[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide

Thu Mar 28 09:33:39 CDT 2019

March 28

PAKISTAN:

Pashto Singer Brother Gets Death Penalty For Raping His Minor Nieces

A local court on Wednesday awarded death penalty and a fine of 0.6 million 
rupees to a rapist uncle of Pashto singer Nazia Iqbal’s daughters.

Rawalpindi Additional District and Sessions Judge Tahir Aslam announced the 
verdict against accused Iftikhar Ali, the real brother of Nazia, after he was 
declared guilty of raping minor girls.

Nazia, reacting on the sentence, thanked the court in a video message. She said 
she felt satisfaction as she got justice.

Nazia had alleged last year in April that her 2 daughters were subjected to 
rape and sexual abuse by their maternal uncle for many months.

Following her complaints, police had arrested the prime suspect after 
registering a case against him.

Nazia had alleged that she caught red-handed his 19-year-old brother while 
sexually abusing her daughter at her home located in Bahria Town, Rawalpindi.

(source: urdupoint.com)

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

Rapist of 2 girls gets death penalty

A court on Wednesday awarded death penalty to a man after charge of sexually 
assaulting 2 of his school going nieces proved against him

Rawat police had registered a case in April 2018 against Iftikhar Ali on the 
complaint of his sister Nazia Iqbal, the famous Pashto singer, for sexually 
assaulting 2 of her daughters (ageing 7 and 10 years old) after showing them 
videos in his cell phone of children being slaughtered in a bid to persuade 
them not to reveal the sin to their parents.

Police held the rapist and sent him to jail.

According to details, Additional District and Session Judge (ADSJ) Tahir Aslam 
took up the rape case of 2 school going girls during which the prosecution said 
the victim had been residing in house of her real sister at Bahria Town where 
he raped 2 of his nieces.

The prosecution argued the accused showed horrible videos to his nieces on 
mobile phone in order to keep them silent over the inhuman act.

The police had arrested Iftikhar Ali and produced him before the court, the 
prosecution added.

The prosecution presented witnesses against the suspect after he pleaded not 
guilty and opted to contest the trial.

The medical examination of the victim conducted on the direction of a judicial 
magistrate concerned also established the charge of rape.

ADSJ Tahir Aslam observed that the prosecution fully proved the commission of 
rape by Iftikhar Ali. He remarked that the defence counsel remained unable to 
bring on record any malice, ill-will or animosity on the part of the 
complainant. The ADSJ awarded capital punishment to Iftikhar Ali besides 
imposing fine on him.

Meanwhile, Nazia Iqbal, the complainant mother of the 2 girls, in a video 
message released on social media soon after the court verdict said: “I have 
done what I committed and I got punished to my brother for raping my 2 
daughters.”

“I am very thankful to Allah Almighty that Justice is done to me,” she added.

She mentioned: “Receiving fine from accused was not her priority but to bring 
him to justice was her goal that she achieved,”

(source: nation.com.pk)

TAIWAN:

Taiwan approves draft for capital punishment from drunk and drive 
killing----The proposal needs parliamentary approval but comes after a spate of 
high profile deaths that have generated widespread outrage.

Taiwan plans to ramp up punishments for those who cause a fatal accident while 
drunk driving, including the death penalty for the most egregious cases, 
sparking an outcry from abolition and rights groups. The cabinet on Thursday 
approved a draft amendment to the Criminal Code that would make death by drunk 
driving an indictable murder offence, potentially punishable by death if the 
deed is deemed "intentional", officials said.

The proposal needs parliamentary approval but comes after a spate of high 
profile deaths that have generated widespread outrage. Currently the maximum 
sentence in Taiwan for causing a death while drunk behind the wheel is 10 
years.

The new proposal would increase jail sentences for repeat offenders who commit 
a new offence within five years of their first conviction. They face up to a 
life sentence for causing death and 12 years for grave injuries.

"Cases of drunk driving leading to death are rampant... drink drivers 
recklessly caused accidents that took lives and destroyed families to result in 
irreparable regret," the Justice Ministry said in a statement. In one notorious 
case in January, a 40-year-old man crashed his van into a taxi while driving 
intoxicated, killing three people and injuring 3 others including himself.

Very few countries employ the death penalty for drunk driving cases. China has 
previously vowed to execute those who have killed behind the wheel and some 
states in the United States retain capital punishment for such cases.

In 2014 a Texas man was indicted on "capital murder" after he ploughed his car 
into a crowd killing 4 people. But in the end, prosecutors did not seek the 
death penalty and he was sentenced to life imprisonment.

