities must now quickly follow this move by also dropping all 
charges against Husham Ali Mohammed Ali, another human rights defender, who 
faces the death penalty on similar trumped-up charges. The authorities must 
immediately and unconditionally release him," said Joan Nyanyuki.

Background

Matar Younis Ali Hussein was arrested on 1 April for criticizing the Sudanese 
government's inhumane practices in Darfur such as unlawful killings, 
abductions, looting and torching of villages, sexual violence, attack on IDPs 
and arbitrary detention.

On 24 June, he was charged with allegedly 'undermining the constitutional 
system' and 'waging war against the state', both of which carry the death 
penalty or life imprisonment. He was also charged with espionage.

Today, the State Security Prosecution Office of Crimes Against the State 
dropped the charges following outcry from human rights organisations and 
activists.

Matar Younis teaches Quran and is also an Imam/Priest at the Mosque of Zalingei 
in Central Darfur state. He has been a vocal critic of the government's actions 
in Darfur. He repeatedly criticised the government-led 'peace process' in 
Darfur as 'false peace' and always called for the protection of displaced 
people in Darfur.

In 2014, the NISS harassed and attacked Matar Younis after he delivered a 
speech critical of the government during a public event organised by Central 
Darfur State at the stadium of Zalingei. He was physically attacked by security 
forces who kicked him and tore his clothes.

Saudi Arabia deported fellow human rights defender Husham Ali Mohammed Ali on 
31 May. He was arrested upon arrival in Sudan. He remains in arbitrary 
detention.

(source: Amnesty International)






SRI LANKA:

Hang Your Head In Shame, Instead Of Hanging Convicts!


TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

The cabinet spokesman told the media on July 25, 2018, as reported on Hiru 
News, that the cabinet has unanimously approved the (presidential) decision to 
implement the death penalty even if the EU withdraws the GSP+ facility in 
response as warned. Though I personally do not attach much credibility to the 
particular person's statement, I thought as a patriotic Sri Lankan that it 
would be in the national interest to sound a warning before it is too late. 
(Caveat: It is hoped that no one will get upset by this personal opinion of a 
non-politician which is being described here for what it is worth.)

Beware! The forfeiture of the GSP+ concessions is not the real issue. The real 
issue is the impact of bringing back the death penalty on the amelioration of 
the law and order situation in the country. Those who are determined to impose 
a 'final solution' on Sri Lanka have cynically manipulated for a noose to be 
slung around her neck in the form of this controversial proposal for 
implementing the death penalty at this particular juncture after a suspension 
of over forty years. They are trying to give a dog a bad name and hang it. To 
elaborate: these very same people who have now begun loudly criticizing the 
proposed re-implementation of the capital punishment and threaten Sri Lanka 
with a suspension or total withdrawal of the GSP (The previous government did 
very well without it, though, and without the death penalty either) were 
suspected to be behind the 2015 regime change, which was a geopolitics centred 
exercise; the change, by now, has proved disastrous for the country. Their 
proteges are in the process of fulfilling their promises against the popular 
will, but the economic help (investments, financial grants, etc) that they were 
made to expect) appears to be not forthcoming, understandably because their own 
economies are in bad shape. Now it is convenient for them to find an excuse for 
washing their hands of their obligations to their potentially useful third 
world 'protectorate'.

They know, as the saner citizens among us do, that hanging the convicts 
currently in the death row is no solution for the problem of drugs trafficking. 
It would be unfair for us to expect outsiders such as Americans, Europeans and 
Indians, though no doubt they are our friends as they have already 
demonstrated, to be so deeply worried about this problem as we are, who are the 
people directly affected by it. They are not worried about whether convicted 
drug traffickers hang or not, either. The people who are the most worried about 
the ever growing drug addiction menace among the young are their parents. But 
these friends in disguise are not worried about that. Neither should we expect 
them to be. However, the anarchic situation prevailing in all spheres of 
governance including particularly law and order (whose handiwork that is, let 
us forget for the moment) seems to have suddenly thrown up this apparent demand 
for the immediate resumption of executions as a deterrent against serious crime 
(particularly, narcotics traffic, murder and rape). Desperate but innocent 
ordinary citizens unaware of the far-reaching implications of the president 
acting like a reckless autocrat bent on a vindictive crusade on this occasion 
dealing death to the convicted drug traffickers might hail him as a hero. But 
he himself is unlikely to resort to such a foolhardy course of action even 
though he might find it an easy way to try to restore at least some of his lost 
credibility. His 2 immediate predecessors also came under pressure for 
re-implementing the death penalty, but they somehow managed to wiggle out of 
it. It must be admitted, whether we like it or not, that under the previous 
government, the better maintenance of law and order minimized underworld 
criminal activity including drugs trafficking, without the help of the judicial 
executioner.

