[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

[Rick Halperin]

June 29



GLOBAL:

UN General Assembly adopts controversial resolution on torture-free trade



The General Assembly on Friday adopted a controversial resolution, which aims 
to establish common international standards for torture-free trade.

The draft resolution, introduced by Romania, was adopted with 81 votes in 
favor, 20 against and 44 abstentions.

The resolution requests the secretary-general to seek the views of member 
states on the feasibility and possible scope of a range of options to establish 
common international standards for the import, export and transfer of goods 
used for capital punishment and for torture or other cruel, inhuman or 
degrading treatment or punishment.

It asks the secretary-general to submit a report on the subject to the General 
Assembly at its 2019-20 session.

It also requests the secretary-general to establish a group of governmental 
experts to examine, beginning in 2020, the feasibility and scope of the goods 
to be included, and draft parameters for a range of options to establish common 
international standards on the matter.

It asks for the transmission of the report of the group of experts to the 
General Assembly for consideration at its 2020-21 session.

Before and after the vote, 20 countries voiced their opposition or reservations 
concerning the draft resolution. The concerns concentrated on the indicated 
linkage between torture and the death penalty, the ambiguity in language that 
may have impacts on trade, as well as the lack of consultations.

(source: xinhuanet.com)








IRAN:

Khamenei’s ‘Upgrade Plan for the Judiciary’ Is a Plan to Increase Execution and 
Torture in Iran



The Iranian regime’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, has spoken several times, 
albeit in vague terms, of a ‘Upgrade Plan for the Judiciary,’ without ever 
explaining exactly what that meant.

When introducing Ebrahim Raisi as Chief Justice on March 7, 2019, Khamenei 
mentioned the plan in his nomination decree. Again he did not elaborate much, 
but called the plan one of “revitalizing and resuming public rights and 
protecting the people’s legitimate liberties.” He also emphasized a few points, 
of which the most important were “the need for firmness” and “presence of 
revolutionary youth” in the Judiciary.

On Wednesday June 26, in the traditional annual meeting entitled “Week of 
Justice,” evidently Raisi raised the question, and Khamenei answered that it 
was necessary to precipitate to implement the plan, again without much ado.

But it was not hard to guess, through Khamenei’s words, on the content of the 
so-called Upgrade Plan for the Judiciary. It was also evident that the plan’s 
implementation was vital to Khamenei for which he is in big hurry. He went so 
far as to say the plan had to be “implemented without delay” and he stressed 
the need for “timely, brave execution based on genuine methods.”

It was clear from what he said that the plan’s true nature was “increasing 
repression.” In his Wednesday speech, Khamenei mentioned the need for showing 
“firmness and might.” Experience has shown that in the regime’s jargon those 
words have no other meaning than increasing repression.

But why the secrecy?

The reason Khamenei keeps a plan of which the consequences would be felt by the 
people on the streets of Iran clearly is that he and the whole of his regime 
have much less leeway in repression now. While the regime needs the repression 
as much as oxygen, the same repression can backfire in the form of popular 
unrest and riots able to threaten the regime’s stability.

The ability to oppress is directly proportional to the elements of power that 
Khamenei and the regime have.

If one looks at the forty year history of Iran’s regime, one notes that 
repression was harshest in the 1980s. The reason is that, having exploited to 
the full the exceptional historical circumstances, the regime’s founder 
Ruhollah Khomeini had been able to combine political and religious power in 
himself after usurping the leadership of the anti-monarchist revolution.

But Khamenei lacks absolutely such exceptional power.

Internally, the regime faces such crisis that Khamenei is obliged to embolden 
his forces on a daily basis to prevent desertion and loss of will.

Internationally, while Khomeini enjoyed support in the East as well as the 
West, the regime’s current isolation has reached a point where Khamenei and his 
entourage are sanctioned by name.

The regime’s foundation stands on a society on the verge of explosion, with 
Khamenei himself calling that social “cleavage,” that if activated, would lead 
to a social earthquake.

In his Wednesday speech, Khamenei pointed to deep social hatred towards the 
regime’s oppressive apparatus, under the term “unleashed virtual space” 
reactions towards the mullahs’ justice department, and reassured his henchmen 
that they should not be afraid of such reactions.

