[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

August 2



SAUDI ARABIA:

Saudi Arabia executes its own citizens with impunity. It is abhorrent that the 
UK will not label it a pariah state----The next G20 summit is in Riyadh in 
2020. The international community must end its indifference to Saudi’s flagrant 
abuse of human rights and refuse to attend



On Sunday 28 July, the day before releasing a report on the illegal use of the 
death penalty in Saudi Arabia, the prominent progressive Saudi cleric Salman 
Al-Awdah was due to appear in a secret court with no legal team, to hear the 
judgement about the death penalty in his case.

He was detained in 2017 after tweeting that he hoped the standoff between Saudi 
Arabia and Qatar would be resolved peacefully. He has been held in appalling 
conditions ever since. Among the 37 charges being brought against him is 
"mocking the government’s achievements" - whether or not this is even true, it 
is certainly not a crime punishable by death.

Although his hearing has now been postponed until November, the systematic 
abuse of his human rights, including his right to a fair trial, continues 
unabated. If the Saudi authorities end up executing him, his case would be an 
alarming example of how the death penalty is used to silence any criticism in 
Saudi Arabia. It is unfortunately not the exception but rather the norm.

Mujtaba al-Sweikat, who was executed earlier this year, was only a teenager 
when Saudi secret police arrested him for protest-related offences. For three 
years he was held without charge. He was denied any legal assistance and was 
regularly beaten, burnt with cigarettes, and flogged on the soles of his feet.

As a result of this prolonged torture, Mujtaba eventually confessed to vague 
"terror charges". It was this confession - extracted through torture - which 
formed the basis of his conviction. He was beheaded in a mass execution on 23 
April 2019. Despite the international outcry, he was not the only person killed 
that day who had been a child at the time of the alleged offences.

The families of those that were killed received no warning that they were to be 
executed. Even in death, Saudi Arabia denies its victims dignity. The mutilated 
bodies of those killed are often left on public display for extended periods or 
are not returned to grieving family members. The horror stories of torture and 
solitary confinement were repeated by the families of many of those executed 
that day.

It isn’t news that Saudi Arabia is one of the most heavy-handed proponents of 
the death penalty. What is shocking however, is the alarming increase in its 
use and, as with the cases of Al-Awdah and Al-Sweikat, the completely arbitrary 
way in which it is used.

In 2010 there were 27 confirmed executions. In 2015 there were 158 confirmed 
executions, most of whom were people who had participated in Arab Spring 
protests in 2013. In the first months of this year there have already been 134 
confirmed executions, with at least another 24 people currently believed to be 
at imminent risk of being executed.

6 Saudi Arabia’s recent excessive use of the death penalty has not happened in 
a vacuum. It comes in the midst of a concerted campaign against human rights 
defenders and political activists. Since Mohammed bin Salman came to power in 
2017, there has been a significant increase in the pressure exerted on critics 
of the regime. Some 17 political dissidents were arrested in the first half of 
2018, many of whom were notable women’s rights campaigners. In April of this 
year, at least 14 journalists, academics, and family members of women’s rights 
campaigners were detained. These arrests are sadly accompanied by the 
all-too-familiar allegations of torture, and the violation of due process 
norms.

All of this is without even mentioning the brutal killing of Jamal Khashoggi. I 
accompanied the UN special rapporteur Agnes Callamard to Turkey during the 
investigation of his murder to review the available evidence, including the 
grotesque recordings of his killing. Whatever the Saudi authorities might try 
to say about his murder being the work of rogue actors, their actions show it 
is part of a systematic abuse and indeed, total disregard for human rights.

It has become clear that international outrage is not enough to stop this 
illegal and wanton use of the death penalty in the Saudi kingdom. Despite the 
world’s lens being fully focused on human rights abuses there, very little 
progress has been made in stopping their arbitrary nature. It is for this 
reason that I am calling for more concrete action.

The Saudi authorities must declare an official moratorium on the use of the 
death penalty and allow an international fact-finding mission to go to the 
kingdom and investigate my findings, get access to those on death row, as well 
as help prevent prospective rights violations.