Buddhist monks have already expressed their disapproval. However, many ordinary 
citizens, in their desperation, appear to be in favour of the convicts being 
hanged. An old woman of 71 has offered to do the job of executioner for free! 
Some well meaning civil leaders including a few religious dignitaries seem to 
endorse the idea as a last resort for controlling serious crime. An outspoken 
politician of the nationalist camp stated recently that the Buddhist teaching 
was that the monks and the laity should obey the law of the country, which, of 
course, is true. However, this politician apparently endorses the bringing back 
of the capital punishment, considering it as an essential part of the country's 
law enforcement machinery. My opinion, though, is that even judicial killing is 
contrary to the Buddhist teaching. The Buddhist stand (i.e., no death penalty) 
is compatible with the modern secular view of morality that is gaining ground 
across the world.

Out of the 195 countries in the world, according to Amnesty International, 101 
countries have abolished the institution of capital punishment; in 39 countries 
it is in abeyance; so, judicial killing as punishment is not practiced in 140 
countries. This means that nearly 72% of the countries do not have the death 
penalty. I think a Sri Lanka without the death penalty should be in good 
company.

I, for one, am against the re-implementation of the death penalty, which has 
been suspended since 1976. The capital punishment is an uncivilized, inhuman 
way of 'exacting' justice. It is not restorative justice; it is retaliatory 
justice (the savage medieval "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" system of 
justice). When the resumption of executions was proposed within a few months of 
the inauguration of the present regime, as it is being done now even more 
menacingly, I participated in the general exchange of views regarding the 
subject at the time by contributing an article to this newspaper. It was under 
the title Abolition of capital punishment: an acceptable absurdity" (The 
Island/June 10, 2015). The concluding paragraph of that particular write-up was 
as follows:

"There are those who think that death by hanging or other method is 'just 
deserts' for someone who has been found guilty of murder, rape, or drug 
dealing. They would argue that it is absurd to worry about the human rights of 
criminals who have deprived innocents of their human rights. But I feel that 
our concern for a person convicted of a crime does not actually exceed that for 
their victim. It is that we tend to extend the same degree of fellow feeling 
towards both in spite of the stark differences in their circumstances. We share 
the general unsatisfactory nature of human existence with both. The resultant 
feeling of compassion for another human being is the essence of humanity. 
Therefore the abolition of the death penalty should be seen as an acceptable 
absurdity."

So, my position is that not only should the suspension continue, but eventually 
the death penalty must be totally abolished. Of course, judicial punishment is 
indispensable in administering the law in any society. But it needs to be 
applied for the reform of the offender, and in a broader context for the 
deterrence of crime. Proper administration of the law is the inescapable duty 
of any government. No excuses can be allowed for a government's remissness in 
executing this responsibility.

To me it appears that the president has been bamboozled (i.e., fraudulently 
persuaded or bewildered) by someone to take this questionable decision, 
ignoring the obvious. The immediate circumstance that triggered his seemingly 
ironclad resolve to hang the condemned for drug trafficking (18 of them as 
reported) who have been languishing in jail for years now is the alleged 
discovery that some of them have directed murders and other crimes from their 
prison cells. There is a problem here. Can executing all of them including 
those who are suspected of having masterminded crimes from within the prison 
walls be a good solution? Of course not.

A vital question is 'Who is to blame for making it possible for the convicts to 
do this sort of crime?' Has the minister in charge of prisons resigned over 
this unspeakable lapse or at least done something about the prison authorities 
whose failure to prevent such heinous breaches of inmate supervision? Shouldn't 
that real problem be solved first and remedial action taken to prevent any 
repetition of similar criminal negligence of duty on the part of prison 
officials? Of course, this is not the 1st time such a thing happened. It must 
have happened in the past too. There is also a perception that there is a 
longstanding link between criminals and politicoes, a deplorable situation for 
which politicians present and past share direct responsibility. Though that is 
true, it should not be cited as an excuse for the incumbent administration to 
perpetuate the pernicious tradition and exploit it for their own ends. Bad 
politics is largely responsible for the recrudescence of drug related and other 
types of criminal violence in our society.