Several rights groups on Thursday, including the Taiwan Association for Human 
Rights, issued a joint statement criticising the proposed amendment and calling 
for "rational legislation for irrational drunk driving". "There is a lack of 
evidence and research that seeking grave penalties and legislation would truly 
prevent drunk driving," the statement said.

Taiwan resumed capital punishment in 2010 after a 5-year hiatus, despite 
ongoing calls from local and international rights groups for its abolition. 
Various surveys over the years have shown support from the public for keeping 
the death penalty.

Taiwan executed a man who murdered his ex-wife and their daughter last 
September, the 1st execution carried out under President Tsai Ing-wen's 
government that took office in 2016.

(source: devdiscourse.com)

EGYPT:

Report: Executions in Egypt soar under Sisi’s leadership

Egypt’s human rights violation record has reached all time high. The country is 
executing detainees at a breakneck pace, with President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi 
giving a nod to the rising death sentences in 2019.

At the recent Arab-EU summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, Sisi rebuked his criticizers, 
including European leaders, saying that executing detainees is part of “our 
humanity”, unlike “your (European) humanity”.

Sisi’s justification seemed far from reality, as it tucked away the ongoing 
humanitarian crisis in Egypt. Under his leadership, the number of death 
penalties has increased, as thousands of people have been sentenced to death 
since 2013.

This scenario is contrary to the past practices beheld under erstwhile 
President Hosni Mubarak’s 3-decade long dictatorship, of terminating some death 
sentences, and even under ex President Anwar Sadat whose assassins were 
pardoned.

Just like its neighboring nations, Egypt’s crackdown on alleged offenders must 
be subjected to international scrutiny, but Sisi’s government prevents any free 
dialogue regarding the death penalty. There are also records of government 
shutting down organisations that highlight Egypt’s human rights abuses.

In 2014, after Sisi’s inauguration in the office as president, Egypt rapidly 
made to the list of countries with the highest number of yearly executions, 
along with other infamous defaulters like China, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

And since then, criminal and military courts have ordered over 2,500 death 
sentences, with majority of cases filed for alleged political violence.

Juxtaposing Sisi’s rule with his predecessors, an international rights group 
found that Egypt’s criminal courts had ordered only 530 death penalties between 
1991 and 2000, which was also an era of political unrest in the country.

Currently, there are at least 50 people can be executed at any moment, as their 
death penalties are confirmed by military or civilian appeals courts.

The Egyptian court trials are immensely flawed, with one judge ordering the 
execution of more than 500 people in one case, and the other ordering a 
4-year-old to life imprisonment, which was later stated a “mistake”.

(source: truenewssource.com)

IRAN:

Iran Report 2018: Ways to Restrict the Use of the Death Penalty in Iran

A part of the 11th Annual Report on the Death Penalty in Iran, by IHR, deals 
with the ways to restrict the use of the death penalty in Iran.

In 2018, we witnessed the most significant decrease in the number of executions 
in the last decade. Although the number of drug-related executions had the 
largest reduction, there was also a notable reduction in the number of qisas 
executions and public executions. It is not known whether the relative 
reduction in the number of qisas and public executions was a result of a 
political decision. But there is no doubt that the large reduction in the 
number of drug-related executions was a direct result of the legislative 
reforms made in 2017.

While the number of drug-related executions has dropped significantly since 
2015, the number of qisas executions has had fluctuations in both directions. 
In 2018, both the drug-related and qisas executions had a reduction.

The experience in the past two decades has shown that the international 
community and the Iranian civil society are the main driving forces behind any 
reforms towards restricting the use of the death penalty in Iran. The few times 
we have witnessed policy changes either in law or practice, the authorities 
have unwillingly given in to the external pressure. The stop in stoning 
punishment and the recent amendments to the Anti-Narcotic Law are the two 
processes which will be discussed in the following sections.

How did the practice of stoning as punishment stopped?

