[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

August 7



IRAN----executions

5 Prisoners Executed at 1 Prison in 1 Day----3 of them were identified by IHR 
sources as Mohammadreza Shokri, Yousef Zakeri and Hossein Panjeh-Maryam.



5 prisoners were hanged for murder charges at the Iranian city of Karaj’s 
Rajai-Shahr prison Wednesday.

According to IHR sources, on the morning of Wednesday, August 7, at least 5 
prisoners were hanged at Karaj city’s Rajai-Shahr prison, near Tehran. All were 
sentenced to death for murder charges.

3 of them were identified by IHR sources as Mohammadreza Shokri, Yousef Zakeri 
and Hossein Panjeh-Maryam.

None of the above-mentioned execution has been announced by Iranian media or 
officials so far.

At least 110 people were executed in Iran in the 1st half of 2019; Only 37 of 
the executions have been announced by authorities or Iranian media. Iran Human 
Rights (IHR) could confirm 73 more through its sources. IHR only reports the 
unannounced executions if it could confirm those with 2 separate credible 
sources. Therefore, the actual number of executions may be even higher than 
reported.

There is a lack of a classification of murder by degree in Iran which results 
in issuing a death sentence for any kind of murder regardless of intensity and 
intent.

(source: Iran Human Rights)








SRI LANKA:

Petition filed on legality of Bandulal’s motion on death penalty



A petition has been filed at the Supreme Court seeking a ruling that the 
Private Member’s Bill presented to the parliament by MP Bandulal Banadarigoda 
on the abolishment of the death penalty is not unconstitutional.

The Attorney General has been named the respondent of this petition file by 
Prof. C. Gunaratne from Nugegoda.

On August 01, MP Bandulal Bandarigoda tabled a Private Member’s Motion at the 
parliament containing provisions to abolish the death penalty.

The petitioner pointed out that no clause in the proposal would violate the 
Constitution of Sri Lanka.

Accordingly, the petitioner has requested the Supreme Court to grant a ruling 
that the motion could be passed by an ordinary majority in Parliament.

(soure: Adaderana.lk)








PHILIPPINES:

British accountant, 47, faces death penalty in the Philippines ‘after being 
caught with meth'



A British accountant is facing the death penalty in the Philippines after 
allegedly being caught with meth in a drugs raid.

Philip Joseph, 47, was in a flat with two locals when police burst through the 
door in Manila on May 13 at around 5pm.

Officers said they found Joseph with a woman, Josephine Olayao, 38, and Rodolfo 
del Rosario, 42, a tuk tuk rider, preparing sachets of methamphetamine, or 
shabu, as it is known locally.

Police said that Joseph, who owns the apartment, has been held in custody while 
prosecutors prepare a case against him.

He faces charges of possession and dealing, which carries a maximum punishment 
of the death sentence or a life sentence in one of the country‘s hellish 
overcrowded prisons.

A police report from the Malate district station said four pieces of 
heat-sealed transparent sachets containing suspected methamphetamine were 
seized in the raid.

It said: ‘Police identified the suspects as being involved in anti-criminality 
operations and found four sachets of shabu.

? ‘The 3 suspected were brought to the Malate police station for proper 
disposition and filing of charges.

‘They will be charged with the violation of Section 5 and section 11 Art. II of 
R.A. 9165 or the illegal Distribution and Possession of Dangerous Drugs.‘

If found guilty of possession, Joseph faces a minimum of 20 years in prison and 
a maximum life term.

Joseph had moved to the Philippines and was working in the financial sector as 
an accountant and legal collections manager.

(source: eastoncaller.com)








SINGAPORE:

Singapore’s execution of drug offenders tripled in 5 years



--Total number of executions from 2014 to 2019 is 32.

--Executions for drug offence stand at 84 percent of the total executions till 
date since 2014.

--A noticeable spike in execution numbers for drug offence occurred in 2017 and 
2018.

The number of executions (for drug offences) in the past 5 years (2014-2018) 
represented a 3-fold jump from the previous 5 year period (2007-2011) before 
the laws on mandatory death penalty for both drug and murder offences were 
reviewed in 2012-2013.