The question that naturally arises where the death penalty is abolished or not 
practiced is 'What is the alternative?' Strict enforcement of the law is the 
answer. If the existing laws are inadequate, let's make new laws. Judicial 
killing is revenge killing by the society or retaliatory justice. Is there any 
reformative value in it? None, because the person to be reformed is dead. It 
could be of some limited deterrence value, though, because it could discourage 
potential murderers, rapists, etc. But hardened criminals are usually suicidal. 
Fear of losing the right to live - of risking the death penalty - is nothing 
for them. In place of the death penalty, appropriately extended life 
imprisonment can be made so grueling for unrepentant murderers, unpardonable 
rapists and drug traffickers as to make them rue the day they were born. That 
will prove a more severe punishment for them than instant death through hanging 
or other form of execution. But even that kind of extreme punishment in lieu of 
capital punishment need not be inhuman. Human beings change. Convicted 
criminals are also human. After serving a prescribed maximum period of time, 
they should be able to qualify for being considered for parole (temporary or 
permanent) when they have reformed and when their release from prison is 
certified to be 100% safe to the society by qualified official psychiatrists. 
The primary responsibility for this must be shouldered by politicians, but they 
must be careful not to politicize crime and prison management.

(source: Rohana Wasala, lankaweb.com)






JAPAN:

Japan has no immediate plans to review death penalty, says minister


Japan does not plan to review its death penalty anytime soon, Justice Minister 
Yoko Kamikawa said Friday, despite her orders this month to execute all 13 AUM 
Shinrikyo cult members on death row sparking international criticism.

"I think capital punishment is unavoidable for those who committed extremely 
grave and atrocious crimes, and the country's death penalty will not be 
re-examined immediately," Kamikawa told the press.

All 13 former members of the doomsday cult who had been sitting on death row 
were executed on 2 occasions this month on Kamikawa's orders, prompting 
anti-death penalty campaigners to protest the massive enforcement of capital 
punishment in a short period of time.

The number of executions carried out under Kamikawa has totaled 16, the highest 
number ordered by a single justice minister since Japan lifted its 40-month 
moratorium on capital punishment in 1993.

AUM founder Shoko Asahara and 12 of his former disciples were convicted of 
involvement in 1 or more of the following crimes -- a 1995 sarin nerve gas 
attack on the Tokyo subway system, another sarin attack in Matsumoto, Nagano 
Prefecture, in 1994, and the murders of a lawyer, his wife and their baby son 
in 1989.

Following their executions, the German government's human rights commissioner 
called on the Japanese government to reconsider the practice of carrying out 
the death penalty.

"It is an inhuman and cruel form of punishment and I therefore call upon Japan, 
our close partner, to review its existing practice and refrain from carrying 
out any further executions," said Baerbel Kofler.

However, Kamikawa said whether or not Japan should abolish its death penalty is 
an issue "that should be cautiously studied from the perspective of achieving 
social justice, while fully paying attention to public opinion" on the matter.

The death penalty is strongly supported by the Japanese public. A 2014 
government survey revealed 80.3 % of Japanese people aged 20 or older favored 
capital punishment, down from a record 85.6 % in the previous survey in 2009. 
Only 9.7 % said the death penalty should be abolished, up 4 points.

Amid increasing international pressure, Japan implemented a moratorium on 
capital punishment for three years and four months beginning in November 1989 
until resuming the practice in March 1993.

According to Amnesty International, 106 countries had abolished the death 
penalty in law for all crimes and 142 countries had abolished the death penalty 
in law or practice at the end of 2017.

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

Survivor of AUM sarin attack says 'real truth' no longer exists after 
executions


A victim of a 1994 sarin attack by the AUM Shinrikyo doomsday cult who was 
initially falsely labeled a suspect told a news conference here that the recent 
execution of 13 former cult members would forever obscure the truth behind 
their attacks.

Yoshiyuki Kono, 68, who now lives in Toyohashi, Aichi Prefecture, lived in the 
Nagano Prefecture city of Matsumoto in central Japan at the time the cult 
carried out a sarin attack in the city. His wife, Sumiko, fell into a coma from 
exposure to the nerve agent, and she remained unconscious until her death in 
2008 at the age of 60. Initially Kono was treated by both investigators and the 
media as a suspect.