Should Saudi Arabia fail to address this growing stain on its human rights 
record, I also call on other countries to consider the use of targeted 
sanctions, and on the UN General Assembly to rescind Saudi Arabia’s membership 
of the UN Human Rights Council.

Saudi Arabia draws legitimacy for its actions from the support of other 
countries who appear indifferent to its flagrant abuse of human rights. For 
this reason, a withdrawal of support for the G20 meeting which is set to take 
place in Riyadh next year would send a powerful message to the kingdom. The 
abuse of human rights should not be tolerated, no matter how big the trade 
deal.

(source: Baroness Kennedy is a leading barrister and an expert in human rights 
law, civil liberties and constitutional issues. She was elevated to the House 
of Lords in 1997----The Indepenent)





IRAN----execution

Man Hanged at Rajai-Shahr Prison



A prisoner was hanged for murder charged at the Iranian city of Karaj’s 
Rajai-Shahr prison Wednesday.

According to IHR sources, on the morning of Wednesday, July 31, a man was 
hanged at Rajai-Shahr prison. IHR could identify him as Mohammad Ghodrati who 
was 30 at the time of the execution. He was recently transferred from Varamin 
prison to Rajai-Shahr prison for execution.

The execution is not announced by Iranian authorities or media so far.

According to the IHR statistic department, at least 110 people were executed in 
Iran in the 1st half of 2019.

(source: Iran Human Rights)

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

Tehran Moves Swedish-Iranian Scientist Sentenced To Death To Solitary 
Confinement



A Swedish-Iranian medical doctor and researcher who has been in jail in Iran 
since 2916 on charges of "espionage" with a death sentence, has been moved to 
an unidentified place, the inmate's wife told Radio Farda on Thursday August 1.

Ahmad Reza Jalali (Djalali) was arrested by Iranian intelligence while visiting 
Iran to attend a scientific conference at the invitation of the University of 
Tehran in May 2016.

Vida Mehran Nia, Jalali's wife , told Radio Farda that moving Jalali to 
solitary confinement in an unidentified place came as a surprise to the inmate 
and his family.

Jalali called his wife in Sweden on Tuesday, and told her that he has been 
moved to a cell which is monitored by CCTV.

Human rights watchdogs all over the world have protested Jalaii's death 
sentence which has been confirmed by the Iranian Supreme Court.

In 2017, Jalali told his family that he was sentenced to death after he refused 
to cooperate with Iran's Intelligence organization and spy on Iranian 
scientists abroad.

Jalali is suffering from serious health problems and Amnesty International has 
urged Tehran’s Prosecutor General to allow him to receive specialized medical 
care.

Jalali is one of several Iranians from abroad who were jailed during visits to 
Iran.

(source: radiofarda.com)








SRI LANKA:

Bill to end death penalty comes as Sri Lanka plans hangings



A bill to abolish the death penalty has been submitted to Sri Lanka's 
Parliament, while the president has sanctioned the hanging of 4 drug convicts.

The bill seems to be a move by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe to stop the 
planned executions, which are now stayed by the courts.

He and President Maithripala Sirisena formed a unity government in 2015 but 
have fallen out and become rival power centers within the government.

Lawmaker Bandula Lal Bandarigoda said Friday the bill seeks to abolish the 
death sentence in the future and commute the sentences of those who are already 
on death row to life imprisonment. The bill submitted on Thursday will be taken 
for a vote in 14 days if no one challenges it.

Speaking at a public event, Sirisena said those who oppose executions in 
reality oppose building a decent county. He said narcotics are the root cause 
of all other major crimes and he decided to execute prisoners for the 
betterment of future generations.

Sirisena announced in June that he has signed the death warrants of 4 prisoners 
convicted of drug offenses.

The European Union said Sirisena's move contradicted the government's 
commitment last year to the U.N. General Assembly to maintain its 43-year 
moratorium on death penalty. The EU said the planned executions will send the 
wrong signals to the international community and investors and it will monitor 
Sri Lanka's commitments to international conventions. Sri Lanka has lucrative 
market access to the EU through a preferential trade scheme that hinges on 
those commitments.