In terms of total executions, the 2014-2019 period exhibits 1.8 times more 
executions compared to the 2007-2011 period.

It is tragic that Singapore’s amended legislative framework for drug 
trafficking offences has elicited an increase in the number death sentences 
carried out. The majority, if not all, of those executed on drug offences since 
2014 were due to the failure of the Attorney General Chambers (AGC) to issue a 
"certificate of cooperation".

Without this certificate, an accused still faces the mandatory death sentence. 
Otherwise the judge could exercise the option to pass an alternate sentence of 
life imprisonment rather than the death penalty.

Problematic trend

The issue of how and when a certificate of cooperation can be issued is the 
sole prerogative of the Attorney General’s Chambers. What is problematic is the 
trend of those who should rightly be considered socially vulnerable but were 
executed instead due to their failure to obtain the certificate.

First, owing to their status as low-level couriers, it would be deeply 
questionable if they were able to provide the level of intelligence that can 
"disrupt drug trafficking activities".

Second, and even more problematic, is when the cases involved persons who were 
assessed to have sub or borderline intelligence level and were found to have 
played the role of a mere courier.

Any of these two factors would significantly reduce the likelihood of the 
certificate of cooperation being granted. Further aggravating the situation are 
the statutory presumptions in the Misuse of Drugs Act which shift the burden on 
accused persons to produce the necessary evidence to rebut the presumptions.

It is therefore not an exaggeration to think that a person may be condemned to 
die because he has been deemed un-useful or was limited by his inherent 
capacity to assist with his own defence at the point of first trial.

While not all executions occurred under this unfortunate matrix of factors, 
when they do, the outcome is devastating. Such persons are most indubitably 
victims of cognitive inequality. The case of Nagaenthran a/l K Dharmalingam 
(alias Naga) is one perturbing example.

First arrested in 2009, and originally sentenced to the mandatory death penalty 
in 2010, he spent the next 8 years fighting for his life.

During this arduous period, his 1st appeal was rejected in 2011. The sentence 
was delayed when the Misuse of Drugs Act was amended in 2012 and given effect 
in 2013.

In late 2014, on the occasion of international human rights day, the public 
prosecutor informed the court that Naga was not eligible for the certificate of 
cooperation.

The next four years were spent on seeking a judicial recourse in challenging 
this denial and to appeal for re-sentencing.

It emerged between 2013 and 2017, when Naga was referred for a forensic 
psychiatric evaluation, that medical experts assessed him to possess a 
borderline range of intelligence. This essentially meant he could rightfully be 
described as a person with intellectual disability.

The Singapore government ratified the Convention on the Rights of Disabled 
Persons on 18 July 2013. Since then, some spotted improvement or developments 
may be observed in the way that the criminal justice system here manages cases 
of persons with intellectual disabilities coming into conflict with the law.

However any improvement remains to be assessed when it comes to death penalty 
cases. In Naga’s case, the courts have consistently adopted the position that 
his disability does not square with the meaning or effect of "abnormality of 
mind" as defined in the Misuse of Drugs Act.

International human rights law has recognised that the death penalty should not 
be imposed on persons with mental or intellectual disabilities. It also calls 
for laws and sentencing guidelines to be developed or amended to prohibit the 
imposition of the death sentence on such persons and their execution.

In lieu of such needed developments in Singapore, and with his final judicial 
appeal for re-sentencing denied earlier on 27 May 2019, Naga’s final recourse 
lies with petitioning the Singapore president for clemency. This however 
presents another worrying challenge.

Blemished clemency process

Disturbingly, his chances of success are reasonably cast in doubt, if we 
observe the case of P Pannir Selvam.

Pannir was arrested in September 2014 and convicted in 2017 for trafficking 
51.84g of diamorphine. Like Naga, he was denied the certificate of assistance 
by the public prosecutor despite the best efforts by him and his family who 
worked hard to provide information to the Singapore authorities.