Kono's news conference was held on July 26, after six former AUM members on 
death row were hanged. Their executions followed the hangings of seven others 
on July 6. Kono, who said he heard about the executions of the latter 6 in 
Kochi Prefecture, where he was to give a lecture, said, "We can't know the 
truth behind the (criminal) incidents without hearing from the people who were 
involved. We no longer have the real truth."

Kono said that he wanted the government to provide an explanation for the 
timing and other choices made regarding the executions of the 13 death-row 
inmates.

"Religion's purpose is to make people happy. It's unfortunate that in this 
case, it brought tragedy to the death-row inmates themselves, their families, 
and many members of the public. It's also very painful that the executions took 
place," he stated.

Having had the experience of being treated like a suspect in the Matsumoto 
sarin attack, Kono has doubts about the death penalty. "People make mistakes," 
he said. "But it's a disregard for life to continue to sustain the capital 
punishment system."

Kono went to visit former AUM members Yoshihiro Inoue, Tomomitsu Niimi, 
Tomomasa Nakagawa and Seiichi Endo, all of whom were executed on July 6, when 
they were in prison. Kono recalled that he came away with the impression that 
the four men were "pure, earnest and congenial."

Looking back on the circumstances that his wife, Sumiko, faced after she barely 
survived the sarin attack, Kono said, "Being unable to move or speak must have 
been much tougher than being in prison."

As for the sarin attack and the ensuing frenzy in which he became embroiled, 
Kono said, "There is nothing for me but to accept those things as an 
unfortunate part of my life." He emphasized, "I hope that people who went 
through this will leave behind the lessons they've learned."

He pointed to the police, who conducted far-fetched investigations, the media 
that went crazy with speculations, and administrative agencies that overlooked 
the cult's illegally constructed buildings and asked that they do everything 
they can to prevent a recurrence. "I hope that they will all take their jobs 
seriously, and conduct themselves as professionals," he said.

(source for both: The Mainichi)

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

End of a cult, but renewed debate on death penalty


The executions of 7 Aum Supreme Truth cult members on July 6 set a record 
number of such killings in 1 day since the Justice Ministry began releasing 
information on capital punishment in 1998.

Putting 13 prisoners to death in just 3 weeks is seen as one of the largest 
spates of executions since the end of World War II.

European Union member countries and other nations on Thursday released a joint 
statement calling for the Japanese government to adopt a moratorium on capital 
punishment with a view to abolishing the death penalty.

The international human rights group Amnesty International, too, criticized the 
moves, saying Japanese authorities should "promote an informed debate on the 
death penalty as first steps towards its abolition."

According to Amnesty, the number of countries and territories that have 
effectively abolished the death penalty has reached 142, while 56 - including 
Japan and the United States - maintain capital punishment.

Yet a national survey by the Cabinet Office in 2014 found 80 % of the 
respondents were accepting of the death penalty.

"The public support for the death penalty system has remained at a high level 
partly because the Aum cases had a devastating impact," said one former justice 
minister.

Current Justice Minister Yoko Kamikawa said Thursday: "Whether we should 
maintain or abolish the [death penalty] system is something we must decide 
independently with reference to the moves in other countries, while also 
considering public sentiment.

"To abolish the system under present conditions is not appropriate."

Chuo University Prof. Makoto Ida, a criminal law specialist, said: "Now that we 
have closed a chapter with the Aum cases, we should probably recognize that the 
time has again come to reopen civil discourse on what to do with the [death 
penalty] system."

(source: The Yomiuri Shimbun)

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

Japan should listen to world outrage over use of death penalty


France was the last Western European industrial nation to retain the death 
penalty.

Criminal justice lawyer Robert Badinter staged a fierce activist campaign for 
the abolition of the death penalty, earning in the process the sobriquet 
"Monsieur Abolition."

In 1981, Badinter became justice minister for President Francois Mitterrand and 
accomplished his mission of retiring the guillotine. But his struggle against 
the death penalty did not receive sufficient public support.

The key driving force for the success of the crusade was the "political 
courage" of Mitterrand, who pledged to abolish capital punishment during his 
presidential campaign, Badinter once said in an interview for The Asahi 
Shimbun's Globe special feature supplement.