After Sirisena's announcement, Wickremesinghe said his party opposes executions 
because the Sri Lankan government under Sirisena has supported UN resolutions 
for a moratorium on death penalty in 2016 and 2018.

Sri Lanka has not hanged a prisoner since 1976 even though courts routinely 
pass death sentences. Prison officials hired two hangmen after Sirisena 
sanctioned the executions.

The Supreme Court has stayed the executions until Oct. 30 in response to a 
petition by a death row inmate.

(source: Associated Press)








INDIA:

Bombay HC commutes death sentence to 35 yrs in jail in Pune BPO rape, murder 
case----Government argued that gravity of lapses was not such to warrant 
commutation of death sentence to life imprisonment; especially when capital 
punishment was confirmed by high court and Supreme Court.



The Bombay high court on Monday commuted the death sentence for two convicts to 
life in prison, or a minimum of 35 years, each, on the grounds of the execution 
being delayed.

The court commuted the death sentence handed to Purushottam Borate and Pradeep 
Kokade, convicted for raping and killing Jyoti Kumari Choudhary, a BPO employee 
in Pune, on November 1, 2007.

A division bench headed by Justice BP Dharmadhikari has now sentenced Borate 
and Kokade to imprisonment for a period of 35 years.

"We find that the delay in execution of death penalty in present matter is 
undue, inordinate and unreasonable," said the bench, commenting on the delay of 
more than 4 years in executing the accused.

This includes 2 years taken to process the mercy pleas sent to the governor of 
Maharashtra.

The bench held that delay in execution of convicts by any arm of the state 
would be violative of the fundamental rights of the accused and the extra, or 
additional, punishment resulting from such an avoidable delay cannot be 
legalised, because it is on account of the undue time taken by a Constitutional 
functionary.

"Such additional punishment is unconstitutional in all circumstances and 
contingencies," said the bench, adding, "Quantum or period thereof is also not 
very material."

Apart from the grounds of delay, the bench also upheld their contention that 
their mercy pleas were rejected without considering the material aspects of the 
case.

The duo had approached the high court after the trial court, on April 10, 2019, 
issued death warrants - fixing June 24, 2019, as the date for carrying out of 
the sentence.

The duo sought commutation of the death sentence primarily on the grounds that 
the delay had resulted in violation of their fundamental right to life.

The plea alleged that there was an “undue and avoidable delay of 1,509 days” in 
carrying out the sentence, including “deferment of 774 days” on their mercy 
petitions submitted to the governor of Maharashtra.

Both, Borate and Kokade submitted petitions to the governor on July 10, 2015 – 
2 months after the Supreme Court upheld the death sentence.

The pleas were rejected 774 days later, on the date March 29, 2016.

The bench found that material information like copy of the trial court verdict 
and the fact that Kokade was 19-years and two-months old when he committed the 
crime was not placed before the governor.

The bench refused to accept this claim.

It said provisions of the jail manual imposes a duty on the state government to 
fix the date and place of execution of convicts on death row.

Also, mere communication of the governor’s decision to the trial court was not 
sufficient compliance of the jail manual requirement.

In his separate petition, 30-year-old Kokade alleged that both, Borate and 
himself, were shifted to solitary confinement on March 20, 2012, the day on 
which the Pune Sessions Court convicted them of abducting, raping and killing 
the BPO employee, and sentenced them to death.

The plea further contended that solitary confinement was impermissible, 
referencing a Supreme Court ruling that held that under Section 73 of the 
Criminal Procedure Code only courts have the power to send a prisoner to 
solitary confinement.

Kokade complained that the isolation of seven years has resulted in development 
of severe mental health issues in his case.

The state government responded to the petition stating the authorities had 
immediately informed the trial court about the governor’s decision to reject 
the mercy petitions filed by the duo and therefore, there was no delay on part 
the of the state, as such.

The government also argued that even if the claim of the duo as regards the 
delay was accepted, as is, the gravity of the lapses was not such that would 
warrant commutation of death sentence to life imprisonment; this is especially 
when the capital punishment was confirmed by high court and the Supreme Court.