Thus Khamenei is obliged to play a double game. On one hand, he cannot openly 
mention that the Upgrade Plan for the Judiciary is one of repression, and on 
the other hand he needs to stress firmness and ask prompt implementation of the 
plan.

The same method is used in terms of the regime’s terrorism: mining oil tankers, 
and denying the act.

Wednesday was Khamenei’s first public appearance, after being sanctioned by 
name. He did not make the slightest point on the new US sanctions, but borrowed 
the term “Iranian people” for himself to say, “the respectful Iranian people 
are insulted every day.” But more important was his implicit confession to the 
regime’s total impasse, when talking about negotiations:

“In negotiating with them, if you accept their word, you are doomed, and if you 
do not, pressure continues.”

This coincides with the Iranian Resistance’s analysis on the regime’s impasse: 
if they accept dialogue, this would lead to an endless spiral of which Khamenei 
himself said in June 2016: “They begin with the nuclear (issue), then our 
missiles, then human rights, then the Guardian Council, then the Revolutionary 
Guards (IRGC), then the leadership, and then the whole regime!

(source: ncr-iran.org)








PAKISTAN:

Officer, civilian convicted of espionage challenge death penalty



A senior military officer and a civilian doctor – awarded the death sentence on 
espionage charges by the field general court martial – have challenged their 
convictions in the Lahore High Court Rawalpindi bench.

Justice Mirza Waqas Rauf of Rawalpindi bench have accepted their petitions for 
initial hearing and ordered Attorney General Pakistan, Home Secretary Punjab 
and Secretary Defence to submit their replies in 2 weeks.

Brigadier (retd) Raja Rizwan and Doctor Wasim Akram, who were tried in separate 
cases under the Pakistan Army Act and Official Secrets Act, were given the 
death penalty, while a 3-star retired general, was sentenced to 14 years 
rigorous imprisonment for “leaking sensitive information”.

Brig Rizwan’s petition has been filed by his wife Nadira Batool, while Dr 
Wasim’s petition has been filed by his father Muhammad Akram under Article 199 
of the Constitution of Pakistan.

The counsel of the petitioners, Brig (retd) Muhammad Wasif Khan, pleaded that 
the special military court awarded the capital punishments to his clients on 
May 30, which were endorsed by Chief of Army Staff Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa.

They were handed over to authorities in Lahore’s Adiala Jail on June 1, where 
they are currently being held, the counsel said, adding that his clients were 
worried that they could be executed at any time as the sentences have already 
been ratified by the army chief.

With the rejection of their appeals from the Military Court of Appeal, the 
authorities can carry out the sentence at any time, he said.

“Therefore, we will not be able to file appeals at any legal forum,” he said 
while pleading the court to issue a stay order against the execution of the 
sentences.

He added that in light of the judgements of the Supreme Court, the 2 appeals 
were maintainable.

While rejecting the appeal to issue a stay order against the executions, 
Justice Rauf admitted the petition and the court issued notice to the attorney 
general seeking his reply on the issue in 2 weeks.

(source: The Express Tribune)








SRI LANKA:

No executions for a week- Prisons Chief



When questioned by the Appeal Court, Prisons Commissioner General yesterday 
assured that no prisoner would be executed within the next 7 days from 
yesterday.

He gave this undertaking when the writ petition against the implementation of 
the death sentence was taken up by Court of Appeal Bench comprising Justices 
Yasantha Kodagoda (President) and Arjuna Obeyesekere.

On this basis Counsel for the petitioner moved to support the writ petition 
next week with Court fixing the date for support on Tuesday.

Petitioner Malinda Seneviratne, a senior journalist, cited the Commissioner 
General of Prisons, Welikada Prisons Superintendent, Welikada Prison 
Executioner and the Attorney General as respondents.

Counsel Niran Anketel with Hafeel Farisz instructed by Vidanapathirana 
Associates appeared for the petitioner while Deputy Solicitor General Nerin 
Pulle appeared for the Commissioner General of Prisons and the Attorney 
General.

Petitioner in his public interest litigation stated that it was in the interest 
of the public that the rule of law be adhered to in all matters including the 
carrying out of sentences imposed by courts of law.