He argued that being a democracy is incompatible with the death penalty. That's 
because, he said, respect for human life is the basis of the philosophy of 
human rights and democracy is based on human rights.

The sheer number is shocking. Japan has executed all the 13 members of the Aum 
Shinrikyo religious cult who had been sentenced to death in 2 rounds of 
executions this month.

The news has come as a fresh reminder of how Japan has been left far behind in 
the global trend concerning the issue and how the system is in flux.

The European Union, its members and some other European countries issued a 
joint statement on July 26 urging Japan to adopt a moratorium on the executions 
of criminals, saying, "The death penalty is cruel and inhuman, and fails to act 
as a deterrent to crime."

A total of 142 countries have either abolished the death penalty or let it fall 
into disuse. The number of nations and regions that retain the use of capital 
punishment has shriveled to 56.

"Dewanokami" is a Japanese term to ridicule people who habitually refer to 
examples in foreign countries in arguments, using the word "dewa," in phrases 
such as "Oshu dewa" (in Europe). The term dewanokami is a pun on the old phrase 
in the feudal era to mean "the Lord of Dewa (a province roughly comprising the 
current Yamagata and Akita prefectures)."

As for the issue of the death penalty, however, Japan should pay more attention 
to the arguments in the countries that have abolished it.

The global trend toward ending the use of capital punishment has been driven by 
the historical movement to shift the purpose of criminal punishment from 
revenge to rehabilitation.

At the heart of this movement is the question of whether a state has the right 
to kill people.

1 of the 13 executed former Aum Shinrikyo followers described an agonizing 
aspect of his life on death row.

"When I'm not told about my execution on a Friday morning, I can breathe a sigh 
of relief knowing that I will not be hanged on the weekend."

That's how he was waiting for the final day of his life.

(source: The Asahi Shimbun----Vox Populi, Vox Dei is a popular daily column 
that takes up a wide range of topics, including culture, arts and social trends 
and developments. Written by veteran Asahi Shimbun writers, the column provides 
useful perspectives on and insights into contemporary Japan and its culture.)

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

Japan has executed nearly as many people as the US this year because of a 1995 
cult attack


So far this year, Japan has executed 13 people, all of them linked to the Aum 
Shinrikyo cult that launched the deadly sarin nerve gas attack in Tokyo in 
1995.

It's the highest number of people executed in Japan in a year since 2008, when 
15 died by hanging. The US by comparison has put 14 people on death row to 
death so far in 2018, according to the Washington DC-based Death Penalty 
Information Center.

6 more former members of the Aum cult were hanged today (July 26), following 
the executions earlier this month of 7 others, including the cult's founder 
Shoko Asahara, meaning all remaining Aum death row inmates have now been put to 
death.

In addition to the Tokyo attacks, which killed 13 people, the cult was also 
responsible for another such attack in Nagano in 1994 that killed 8, and the 
murders of a couple and their baby in 1989. The last remaining fugitive Aum 
member was arrested in 2012. All trials connected to the cult were officially 
completed in January this year.

Amnesty International, which campaigns for the abolishment of the death penalty 
worldwide, said that it was extremely rare for Japan to execute more than 10 
people in a year, and to carry out 2 rounds of executions in a single month. 
The Mainichi newspaper reported that with the current emperor due to abdicate 
next year, authorities wanted to put an end to the cult for good before the end 
of the Heisei era, which began with the death of the previous emperor in 1989.

"This unprecedented execution spree... does not leave Japanese society any 
safer. The hangings fail to address why people were drawn to a charismatic guru 
with dangerous ideas," said Hiroka Shoji, East Asia researcher at Amnesty.

Japan has also been criticized by bodies like the United Nations Committee 
against Torture for giving its inmates on death row exceptionally short notice 
for their execution, typically just hours before the hanging is to take place. 
However, a majority of people in Japan support capital punishment.

Aum Shinrikyo was founded in 1984 by Asahara. The cult's followers believed 
that they would attain salvation after Doomsday if they followed Asahara, who 
as the "enlightened one" possessed the supreme truth.

(source: qz.com)



BAHAMAS:

Let Bahamians decide on capital punishment, says AG


The Attorney General (AG) weighed in on the reignited public debate surrounding 
capital punishment Tuesday stating that the issue would most likely be taken to 
a referendum.