(source: Hindustan Times)

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

Coimbatore siblings murder case: Supreme Court confirms death penalty



While Justices Rohinton Nariman and Hemant Gupta found it a case of the "rarest 
of rare category" deserving the death penalty, Justice Sanjeev Khanna awarded 
him life sentence without remission/commutation till his natural death.

The Supreme Court, in a majority judgment of 2:1, confirmed the death sentence 
of a man for the gruesome rape of a 10-year-old child and the double murder of 
her and her 7-year-old brother in Coimbatore 9 years ago.

The majority decision of Justices Rohinton Nariman and Hemant Gupta on Thursday 
concluded that the convict, Manoharan, showed no remorse for the heinous crime 
and found it a case of the "rarest of rare category" deserving the death 
penalty. Manoharan had come in appeal.

However, Justice Sanjeev Khanna, while confirming the guilt of Manoharan, 
dissented with the majority decision and awarded him life sentence without 
remission/commutation till his natural death.

Justice Nariman, writing for the majority, said the trial court and, 
subsequently, the Madras High Court correctly balanced the aggravating and 
mitigating factors for and against Manoharan to find that the "crime committed 
was cold blooded and involves the rape of a minor girl and murder of 2 children 
in the most heinous fashion possible".

The majority judgment said Manoharan falsely retracted only those parts of his 
earlier confessional statement which implicated him of the rape of the young 
girl and the murder of both her and her little brother.

"Consequently, we confirm the death sentence and dismiss the appeals," Justice 
Nariman wrote for himself and Justice Gupta.

Justice Khanna, in his dissenting judgment, held the retraction of the 
confession should not be treated as absence of remorse or repentance but "an 
afterthought or on advice propelled by fear that the appellant (Manoharan) in 
view of his admission may face the gallows, and that the earlier confession 
made seeking forgiveness would be the cause of his death".

This "thought of doubt and attempt to retract had surfaced on account of belief 
that the sense of remorse, repentance and forgiveness would not be appreciated 
and given due regard, cannot be ruled out". Justice Khanna said the retraction 
should not be held against Manoharan.

Justice Khanna also considered the mitigating factors in favour of Manoharan, 
saying he was a 1st-time offender. He was 23 years of age at the time of the 
crime. He hails from a poor family and has aged parents. The crime was 
masterminded by his friend, Mohanakrishnan, who was later killed in a police 
encounter.

"Mohanakrishnan had thought, conceived and had single-handedly executed the 
plan to abduct the children. Appellant did join him thereafter and was with 
Mohanakrishnan. Subsequently the devil in Mohanakrishnan took over and he 
sexually assaulted and raped the small girl, while the appellant kept quiet. 
Later the appellant too sexually assaulted and committed rape. Thereupon, 
poison was administered to the children before throwing them into the canal," 
Justice Khanna wrote.

The judge said the offence committed was “heinous and deplorable” but did not 
call for the gallows.

On October 29, 2010, Mohanakrishnan, along with Manoharan, kidnapped the 
children, on their way to school, and took them to a remote area called 
Gopalasamy temple hills. The girl was sexually assaulted by both the men. The 
children were then fed milk with a poisonous substance added to it. They were 
then tied up and thrown into the swirling waters of Parambikulam-Azhiyar 
Project canal.

(source: The HIndu)

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

Parliament approves bill providing death penalty for sexual assault against 
children----The Bill, which was already approved by the Rajya Sabha, defines 
child pornography, making it punishable.



A bill seeking to provide death penalty for aggravated sexual assault on 
children and greater punishments for other crimes against minors was approved 
by Parliament, after it was passed by the Lok Sabha on Thursday.

Piloting the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Amendment) Bill, 
2019, Women and Child Development Minister Smriti Irani said it aims at making 
offences against children gender neutral.