His clemency petition to the Singapore president was rejected earlier in May 
this year on the advice of the Singapore cabinet. The troubling aspect stemmed 
from the manner such grave news was communicated to his family. They received 
both letters dated on the same day - 17 May - from the president’s office 
informing them of the clemency denial, and the letter from the Singapore Prison 
Services informing of his scheduled execution on 24 May.

Pannir narrowly gained a reprieve when the court granted a rare leave for him 
to challenge his execution based on this troubling circumstance.

This sliver of hope is overshadowed by the disturbing revelation that as many 
as 13 clemency petitions have already been rejected by the president, as shared 
by N Surendran the legal adviser to Malaysia-based Lawyers for Liberty. It is a 
sombre fact that Singapore has not seen any clemency granted for the past 20 
years since 1998.

Keen observers of the death penalty’s application in Singapore will know that 
the weight of granting clemency derives from the cabinet’s prerogative. In a 
2003 BBC interview, the then Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong, infamously said, 
"Each execution comes to the cabinet and we look at it. If we decide that a 
certain person has got to be executed, he is executed."

To date, we have yet to witness any evidence that would suggest the president 
possesses the powers to decide independently from the cabinet’s advice.

Think Centre reiterates our longstanding belief that the death penalty is a 
cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. We oppose the use of capital 
punishment in all circumstances, and especially the mandatory death penalty for 
non-violent crimes in the case of drugs offences.

The death penalty has no place in any society that wants to pride itself as 
being modern, developed and civilised. The death penalty in Singapore today is 
an anachronistic and incongruous practice; it should only be as fashionable as 
the ongoing bicentennial commemoration – not to be celebrated, but to be 
remembered only as a part of history.

(source: aliran.com)








INDIA:

Rajasthan Assembly passes Bill on honour killing: Social activists oppose death 
penalty provision ---- Activists also complained about the short time they had 
to study and discuss the Bills.



Civil society groups in Rajasthan have objected to the provision for death 
sentence in the recently passed Bill on honour killings in the state Assembly.

In a joint statement, activists Aruna Roy, Kavita Srivastava, Nikhil Dey, Anant 
Bhatnagar, and several others, said they oppose the death penalty in the 
Rajasthan Prohibition of Interference with the Freedom of Matrimonial Alliances 
in the Name of Honour and Tradition Bill, which was passed in Assembly on 
Monday, along with Rajasthan Protection from Lynching Bill. The activists 
praised the Bills but said that these required some changes.

They say that the Bill against honour killing is 'flawed' as it does not 
clearly include the parents and family of the aggrieved as those who will 
interfere with the alliance, and instead only makes the unlawful assembly 
guilty of such a crime. "Their crime will have to be proved as a part of the 
unlawful Assembly," they said. Second, they say that the Bill provides no 
provision of giving a declaration by the couple, in a situation of violence, so 
that a civil injunction against the violators can be obtained.

As for the Bill against mob lynching, they say that the concept of dereliction 
of duty by a public servant is not included in the Bill. "This concept of the 
neglect of duties by the public servant which makes those implementing the law 
accountable, needs to be included," they said.

"Our argument is that such a regime would create fear in the minds of the 
public servant and make them responsible and accountable. The Supreme Court 
goes to the extent of emphasising that both, the departmental action which 
should be taken to its logical conclusion and criminal proceedings, should be 
undertaken. The bill is silent on this," they say. They also say that the 
responsibilities of the state-level authorities, such as the DGP and Home 
Secretary, have not been clearly defined in this Bill.

On August 2, they had also sent letters to Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot, 
suggesting several changes in the Bills. Kavita Srivastava, along with inputs 
by senior lawyer Indira Jaising, had termed the honour killing Bill 'flawed', 
and commented that the emphasis is only on interference in matrimonial 
alliances, not the right to choice, "which is the more important part, and 
should have been included, as every other day, there are diktats and denials 
related to choices of girls, from wearing clothes, to having a friend or 
keeping a mobile among other things."

Activists also complained about the short time they had to study and discuss 
the Bills, stating that "now that the bills have been passed, we are appealing 
to the Government to amend the laws through an Ordinance at the earliest."