He said various steps have been taken towards reintroducing the implementation 
of the death sentence in the recent past including advertising for the 
recruitment of an executioner, the procurement and/or preparation of the 
required ropes.

The petitioner said on or about June 26, the President at a conference with 
heads of media institutions revealed that he had signed papers for the 
execution of the death sentence and that

four persons would be executed with the executions to be conducted soon on the 
days already decided.

He said in this application and in these proceedings he did not seek to impugn 
the said actions of the President but that he believed the death penalty 
offends the Constitution and is a barbaric practice.

The petitioner said an executioner is not entitled in law to execute a person 
sentenced to death and that the superintendent of prisons was not entitled in 
law to cause any other person to execute a person sentenced to death.

He said the execution of persons sentenced to death by one and/or more of the 
respondents as set out herein, their servants, agents and those holding under 
them would be (a) Prohibited by law and the Constitution (b) A violation of the 
rights of citizens and that of the public inclusive of the petitioner and the 
petitioner himself (c ) Ultra vires (d) Arbitrary, irrational, capricious, 
vexatious and unreasonable (e) Action that offends and is in breach of the 
principles of reasonableness, fairness, proportionality, legitimate 
expectation, natural justice and motivated by improper objectives.

The petitioner said thus and otherwise, the imminent decisions and/or actions 
of one or more of the Respondents to execute prisoners sentenced to death 
and/or to execute prisoners sentenced to death through any servant, agent and 
person would be unlawful, void ab initio and of no force or effect in law.

He is seeking an interim order preventing the respondents from executing the 
sentence of death on any person until the final hearing and determination of 
this application and is pleading for a writ of prohibition restraining the 
respondents from executing a sentence of death on any person.

The petitioner is also seeking court to grant and issue a mandate in the nature 
of a writ of certiorari quashing the decision to execute a sentence of death on 
any person.

(source: dailymirror.lk)

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

Sri Lanka appoints executioners for return of death penalty----4 convicts to be 
put to death after president announced end to 42-year-old moratorium



Sri Lanka has hired 2 executioners as it prepares to put four prisoners 
convicted of drug offences to death in what would be its 1st use of capital 
punishment for more than 40 years.

The executioners were picked from among 100 applicants who responded to an 
advertisement calling for male Sri Lankans aged between 18 and 45 with 
“excellent moral character” and “mental strength”.

The prisons department began the recruitment process in March after the last 
executioner quit in 2014, citing stress after seeing the gallows for the first 
time. Another, hired last year, never turned up for work.

President Maithripala Sirisena announced on Wednesday an end to a moratorium on 
the death penalty in force since 1976, a move political analysts said was meant 
to boost his chances of re-election if he stands again later this year.

Local and international rights groups, as well as the former colonial ruler 
Britain, Canada, the EU and UN have raised concerns about the south Asian 
nation’s restoration of capital punishment.

“The recruitment process is finalised and 2 [executioners] have been selected. 
The 2 need to go through final training which will take about two weeks,” 
prisons spokesman Thushara Upuldeniya said.

The prisons commissioner, TMJW Thennakoon, declined to provide details of the 4 
convicts whose death penalties the president approved.

On Friday, a Sri Lankan journalist filed public interest litigation seeking to 
stop any executions, arguing that people’s rights were being violated. A court 
hearing will be held on 2 July, and Thennakoon pledged there would be no 
executions for the next 7 days.

A spokesman for the UN office on drugs and crime said on Thursday international 
drug control conventions could not be used to justify the use of the death 
penalty for drug-related offences alone. Sri Lanka advertises for t2 hangmen as 
country resumes capital punishment.

“Application of the death penalty may also impede international cooperation in 
fighting drug trafficking as there are national laws that [bar] the exchange of 
information and extradition with countries which may impose capital punishment 
for the offences concerned,” the spokesman said.

(source: The Guardian)

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

Petition filed in Court of Appeal against implementing death sentence in Sri 
Lanka



In Sri Lanka, a writ petition has been filed in the court of appeal, seeking an 
interim order preventing implementation of the death sentence while prisons 
department has assured that there won’t be any execution till one week.

An individual in his petition stated that the President has announced that he 
has signed execution warrants for 4 death row prisoners and that the death 
penalty is a serious violation of human rights.