(source: India Times)




PHILIPPINES:

Useless and Inhumane



Under Section 19, Article III of the Constitution which took effect on Feb. 2, 
1987, death penalty shall not be imposed, unless for compelling reasons 
involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death 
penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua”. So, from said 
date, the death penalty was no longer imposed and any death penalty already 
imposed has been reduced to reclusion perpetua (imprisonment from 10 years and 
one day to 40 years). However in the case of People vs. Muñoz (170 SCRA 107), 
the Supreme Court declared that: "there is really nothing in Article III 
Section 19, which expressly declares the abolition of the death penalty". The 
provision merely says that the death penalty shall not be imposed unless for 
compelling reasons involving heinous crimes the Congress hereafter provides for 
it”.

And true enough, on Dec. 13, 1993, Congress enacted R.A. 7659 entitled: “An Act 
to Impose the Death Penalty on Certain Heinous Crimes”. So when R.A. 7659 took 
effect on Dec. 31, 1984, the death penalty has been reinstated, because 
according to our legislators, there is an "alarming upsurge of ‘heinous crimes' 
which they defined as the "grievous, odious and hateful offenses which, by 
reasons of their inherent or manifest wickedness, viciousness, atrocity and 
perversity, are repugnant and outrageous to the common standards and norms of 
decency and morality in a just, civilized and ordered society." Heinous crimes 
are therefore the compelling reason for the re-imposition of the death penalty.

The 'heinous' crimes under said RA are: treason, qualified piracy, qualified 
bribery, murder, parricide, kidnapping and serious illegal detention, robbery 
with homicide or with rape or with intentional mutilation, destructive arson, 
rape, where the victim is under 18 years of age and the offender is the common 
law spouse of the victim’s parent, violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act (RA 
6425) and Plunder under RA 7080.

2 specific penalties are imposed by RA 7659 for the above mentioned offenses. 
These are: (1) reclusion perpetua to death, and (2) death. If death is the only 
penalty imposed, it shall be applied regardless of any mitigating or 
aggravating circumstances that may have attended the commission of the offense. 
If the penalty is reclusion perpetua to death and there is present only one 
aggravating circumstance, the greater penalty of death shall be applied. But 
when no mitigating or aggravating circumstance, or when only mitigating 
circumstance is present, the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be 
imposed. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances attended the 
commission of the crime, the courts shall reasonably allow them to offset one 
another in consideration of their number and importance. The imposition of the 
death penalty is, therefore, mandatory if that is the sole penalty prescribed 
by law, or discretionary if the penalty ranges from reclusion perpetua to 
death.

Death Penalty shall not be imposed: (1) when the guilty person is below 18 
years or more than 70 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime; 
or (2) when upon appeal or automatic review by the Supreme Court, majority is 
not obtained for its imposition. Its execution shall be suspended when the 
convict is a woman and she is pregnant. The suspension shall remain within one 
year after the convicted woman gives birth. The execution shall also be 
suspended when the convict becomes insane or an imbecile after final sentence 
has been pronounced. The court shall determine when the suspension will be 
lifted, or when the convict is fit to be executed.

While the compelling reason for the imposition of death penalty is heinousness 
of the crime committed, others believe however that the gravity of the offense 
should not be the only reason for imposing death sentence as a commensurate 
penalty. There must also be a lack or insufficiency of any lesser penalty to 
defend human lives and preserve the common good.

Thus in June 2006 or about 13 years after the re-imposition of the death 
penalty, RA 9346 was signed into law. This law, also known as “An Act 
Prohibiting the Imposition of the Death Penalty in the Philippines”, abolished 
the death penalty imposed by R.A. 7659, mainly because “it had not proven to be 
a deterrent to crime and had become a dead-letter law”. Life imprisonment was 
thus restored as the capital punishment.

Sadly however, another bill is again being proposed to re-impose the death 
penalty allegedly for the purpose of deterring the commission of heinous crimes 
particularly the violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act and Large Scale 
Corruption in the government. This move is undeniably so controversial in view 
of what happened to RA 7659 which is the previous law imposing death penalty. 
Said RA was repealed precisely because it failed to serve its purpose of 
deterring the commission of heinous crimes. Our legislators themselves said so. 
They even called it “a dead letter” legislation. Reviving the death penalty 
therefore is providing a solution which has already been proven to be a failure 
in deterring heinous crimes. It is like remedying a blunder with another 
blunder.