"A standard has been set by the Privy Council as it relates to the worst of the 
worst when it comes to certain crimes," Bethel said.

"Now, I've said it before but I will say it again, there is always something 
worse than the worst; so, it's a standard that might not be able to ever be 
met.

"So, we feel that there has to be some intervention by statute or by 
constitutional amendment to settle this issue. That is what we are going to 
look at."

Bethel could not confirm if the government would carry out the referendum on 
capital punishment during its current tenure in office.

But he noted that putting the decision in the hands of Bahamians is the 
preferable way to decide the way forward on the controversial issue.

"It depends on who the Bahamian people want to determine their future on an 
issue like this," he said.

"Do they want some judges in London to rule on it, or do they want to have a 
say on it.

"I think at the end of the day that is going to be the question. We as a people 
have to decide where we want to go on this issue. That would be, in my view, 
the preferable way to go.

"Let the Bahamian people decide, rather than a few unelected judges in the 
United Kingdom."

Capital punishment in The Bahamas is a legal punishment, and is conducted by 
hanging at The Bahamas Department of Corrections (BDOC).

The last execution in the country was on January 6, 2000.

Over the weekend, Prime Minister Dr. Hubert Minnis told Eyewitness News that he 
is a strong proponent of capital punishment.

(source: ewnews.com)






SAUDI ARABIA-----execution

Pakistani national executed in Riyadh for drug smuggling----Shahzad Nim Khan 
was executed on Thursday for smuggling heroin inside his intestines


A Pakistani national has been executed in the Saudi capital of Riyadh for 
smuggling drugs, the official Saudi Press Agency (SPA) reported.

The kingdom's interior ministry said that Shahzad Nim Khan was executed on 
Thursday for smuggling a "quantity of heroin inside his intestines".

The ministry said that the accused was convicted by the court with the sentence 
endorsed by the appeal and supreme courts. A royal order was issued to execute 
the sentence.

It reiterated that the Saudi government is "keen on combating narcotics due to 
their great harm to individuals and the society", and warned violators of 
punishment according to Sharia law.

The kingdom's laws on drug smuggling are among the strictest in the world and 
it has carried out multiple executions of those convicted of the crime.

So far this month, a Lebanese national and a Pakistani national were executed 
in the kingdom, while last month a Nigerian national was executed in Madinah 
for smuggling cocaine in his intestines.

Those executed in the country for drug smuggling last year include 5 Saudi 
nationals, 4 Pakistani nationals, 3 Yemenis, 2 Egyptians, 1 Syrian national and 
a Palestinian national.

(source: gulfbusiness.com)






INDIA:

Man gets capital punishment for rape


A man was today awarded death penalty by a local court for raping a 6-year old 
in Gwalior district of Madhya Pradesh in June.

The court complete the hearing within 13 days of submission of charge-sheet. 
Additional Sessions Judge Archana Singh convicted Jitendra Kushwaha.

According to prosecution, Kushwaha abducted the victim from a wedding ceremony, 
took her to a desolate place and sexually assaulted her.

He was identified with the help of a close circuit camera television (CCTV) 
footage.

(source: United News of India)

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

Kerala has not seen a hanging after 1991


With the CBI court awarding death sentence for 2 police officials, the debate 
on capital punishment and the horrifying style of execution that perturbs all 
those who are associated with the task has once again come to the fore.

The last time someone was hanged till death in Kerala was more than 2 1/2 
decades ago when a convict Chandran, better known as Ripper Chandran, was 
executed at central prison, Kannur in 1991. The only other prison with a 
facility to execute the death sentence is Poojappura central prison, where a 
convict Azhakesan was hanged in 1978. The process begins with the issuance of 
black warrant. The convict is then shifted to a condemned cell, where he is 
housed in isolation, which is the beginning of the preparation by the jail 
authorities for the sentence.

According to jail department sources, the prisoner will be prepared mentally 
for the sentence, who usually would be in a depressed state of mind as he 
becomes aware of his fate after a few days. "The prisoner gets the food and 
dress of his choice and can meet the people he would like to meet," sources 
said. The prisoner would also get the services of a doctor if he wishes so, and 
would be given a choice to execute his will if he has properties in his name.