(source: The Indian Express)








NIGERIA:

Kaduna govt: El-Zakzaky facing death penalty… India mustn’t give him asylum



The Kaduna state government says Ibrahim El-Zakzaky, leader of the Islamic 
Movement in Nigeria (IMN), must not seek asylum in India.

In a statement signed by Samuel Aruwan, commissioner for internal security and 
home affairs, the government of Kaduna which is currently prosecuting 
El-Zakzaky, said steps must be taken to ensure the IMN leader and Zeenah, his 
wife, do not become fugitives from justice.

The government said the duo should not frustrate the trial by claiming asylum 
or the status of political prisoners in India.

On Monday, a high court in Kaduna granted El-Zakzaky and his wife the 
permission to travel to India for treatment. They have been in detention since 
2015 following a clash between IMN members and some soldiers.

Through Femi Falana, their counsel, El-Zakzaky and his wife had applied for 
medical leave, citing poor health.

But Aruwan said while the government is not opposed to anyone seeking medical 
treatment in any part of the world, so long it is not at the expense of the 
government, it has filed for strict supervision of the medical leave.

“Malam Ibrahim El-Zakzaky is facing criminal trial before the Kaduna High Court 
on charges filed in April 2018. The Kaduna State Government is prosecuting 
Malam Ibrahim El-Zakzaky on an eight-count charge, including culpable homicide 
punishable with death,” the statement read.

“On Monday, 5th August 2019, the Kaduna High Court granted an application for 
medical leave filed by Mr. El-Zakzaky and his wife, Mrs. Zeenah Ibrahim. The 
court specifically said it was granting the 2 defendants ‘leave to travel out 
of Nigeria for urgent medical treatment at Medanta Hospital, India, under 
strict supervision of the Respondent and to return to Nigeria (for continuation 
of trial) as soon as they are discharged from the hospital’.

“The Kaduna State Government respects the right of anyone to seek treatment 
anywhere in the world, even for malaria or common cold, so long as they are 
paying for it. But in the case of persons facing trial for serious offenses, 
necessary safeguards are required to ensure that such persons do not become 
fugitives from justice or frustrate trial by claiming asylum or the status of 
political prisoner in the host country.”

Aruwan said while the Kaduna government respects the court’s ruling on medical 
leave, it is not in agreement with the premises on which it is based, and will, 
therefore, file an appeal.

The statement said El-Zakzaky and his wife consented to being held in custody 
of the Department of State Services (DSS).

"The court ordered that the defendants be kept in prison custody and that the 
defendants be allowed access to their personal physicians alongside physicians 
of the State. However, at his request, Mr. Ibrahim El-Zakzaky and his wife are 
being kept in SSS facilities which were deemed more comfortable than the Kaduna 
Prison," the statement read.

“The trial suffered initial delays because the 3rd and 4th 
defendants/applicants remain at large. That was the case when the matter first 
came up in court on 15th May 2018. It was adjourned till 21st June 2018 because 
the charges had not been served on the 3rd and 4th defendants. An accident 
involving the trial judge further delayed the hearing scheduled for 21st June 
2018. Subsequently, the arraignment of the 1st and 2nd defendants was done on 
2nd August 2018.

"However, the Kaduna High Court heard Malam El-Zakzaky’s application for leave 
to seek medical attention abroad on Monday, 29th July 2019. At the hearing, 
counsel to the Kaduna State Government opposed the application for medical 
leave largely because it was based on medical reports not issued by a 
government medical facility. The court granted the application on Monday, 5th 
August 2019.

"It is the considered contention of the Kaduna State Government that decades of 
impunity emboldened the IMN to engage in various unlawful activities 
culminating in the tragic events of December 2015. In prosecuting the case, the 
state government is affirming simple canons of the rule of law, that no one is 
above its long arm and that all persons are equal in its eyes. Mob pressure, 
such as the carnage visited on the streets of Abuja to force Mr. El-Zakzaky’s 
release without due process, cannot be allowed to succeed."

(source: thecable.ng)