Indeed the death penalty itself is a cruel and unusual punishment that degrades 
human life. Imposing it on heinous crimes is like correcting a wrong with 
another wrong; like committing violence to suppress violence. But as already 
proven by what happened to RA 7659 or the death penalty law, "2 wrongs do not a 
right make".

Besides as shown by what is happening now in our criminal justice system, 
crimes proliferate and criminals abound because they are aware that it takes so 
many years and tedious or sometimes futile efforts to prosecute criminal cases. 
So the best deterrent against crimes is to ensure a fair and speedy trial in 
the disposition of criminal cases by improving the administration of justice 
which largely depends on selecting and having honest, efficient, competent, 
dedicated, and diligent Members of the Judiciary.

(source: Opinion; Jose C. Sison, The Philippine Star)








INDONESIA:

French drug smuggler's death sentence in Indonesia 'commuted to 19 
years'----The ruling overturns a lower court's decision to sentence Felix 
Dorfin to death



A Frenchman sentenced to death for drug trafficking in Indonesia has had his 
sentence commuted to 19 years in jail, his lawyer and media have said.

Félix Dorfin, 35, had been convicted of trafficking about 3kg (6.6lb) of 
various drugs into the Indonesian holiday island of Lombok.

The Mataram high court ruling overturns the death penalty imposed by a lower 
court less than 3 months ago.

Indonesia has some of the world's strictest drug laws.

Dorfin's lawyer, Denny Nur Indra, welcomed the ruling, telling Agence 
France-Presse news agency: "Praise be to God, Dorfin's sentence has been 
commuted."

It is not clear whether prosecutors will appeal against the latest sentence.

The Antara news agency said that although the ruling had been recorded, it had 
yet to be officially delivered to the parties concerned. The reasons for the 
ruling are expected to be made public later on Friday.

Antara said a fine of 10bn rupees ($703,000; £580,000) had also been imposed.

Indonesia's new appetite for execution

Dorfin was arrested in September last year at the airport in Lombok where he 
had flown in from Singapore.

He was carrying a suitcase filled with drugs including ecstasy and 
amphetamines.

Media captionBBC Indonesia's Liston Siregar explains Indonesia's firm stance on 
drugs

The judge in the lower court cited Dorfin's involvement in an international 
drug syndicate and the amount of drugs in his possession as aggravating 
factors.

The death penalty verdict came as a shock as prosecutors had requested 20 years 
in jail and a fine of $700,000 (£540,000).

No-one has been executed in the country since 2016, although a number of 
foreigners remain on death row.

Earlier in the year, Dorfin escaped from the prison he was being held in, by 
sawing off the bars on his cell's window and rappelling down with a rope made 
of a sarong and curtains, reports say.

A female police officer was arrested for allegedly helping him escape in 
exchange for money.

He was later recaptured by police who found him hiding in a forest in the north 
of the island.

(source: BBC News)








JAPAN----executions

Hangings carried out for 2 Japanese death row inmates convicted of multiple 
rape-murders----Executions 1st since December

2 death row inmates, Koichi Shoji, 64, and Yasunori Suzuki, 50, were executed 
on Friday, the Justice Ministry said, marking the country’s 1st executions of 
2019.

Both were sentenced to death for separate rape and murder charges of several 
women.

Justice Minister Takashi Yamashita ordered their executions on Wednesday.

"Sexual assault, including rape, is an unforgivable crime in itself. These 
cases were particularly harrowing, as the criminals also murdered their 
victims," Yamashita said at a news conference Friday morning.

However, he declined to give any more details on how the executions were 
decided and carried out, repeating the government’s policy that "the decision 
was made following careful deliberation over whether there were any grounds for 
suspending the execution."

Shoji was sentenced for killing Hiroko Hayashi, 54, and raping and killing 
Fumiko Osawa, 42, both in Kanagawa Prefecture, in conspiracy with his 
girlfriend in 2001. He also acted alone in raping and injuring another woman in 
Tokyo a year earlier.