Also, if the convict is a believer, he or she would be given the services of a 
religious leader of his faith. The sentence is usually executed before sunrise, 
around 5am, where only the prison superintendent, the magistrate executing the 
warrant, a doctor who would confirm the death and the hangman would be the only 
people present other than the convict. The high-walled hanging place would have 
one door through which the body of the convict would be taken outside the jail 
where it would be handed over to his waiting relatives.

The hanging ropes are prepared in the prison itself, where it would be tested 
in advance whether it can withstand the body weight. "It would be tested with a 
dummy which would have a weight 5 times that of the weight of the convict," 
sources said. The convict's head would be covered with a black cloth and made 
to stand on the podium for 15 minutes before he meets his fate.

"When the lever is pulled by the hangman, the platform, which is fixed with 
hinges and screw, opens causing the person to hang. The sound of metal portion 
of the platform hitting the side walls in the basement is enough to send chill 
in the spines of everyone present."

The jail authorities got the gallows in Poojappura central prison repaired when 
the black warrant of Antony was issued. They also tested the platform with a 
dummy. A flood of applications came from several parts of state and outside 
seeking the job of hangman despite the fact that there is no such post of 
hangman in prisons, only because the government had enhanced the remuneration 
for the task, under the revised prison rules.

According to the section 375 of the revised jail rules, for hanging a prisoner 
sentenced to death, Rs 2 lakh should be paid to the group of prisons staff, who 
provide help to undertake the task. The rule 375 (2) further says that in case 
the jails officials are reluctant, the jail superintendent can engage people 
from outside and can award them deserving monetary remuneration. It is learnt 
that the prisons authorities had prepared a list of 12 applicants, who could 
probably be considered if the sentence needs to be executed.

(source: indiatimes.com)

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

Kerala: Policemen sentenced to death for killing an inmate


In what seems to be a landmark judgement in Human Rights violations activism, a 
Kerala court has awarded death penalty to two policemen for a custodial death 
of an inmate in 2005.

"My son has got justice at last," said 67-year old Prabhavathy, reacting to the 
verdict of the CBI special court yesterday awarding death sentences to 2 police 
officers in connection with her son's custodial death in 2005.

Clad in a white sari, the frail woman, who waged a lonely battle for 13 years 
to bring the accused to book, was in the court room when the landmark ruling 
was pronounced by judge J. Nazer.

The Wire reports that the judge sentenced the 2 serving police officers to 
death a first in the state and also in the country, while handing out 3 years 
imprisonment to 3 other police personnel for the brutal torture and consequent 
death of 26-year old Udayakumar in police custody. Justice Nazar ruled the 
crime fell in the rarest of the rare category that deserved the death penalty. 
Their illegal actions had severely eroded public trust in the law enforcement 
and caused social harm.

Udaykumar was taken into custody by Fort police in Thiruvananthapuram on 
September 25, 2005 in a case of theft and allegedly tortured at the police 
station. He died of severe injuries and broken veins. The women officers who 
were present on duty on the fateful day saw officers escorting a weakened 
Udayakumar to the hospital, where he was pronounced dead on arrival.

The case took several twists and turns with prime witnesses turning hostile, 
alleged tampering of evidence and forged documents. On a petition by 
Prabhavathy, the high court had directed the CBI to probe into Udayakumar's 
death. "No mother should face what I have undergone. This should be a lesson to 
all," she told reporters outside the CBI court. This case sparked nation wide 
debate on police brutalities and custodial deaths.

"I am happy that the court has delivered the sentence when the Onam festival is 
just round the corner. They caught my son during the Onam festivities. Before 
this Onam, they have been sentenced," she said. During this fight for justice, 
Udayakumar's mother had stopped going to temples, telling herself that she 
would offer prayers only after the accused were punished.

(source: thelivemirror.com)

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

Will hang husband if guilty: Manju


Social welfare minister Manju Verma on Thursday vowed to ensure the death 
penalty for her husband if it is proved that he was involved in the Muzaffarpur 
shelter home horror.

Shibha Kumari Singh, wife of arrested district child protection officer Ravi 
Kumar Raushan, had claimed on Thursday that the minister's husband, Chandeshwar 
Verma, used to frequent the short stay home where at least 29 minor girls were 
raped, tortured, and made to undergo abortion.

"Agar pati doshi hue to main khud unhe phansi ki saja doongi (If my husband is 
found guilty I will punish him with death by hanging)," Manju said in the 
Legislative Council during the pre-lunch session.