The court issued notice to the Commissioner General of Prisons following which 
the latter gave an undertaking that the death penalty will not be carried out 
within the next 7 days. The court decided to further hear the matter on 
Tuesday.

Meanwhile, President Maithripala Sirisena said that he had an over-the-phone 
conversation with UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres last night where he 
explained the reasons for implementing the death sentence in Sri Lanka.

Speaking during a function on Friday, he said that the death penalty should be 
implemented on drug traffickers in order to safeguard the future of the country 
and future generations from the illegal drug racket.

The President said that he signed death warrants for four convicted drug 
offenders and that all those who speak against it are helping the drug 
racketeers.

President decision has come under criticism from several western nations and 
human rights organizations as Srilanka has not carried out any executions for 
past 42 years.

(source: ddinews.gov.in)

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

Norway’s Statement on the Death Penalty



Norway is deeply concerned that Sri Lanka intends to implement the death 
penalty, which would put an end to Sri Lanka’s 43-year moratorium on the use of 
this cruel and irreversible punishment.

As recently as December 2018, Sri Lanka was one of 120 countries that voted in 
favour of a UN General Assembly resolution calling for a moratorium on the use 
of the death penalty. The vote was a tangible sign of the global trend to move 
away from the use of the death penalty.

Implementation of the death penalty would negatively affect Sri Lanka’s 
international reputation and its human rights record.

Norway strongly opposes all use of the death penalty as a matter of principle. 
We believe that states have a duty to protect the safety, well-being and human 
rights of all their citizens.

We have communicated our position and raised our concerns regarding this issue 
at the highest levels of the Sri Lankan Government, and we urge Sri Lanka to 
refrain from reinstating the death penalty."

(source: Asian Tribune)








MALAYSIA:

Bill on abolishing death penalty not ready yet, says VK Liew



The paperwork on a bill to abolish the death penalty is still not ready 
although Parliament is sitting on Monday, said de facto law minister Liew Vui 
Keong.

He hoped the bill can be tabled at this sitting.

He said judges were in the best position to decide on the best sentence for 
those convicted of murder.

Last October, the Cabinet had given the green light to abolish the death 
penalty.

If Parliament approves it, the country’s 1,291 death row inmates will get a 
reprieve.

Liew had previously said the death penalty would be replaced with a minimum 
jail sentence of 30 years.

There are 18 criminal offences punishable by the death penalty. They include 
offences such as trafficking in drugs, waging war against the Yang di-Pertuan 
Agong, terrorism, murder, killing victims during kidnapping, possessing and 
using firearms, rape leading to death and rape of minors.

Liew said the bills ready to to be tabled were the setting up of the 
Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) and lowering 
the voting age to 18.

“If we manage to pass the bill on voting at this Parliament sitting, 3.8 
million new voters will be eligible to vote in the next 15th general election.”

Liew said a motion will be tabled on Monday to make it it compulsory for all 
MPs, including those in the opposition, and their families, to declare their 
incomes and assets to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commision (MACC).

“The speaker will decide on how many MPs will be allowed to debate.

“We don’t need 2/3 support from MPs to pass this motion.

“MPs will have to declare their assets three months after the motion is passed.

“The assets will be declared by the MPs, wives and their children aged below 
21.

“This will be extended to senators as well.”

Liew said those who refused to declare their assets will be referred to the 
speaker, adding that any refusal can be considered as “contempt of the house”.

“Then it is up to the speaker if he wants to refer the MPs to the Privileges 
Committee to take further action. They will decide on the relevant punishment 
(give advice or punish).”

(source: Free Malaysia Today)








INDIA:

India abstains from voting on UNGA resolution against capital punishment, 
torture----The resolution was aimed at examining options to end the trade in 
goods used for capital punishment and torture.



India has abstained from voting on a General Assembly resolution aimed at 
examining options to end the trade in goods used for capital punishment and 
torture, saying it is 'unacceptable' to place death penalty on par with 
torture.

The 193-member UN General Assembly Friday adopted the resolution 'Towards 
torture-free trade: examining the feasibility, scope and parameters for 
possible common international standards' by a recorded vote of 81 in favour to 
20 against, with 44 abstentions.