Suzuki was found guilty for the rape and murder of Nana Kubota, 18, the killing 
of Toshiko Onaka, 62, and the attempted rape and murder of Keiko Fukushima, 23, 
over the course of 4 weeks from December 2004 to January 2005.

The hangings marked the 1st of the Reiwa Era and follow the executions of 2 
inmates in Osaka in December last year. It also marks a little over a year 
since the executions of 13 former Aum Shinrikyo cult members over the span of 3 
weeks in July last year rekindled public debate on capital punishment.

Yamashita declined to specify whether Shoji and Suzuki had requested retrials. 
However, he confirmed that out of 111 inmates on death row, 82 were making such 
requests. According to a statement by human rights group Amnesty International 
Japan, Shoji had been petitioning for a retrial.

The Japan Federation of Bar Associations is calling for the abolishment of the 
death penalty by 2020, pointing to cases in which people on death row were 
later found innocent after retrial. It also questions the validity of hanging 
those who are petitioning for retrials.

But the public is overwhelmingly in favor of keeping capital punishment. A poll 
conducted by the government in 2014 found that 80 % of the 1,826 respondents 
thought there were compelling reasons to keep the death penalty, whereas 10 % 
thought the death penalty should be abolished.

When asked whether the death penalty should continue even if Japan were to 
introduce life sentences into the criminal justice system, 38 % responded that 
capital punishment should be abolished and 52 % said it should continue.

Amnesty International Japan strongly criticized Friday’s executions in a 
statement and urged Japan to never execute people on death row.

(source: Japan Times)








MOROCCO:

Government in contact with Curaçao citizen sentenced to death



The Curaçao government is in contact with the Dutch embassy in Morocco about 
the Curaçao born Shardyone Semerel. Last weekend he was sentenced to death in 
that country.

According to the court, the 30-year-old Curacao resident and his 25-year-old 
co-perpetrator Edwin Robles Martines wanted to murder an Amsterdam cafe owner 
in Marrakesh in 2017, but they killed the wrong person; the 26-year-old son of 
a Moroccan judge. Both receive the death penalty for this crime.

The Plenipotentiary Minister of Curaçao Anthony Begina said that the detainees 
communicate with the embassy via a self-chosen contact person and that the 
embassy offers all possible assistance to them.

(source: curacaochronicle.com)








NORTHERN IRELAND/NEW ZEALAND:

Chasing justice for a Belfast man hanged in New Zealand----Albert Black was 
sentenced to death for killing a man in apparent self-defence in 1955



When Albert Black set sail for New Zealand on the SS Captain Cook in 1953, he 
was a "ten quid Pom" or assisted emigrant, looking for a bright new future of 
full employment. Nearly 30 years before, my father, also a Protestant Irish 
man, born in England, had travelled the same route when it cost "ten bob" to 
emigrate. There were so many dreams to fulfil; my father never really found his 
but his voice would lend itself to me when I came to draw on that of Albert. 
Albert, or Paddy Black as he was nicknamed on board the ship, would face the 
gallows two years later, found guilty of murder. He was the 2nd last person to 
be hanged in New Zealand.

I began the story of Albert’s short life and death because it illustrated a 
theme that has run through my mind for a long time, a concern for young people 
who make one terrible mistake and have not only had their own lives changed 
forever, but that of theirs and their victim’s families, and of the wider 
society.

By all accounts, Albert was a happy go lucky, gentle boy who revelled in 
shipboard life. His contemporaries from that time left letters and accounts of 
his later trial and death in Auckland. There are still living people who knew 
Albert. They include a woman who was a child in the house where he first lived 
in Naenae, a dormitory suburb of the Hutt Valley, near Wellington. She recalls 
a youth who built a playhouse for her and her brothers, kept a pet hedgehog in 
a shoebox and wept when it died, who sang Irish songs, and waltzed at Christmas 
time with her standing on his shoes.