As soon as the House commenced after a roughly 20-minute adjournment, Manju 
requested Council deputy chairman Haroon Rashid to give her 2 minutes to speak.

In her speech she accused the Opposition members, who were demanding her 
removal from the state cabinet, of targeting her because she was the only woman 
minister in the Nitish Kumar government. Manju also claimed - while looking 
towards leader of Opposition Rabri Devi, who was standing at her seat - that 
she was being targeted because she belongs to the Kushwaha caste.

The Kushwahas are considered the 2nd biggest bloc after the Yadavs among the 
other backward classes in Bihar. While Kushwahas are believed to constitute 
between 6 and 9 % of the state population, the Yadavs are estimated to have a 
numerical strength of between 12 and 15 % of the state population. According to 
the 2011 census, Bihar has a population of about 10.40 crore.

"Kushwaha samaj sab dekh raha hai (the Kushwahas are watching)," Manju said 
while countering the Opposition's attack on her.

She maintained that her husband's name was propped up in the case after 
Tejashwi Yadav visited Muzaffarpur.

At one point during her offensive, the minister pointed towards Rabri and said 
the RJD leader used to live in a peon's quarter. "From where did you get so 
much of wealth?" she asked the former chief minister.

Suraj Nandan Kushwaha of the BJP joined Verma in the counter-attack, pointing 
out that an RJD MLA (Raj Ballabh Yadav) was behind bars in a rape case and 
Rabri was mum on it.

An unmoved Rabri said no one should forget that the Muzaffarpur episode 
happened in a government-funded facility. "Minor girls have been raped," she 
said.

During the exchange of volleys, RJD MLCs remained in the Well, raising 
anti-government slogans.

Parliamentary affairs minister Shravan Kumar accused the Opposition of wasting 
Question Hour.


IRAN----execution

Prisoner Executed in Rasht in the presence of his child


A prisoner was executed on July 21, at Rasht Central Prison while his 
9-year-old son was present at the execution.

According to a close source, on the morning of Saturday, July 21, a prisoner 
identified as Seyyed Morteza Mohammadi was executed on murder charges at Rasht 
Central Prison.

The source said, "Morteza was from the northern city of Rasht and was dating a 
girl named Fariba. He murdered her after a fight in 2015. He had a 9-year-old 
son who was present in front of the prison gate at the time of the execution."

The execution of this prisoner has not been announced by the state media so 
far.

In another development the death sentence for 3 prisoners was carried out on 
July 23 in the Central Urmia Prison. They have been identified as Farugh

Chiri Daryaie, Mahmoud Hamzeh Zadeh and Kamal Soltani, all charged with murder.

Farugh Chiri Daryaie and Mahmoud Hamzeh Zadeh were from the Youth Section.

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

Prisoner Might be Sentenced to Death Based on "Qassameh"


Qassameh was performed for a woman who is allegedly convicted of murdering her 
husband. Hence, she might be sentenced to death again without enough evidence 
proving her guilt.

According to a report by the state-run news site, Rokna, on March 22, 2015, the 
body of a man was found in the defendant's house and, consequently, she 
(Tahereh) was arrested.

In her interrogations, the defendant said, "When my husband and I got into a 
fight he stabbed himself in the chest and killed himself." However, the 
forensic report rejected the possibility of suicide and specified that the 
victim was stabbed to death by another person. Tahereh was sentenced to Qisas 
(retaliation in kind) but the Supreme Court rejected the verdict. Consequently, 
the judges decided that Qassameh should be used in this case.

As a result, the next of kin was required to bring 50 of their relatives to the 
court to swear an oath that the defendant was guilty.

After Qassameh was performed, the judges decided that she was guilty and 
Tahereh is supposed to defend herself for the last time in the next court 
session before the judges issue a verdict.

Qassameh is one of the weakest ways to prove a crime (murder or physical 
injuries) in the Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) and criminal law. It is performed 
when the judge decides that there is not enough evidence of guilt to prove the 
crime but the judge still thinks that the defender is most probably guilty and 
it is based on swearing an oath by 50 people in murder and 25 people in 
unintended manslaughter.

"Proving someone's guilt based on oath by a certain number of individuals who 
even probably haven't been witnesses of the offence," Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, 
IHR's spokesperson says, "is in conflict with the principles of due process and 
the rule of law and must be removed from the Iranian legal system."

(source for both: Iran Human Rights)