By the draft's terms, the Assembly requested the Secretary-General to seek the 
views of Member States on the feasibility and possible scope of a range of 
options to establish common international standards for the import, export and 
transfer of goods used for "capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman 
or degrading treatment or punishment."

India abstained from voting on the resolution, with First Secretary in India's 
Permanent Mission to the UN Paulomi Tripathi, in the explanation of vote, 
saying that incorporating capital punishment into the scope of this resolution 
"raises concerns that it may be an attempt to place it on par with torture."

She stressed that India remains firmly committed to prevent torture and other 
cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.

"We firmly believe that freedom from torture is a human right which must be 
respected and protected under all circumstances."

She asserted that India strongly believes that torture is a crime and 
"therefore, unlawful."

On the other hand, in countries where capital punishment is statutorily 
provided for, it is "exercised after following the due process of law," she 
said.

"Every state has the sovereign right to determine its own legal system and 
appropriate legal penalties. Any implication that capital punishment is being 
treated on par with torture is unacceptable to my delegation, as in India 
capital punishment is a statutory provision, even though it is used in the 
rarest of rare cases," Tripathi said.

"In view of these substantive and procedural inconsistencies India was not able 
to support the resolution and abstained during the voting," she said.

She told the General Assembly that in India, acts of torture are a punishable 
offence under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Indian 
judiciary also serves as a bulwark against any such violations of human rights.

Tripathi further added that the present draft resolution seeks to establish a 
link between trade in goods and the criminal acts of torture.

"It is apparent that the multilateral trade system is already under stress. In 
such a situation, attempts at trade restrictions in a selective manner, as 
proposed by the resolution, is likely to raise further concerns regarding 
implications on the international trading system," she said.

Further, before starting a process of this nature, the obligations are 
undertaken by different countries under the World Trade Organization and other 
forums also need to be carefully looked into, Tripathi said voicing concern 
that the current process has not afforded any such opportunity for the Member 
States.

The subject matter of torture will be given full consideration by UN Member 
States in the forthcoming GA session and this will include a range of 
appropriate measures to be taken to prevent and prohibit the production, trade, 
export, import and use of equipment that has no practical use other than for 
the purpose of torture, Tripathi said.

"This current resolution may start a duplicative parallel process related to 
'goods' used for torture and capital punishment and create ambiguity by 
conflating different issues," she said.

(source: The New Indian Express)








SINGAPORE:

Explained: How a Malaysian landed on Singapore’s death row...and had his 
execution deferred



Last month, Malaysian Pannir Selvam Pranthaman gained a last-minute reprieve 
when the Singapore courts made a rare decision to postpone his execution 
scheduled for the next day.

But how did Pannir Selvam come to be on Singapore’s death row and how did he 
secure more time to challenge his death sentence?

Here is what you need to know about Pannir Selvam’s case, based on court and 
legal documents sighted by Malay Mail:

On the morning of September 3, 2014 (a Wednesday), 27-year-old Pannir Selvam 
took 4 packets of brown-coloured substance from the drain across his house, 
which he then taped up with black tape before hiding three in his groin area 
and one in the back seat compartment of his motorcycle.

It was raining that afternoon when the raincoat-clad Pannir Selvam rode his 
motorcycle through the Woodlands Checkpoint at the border crossing in 
Singapore.

He was stopped for a random check by Singapore officers which resulted in all 4 
packets being discovered.

The content of the 4 packets included diamorphine — a drug which is classified 
as a Class A controlled drug.

Pannir Selvam was charged with unauthorised import of drugs — via four packets 
containing over 1.83 kg of granular or powdery substance found to contain not 
less than 51.84 g of diamorphine. (Singapore’s Ministry of Home Affairs have 
said that 51.84g of diamorphine is equivalent to about 4,320 straws of heroin 
which it said would be enough to feed the addiction of over 600 drug abusers 
for one week.)

He was charged under Section 7 of Singapore’s Misuse of Drugs Act for the 
offence of importing a controlled drug into Singapore, which can be punished 
under Section 33(1) or alternatively under Section 33B of the same law.

Pannir Selvam’s trial proceedings went on for a total of six days in 2017 
(February 21-23, 28, March 1, May 2), where he did not dispute that the drugs 
were found on him or that he had possession of the drugs.