But events in the Hutt Valley, in the time that he lived there, were to be a 
catalyst for a major scandal that soon swept the country. A policeman caught 
two young people making out on the shingle banks of the wide river that flows 
through the Hutt. One thing led to another and shortly afterwards a newspaper 
reported widespread promiscuity in the area, snogging couples in the back rows 
of picture theatres, young girls hanging out to meet motorbike riders at the 
local milk bar.

"The presiding judge commented in closed court that the accused was an 
'outsider', not the sort of person wanted in New Zealand

The prime minister of the time was a right-wing politician, the leader of the 
National Party, who had ousted the Labour government on a platform of 
reinstating the death penalty, previously suspended for some 14 years. His 
outraged response to the growing 'scandal' in the Hutt was to call for an 
inquiry, headed by his close friend Oswald Mazengarb. The Mazengarb report 
followed in 1954, an alarmist document calling for measures to curb youth 
revolt, heavy penalties for those who transgressed, and the banning and burning 
of books deemed offensive. The report, filled with moral outrage, was forwarded 
to every household in the country that received the family benefit, an 
allowance made to all families who had children 16 and under. I was a teenager 
then, just 5 years younger than Albert. The heavy tome landed in the letter box 
at our farm gate, but my parents whisked it out of sight, afraid it might give 
me 'ideas'.

If anything, it fuelled youthful enthusiasm for change. American culture had 
arrived with the troops during the second World War and it was here to stay. It 
was the dawn of rock ‘n’roll, of dancing till daylight, of new styles of dress. 
Young English men brought Teddy Boy styles; and winkle pickers and bomber 
jackets, tight skirts and bouffant hairstyles, defined emerging bodgie and 
widgie culture. It might have offended rugby-worshipping, church-going New 
Zealand but there was no turning back. Auckland

Albert had become homesick for Belfast, and in an effort to make more money and 
return home, he moved north to Auckland where he was offered a position as the 
caretaker of a vacant mid-city boarding house. It was just around the corner 
from Ye Olde Barn cafe, frequented by bodgies, widgies and English seamen, 
jiving to the jukebox. The clientele began to gather at the boarding house for 
parties, whether Albert wanted them there or not, seemingly coerced into some 
of these gatherings. He gave free lodgings to the homeless. One of these was a 
knife-carrying youth called Alan Jacques, known as Johnny McBride, after the 
main character in the Mickey Spillane novel The Long Wait, his pseudonym and 
violent behaviour modelled on that of his hero. After a series of arguments 
over a girl, Jacques beat Albert severely one evening. The following night, at 
Ye Olde Barn, the fight reached its climax and Albert drew a knife. After one 
blow, Jacques died.

Self-defence as a defence for manslaughter was raised, but rejected. The many 
circumstances surrounding the case suggest it might have been a more credible 
verdict. The presiding judge commented in closed court that the accused was an 
'outsider', not the sort of person wanted in New Zealand. His comments were 
relayed to the jury.

Back in Belfast, Kathleen Black raised a petition to the New Zealand government 
which attracted 12,000 signatures within a week and she also appealed to the 
queen. Not only was her petition turned down, the national government and its 
ministers denied her entry to New Zealand in order to say goodbye to her son. 
Five months after the death of Jacques, Albert Black was hanged in Mount Eden 
prison at the age of 20. His last words as he stood on the gallows were "I wish 
you a merry Christmas gentlemen, and a prosperous New Year."

A painful eyewitness newspaper account of his death led to a wave of public 
revulsion for the death penalty, and its subsequent abolition. Albert Black’s 
story has thus earned a place in our history.

I continue to seek justice for the death of this boy. I would wish his crime 
downgraded to manslaughter. It would be a gift to one of my many informants, 
his daughter, born 3 months after his death, and her children and 
grandchildren. This is the hope I hold.

I am grateful for the assistance of the Linen Hall Library, Belfast, Births, 
Deaths and Marriages, Belfast, and the Belfast Book Festival where I was a 
guest in 2016.

This Mortal Boy by Fiona Kidman is published by Gallic Books (£8.99)on August 
1st

(source: irishtimes.com)