But Pannir Selvam argued that he did not know what the drugs were and that he 
has rebutted the presumption under Section 18(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act of 
knowing what the drugs were. (Pannir Selvam argued that he thought the drugs 
were an aphrodisiac or sex medicine, but this was disputed by the prosecution.)

Under Section 18(2), anyone proven or presumed to have had a controlled drug in 
their possession is then presumed to have known the nature of that drug, unless 
it is proven otherwise.

On May 2, 2017, trial judge Lee Seiu Kin sitting at the High Court ruled that 
Pannir Selvam had failed to rebut the presumption and convicted him of the 
charge.

The judge also noted that Pannir Selvam’s involvement in the drug case falls 
within the Section 33B(2)(a)(i) exception, where drug couriers can escape the 
death penalty if they meet certain conditions.

This point is crucial as the import into Singapore of the amount and type of 
drugs found in Pannir Selvam’s possession (more than 15g of diamorphine) 
carries a mandatory death penalty, which means the judge must hand down the 
death sentence if an accused is found guilty.

Section 33B enables the court to not impose the death penalty on drug couriers, 
but to instead sentence them to life imprisonment and at least 15 strokes of 
the cane, with 2 conditions.

The 2 conditions are that the convicted person manages to prove that his role 
was only limited to transporting, sending or delivering a controlled drug, and 
if Singapore’s public prosecutor certifies to the court that the accused person 
had “substantively assisted” Singapore’s anti-drug agency Central Narcotics 
Bureau in disrupting drug trafficking activities within or outside Singapore.

Despite finding Pannir Selvam to have merely been a drug courier, the judge 
handed down the mandatory death sentence on Pannir Selvam as the public 
prosecutor did not consider the latter to have provided substantial assistance. 
(Under the same law, the decision on whether substantive assistance was 
provided is at the attorney general’s sole discretion, which cannot be 
challenged unless proven in court that it was done in bad faith or with 
malice.)

One chance to appeal

Pannir Selvam then appealed to Singapore’s Court of Appeal, which on February 
9, 2018, dismissed his appeal and upheld his conviction for bringing drugs into 
Singapore.

Unlike Malaysia where criminal cases can be appealed from the High Court to the 
Court of Appeal and then further to the Federal Court, cases at Singapore’s 
High Court can only be appealed to the Court of Appeal as the city state does 
not have a Federal Court.

Seeking pardon

On February 26, 2019, Pannir Selvam sent an 18-page petition to Singapore’s 
president to ask for clemency or a pardon. (The granting of clemency in 
Singapore is believed to be extremely rare, at least based on known cases.)

In the petition, Pannir Selvam shared how he had allegedly been manipulated by 
a man known as “Anand” — who he had met only one month before his arrest and 
treated him like a “brother” — into becoming a drug mule by claiming that the 
items to be brought into Singapore were merely an aphrodisiac.

Pannir Selvam listed out 5 reasons why he should be granted clemency, including 
his young age and high propensity for rehabilitation; his full cooperation with 
authorities including giving potentially self-incriminating information 
regarding Anand and 2 other associates; further substantial assistance by 
sharing Pannir Selvam’s sister’s investigation findings of Anand’s personal 
details including his real name, address and car plate number, personal details 
of two cross-border drug mule recruiters by the names of Steven and Shanmugam.

Pannir Selvam said the additional information he had given to authorities could 
potentially go a long way towards disrupting the importation and trafficking of 
drugs into Singapore, saying that he gave full cooperation, even after his 
death sentence was passed, as a sign of his remorse and regret.

Noting that he played a minimal role as a drug courier, he was nevertheless 
greatly ashamed of and acknowledging there was no excuse for his actions.

Pannir Selvam also said he was “deeply remorseful” and pleaded for mercy and 
forgiveness to spare his life, promising to do his best to repay the goodwill 
and devote his life to the betterment of society to atone for his wrongs if 
spared from death.

News of execution

On May 16, 2019, 2 letters dated May 17 respectively from the Singapore 
president’s office and Singapore prison service were sent out to Pannir 
Selvam’s family in a single courier package.

In the first letter, the Singapore president’s principal private secretary 
Benny Lee informed Pannir Selvam’s Ipoh-based parents that the president has 
decided that his death sentence should be maintained following consideration of 
the petition for clemency and the Cabinet’s advice.

In the other May 17 letter, the Singapore prison service told the parents that 
Pannir Selvam would be executed on May 24 (about 8 days later), and listed 
extended visiting hours from May 21 to May 23 (10am-12pm, 2pm-4pm) while also 
saying that advance arrangements have to be made if they intend to visit during 
May 18-May 20 (Saturday-Monday).

The family was asked to make the necessary funeral arrangements, but were also 
informed that Singapore would assist with the necessary arrangements in 
accordance with the country’s laws if the family was unable to do so.

Plea for time

On May 21, Pannir Selvam applied to the courts to suspend his execution, as he 
wanted to file for judicial review to challenge both the attorney general’s 
April 2019 refusal to issue the substantive assistance certificate and the 
Singapore president’s May 2019 clemency rejection.

In an affidavit to support his application for a stay of execution, Pannir 
Selvam said the attorney general’s refusal is unreasonable and legally void as 
he believed he and his family had provided “important information” that 
substantively assisted the authorities in the anti-drug war.

Pannir Selvam cited the same May 17 date of both the Singapore president’s 
clemency rejection letter and the Singapore prisons’ execution notice, arguing 
that this suggested his execution was pre-determined before the clemency 
rejection and had seriously prejudiced the clemency process.

Noting that both May 17 letters were sent out a day before on May 16, he said 
this also raises serious doubts on the transparency of the clemency process.

Emphasising that the extremely short one-week notice of his scheduled execution 
has caused difficulty in finding Singapore lawyers to challenge the clemency 
process, Pannir Selvam said this application was not a “tactic” to delay his 
execution.

The curious dates

In an affidavit, the Singapore president’s principal private secretary Benny 
Lee explained that the Singapore Cabinet had, on an unspecified date before May 
7, 2019, advised the president that “the law should be allowed to take its 
course” in Pannir Selvam’s case.

Lee said he had on May 7 signed 3 letters dated May 17 meant for Pannir Selvam, 
his Malaysia-based parents and siblings to inform them that the death sentence 
stands, and that the Singapore president had on May 10 sent to the Court of 
Appeal a copy of an order for Pannir Selvam’s execution to be carried out on 
the specified date of May 24.

On May 14, the Singapore president’s office sent the three letters dated May 17 
to the Singapore Prison Service to be forwarded to Pannir Selvam and his 
family, Lee said.

In a separate affidavit, Singapore Prison Service (SPS) senior assistant 
director Toh Gek Choo said a warrant by the Court of Appeal was received on May 
13 for Pannir Selvam’s execution on the stated date of May 24.

Having received on May 14 the three May 17 letters from the Singapore 
president’s office, Toh said the SPS then sent two of the letters out on May 16 
via courier to ensure they would reach Pannir Selvam’s family on May 17.

Toh argued that it was incorrect to say SPS had decided to proceed with the 
execution before the clemency rejection, arguing that SPS instead had to carry 
out the death sentence according to the law after receiving the court warrant 
on May 13.

Pannir Selvam asserted that the attorney general had in an April 4, 2019 letter 
declined to grant him a certificate of substantive assistance, while the 
attorney general’s chambers argues that the refusal happened prior to the May 
2, 2017 sentencing and that the April 4, 2019 letter was to tell Pannir 
Selvam’s lawyer that it was unable to agree to the latter’s request for a 
certificate.

(Pannir Selvam’s lawyer Eugene Thuraisingam had on February 20, 2019 sent to 
the Attorney General’s Chambers the information regarding Anand and the two men 
believed to be recruiters of drug mules to carry illegal drugs from Johor Baru 
to Singapore — including details such as their actual names and identity card 
numbers.)

Hours before scheduled execution

Just minutes before the May 23 court hearing scheduled at 2.30pm was to start, 
2 Singapore-based Malaysian lawyers — Too Xing Ji and Lee Ji En — stepped in 
and were appointed as Pannir Selvam’s lawyers for his application to stay or 
postpone the execution.

He would otherwise have been unrepresented, as the family’s Malaysian lawyers 
were unable to find lawyers in Singapore who could represent him for this, 
given the extremely short notice.

After a hearing of almost 40 minutes, a 3-man panel at the Court of Appeal 
chaired by Singapore’s Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon decided to grant a stay of 
execution, which effectively meant the execution scheduled the next day (May 
24) would be suspended and deferred to enable Pannir Selvam to file his 
challenge against the clemency process.

In deciding to defer the execution, the Court of Appeal noted that there are 
“extremely narrow grounds” where the clemency process can be challenged and 
that Pannir Selvam should be given a “reasonable opportunity” to get advice on 
whether he can mount a successful challenge.

“In the way in which matters have transpired, he was notified of both the 
rejection of his clemency petition and the scheduled date of the execution of 
his sentence just one week in advance,” the court said, noting that the 
prosecution had “candidly conceded” that the brief 1-week notice did not leave 
Pannir Selvam much time to seek advice on his options.

Judith Prakash and Steven Chong were the other 2 judges on the panel, which 
also said there was nothing to suggest that Pannir Selvam had acted with undue 
delay or abused the court process.

With that, Pannir — who will turn 32 next month — will have another chance to 
challenge his death sentence.

(source: Malay Mail)








CHINA:

China grants special pardons to mark 70th PRC founding anniversary



Chinese President Xi Jinping on Saturday signed and issued an order of special 
pardons for 9 categories of criminals on the occasion of the 70th anniversary 
of the founding of the People's Republic of China (PRC).

The decision of granting the special pardons had been adopted by the Standing 
Committee of the National People's Congress, China's top legislature, at a 
bimonthly session which closed Saturday.

The nine categories of criminals who are serving their sentences effective 
before Jan. 1, 2019, will be pardoned, according to the order. They include:

1. Those who fought in the Chinese People's War of Resistance against Japanese 
Aggression and the Chinese People's War of Liberation;

2. Those who fought in wars to safeguard national sovereignty, security and 
territorial integrity after the founding of the PRC in 1949;

3. Those who made fairly big contributions to the advancement of the country's 
major projects after the founding of the PRC and received honors of provincial 
and ministerial level or above, including "Model Workers," "Advanced Workers," 
and "May 1 Labor Medals;"

4. Those who used to be on active service and received first class merit 
citations or higher-level awards;

5. Those who were sentenced to less than 3 years in prison or have less than 
one year of remaining prison terms for acts of excessive defense or acts to 
avert danger in emergencies that exceed the limits of necessity;

? 6. Those aged 75 or above who have serious physical disabilities and are 
unable to take care of themselves;

7. Those who committed crimes when they were under 18, and were sentenced to 
less than 3 years in prison or have less than one year of remaining prison 
terms;

8. Female prisoners who have been bereaved of their spouses and have to take 
care of their underage children or children with serious disabilities who are 
unable to care for themselves; they are eligible only under the condition that 
they were sentenced to less than 3 years in prison or that their remaining jail 
terms are less than 1 year;

9. Those granted a parole who have undergone more than 1/5 of their parole 
probation periods, or who received a public surveillance sentence.

Criminals who fall into the above nine categories but are found in any of the 
following situations shall not be pardoned, according to the order:

1. Those who fall into the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 7th, 8th and 9th categories listed 
above, but committed embezzlement, acceptance of bribes, servicemen's 
transgression of duties, intentional homicide, rape, robbery, kidnap, arson, 
explosion, spreading hazardous substances, organized crimes of violence, 
mafia-natured organized crimes, trafficking in narcotic drugs, crimes of 
endangering national security, terrorism, or were convicted as principal 
criminals or recidivists of other organized crimes;

2. Among criminals falling into the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 9th categories, those who 
have more than 10 years of remaining prison terms to serve, and who are still 
serving life imprisonment or in the suspension period of death penalty;

3. Those who had been pardoned but were subject to criminal punishment again 
for crimes;

4. Those who refused to admit their guilt, repent and mend their ways;

5. Those who are deemed an actual threat to society after evaluation.

Prisoners who meet the above-mentioned requirements on June 29, 2019 will be 
released upon court ruling, according to the order.

(source: xinhuanet.com)