After nearly 2 decades of isolation, with the election of Mohammad Khatami as 
the President in 1996 the relation the relations between Iran and EU entered a 
new era. The serious situation of human rights in Iran was an obstacle for the 
total normalization of EU-Iran relations. Publication of stoning footage by an 
opposition group[1] received much attention in the international media and was 
in strong contrast with the reformist image of the new Iranian government. As a 
condition to upgrade the economic relations EU put certain human rights 
demands, including a moratorium on stoning punishment.[2] Iranian authorities 
informed the EU that a moratorium on stoning had been in effect from the end of 
2002.[3] However, the practice of stoning continued secretly and stoning 
remained in the Iranian Penal code. Human rights activists launched a campaign 
called “Stop stoning forever” to raise awareness about the continuous practice 
of stoning.[4] Newly established Iranian human rights NGOs in diaspora, such as 
IHR[5], contributed the awareness campaign about the stoning directed towards 
the European governments.[6] It was first after the massive global campaign for 
Sakineh Ashtiani[7] which Iran stopped the stoning punishment in practice.[8]

However, the Iranian officials do not appreciate abandoning the implementation 
of a punishment because of the pressure of the international community. In a 
meeting with the heads of Police on January 15, 2019, Iran’s Chief Prosecutor, 
Mohammad Jafar Montazeri, said: “I am very sorry that the Islamic Republic has 
stopped implementing certain hodoud punishment in order to avoid condemnation 
by the international community”.[9]

Lessons from the process of changing the Anti-Narcotics Law

The first mention of a need for a change in anti-drug legislation came on 
December 4, 2014 when Javad Larijani, head of the judiciary’s “High Council for 
Human Rights”, said in an interview with France 24, “no one is happy to see 
that the number of executions is high.” Javad Larijani continued: “We are 
crusading to change this law. If we are successful, if the law passes in 
Parliament, almost 80% of executions will go away. This is big news for us, 
regardless of Western criticism.”[10] Almost at the same time, the head of the 
Judiciary, Ayatollah Sadegh Larijani, addressed the need for a change in 
legislation in a meeting with judiciary officials.

However, nine months earlier in March 2014, the same Javad Larijani had 
addressed the UN’s “Human Rights Council” about drug-related executions, 
saying: “We expect the world to be grateful for this great service to 
humanity”. He continued: “Unfortunately, instead of celebrating Iran, 
international organizations see the increased number of executions caused by 
Iran’s assertive confrontation with drugs as a vehicle for human rights attacks 
on the Islamic Republic of Iran.”[11] This last statement has been the Islamic 
Republic’s official position for many years.

It is unlikely that the Iranian judiciary has suddenly, in less than nine 
months, come to recognize the fact that the death penalty does not deter drug 
crimes.

Iran has used the death penalty for drug crimes since the very beginning of the 
Islamic Republic in 1979 and both the crime rate and drug abuse has been 
increasing in the past 3 decades.

However, international attention on the death penalty for drug offences is 
rather new. In recent years, a growing number of global institutions and 
agencies have expressed public concern about Iran’s use of the death penalty 
for drug offences and called for an end to international cooperation with 
Iranian counter-narcotics efforts. European aid to the United Nations Office 
for Drugs and Crimes (UNODC) and Iran has been widely criticized.

International NGOs which have urged UNODC to freeze counter-narcotics funding 
to Iran include Reprieve, Harm Reduction International, Human Rights Watch, 
Amnesty International, Iran Human Rights, and Ensemble Contre la Peine de 
Mort.[12]

Moreover, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iran, 
who was appointed in 2011, has significantly contributed to the sustainable 
focus on the issue of drug-related executions in Iran. Besides the annual 
reports where the death penalty in general and the death penalty, in 
particular, have been addressed, the UN Special Rapporteurs have issued several 
public statements calling on Iran to abolish the death penalty for drug 
offences which are not regarded as the “most serious” crimes by the ICCPR which 
Iran has ratified.

Increasing criticism and awareness led to decisions by individual State donors 
to withdraw funding from UNODC operations in Iran. In 2013, Denmark withdrew 
support for such efforts, stating that “donations are leading to 
executions”[13]. The United Kingdom subsequently did the same, citing “the 
exact same concerns” as Denmark[14]. Ireland also took similar action with the 
then Foreign Minister explaining that “we have made it very clear to the UNODC 
that we could not be party to any funding in relation to where the death 
penalty is used so liberally and used almost exclusively for drug 
traffickers”[15].

In October 2015, the European Parliament passed a Resolution with a 569 to 38 
majority condemning Iran’s high rate of drug-related executions and calling on 
the European Commission and Member States “to reaffirm the categorical 
principle that European aid and assistance, including to UNODC 
counter-narcotics programs, may not facilitate law enforcement operations that 
lead to death sentences and the execution of those arrested”.

So, international pressure on the Iranian authorities and thus the increased 
political costs of continuous executions of drug offenders is most likely the 
factor which triggered the sudden change in the Iranian authorities’ rhetoric 
and attitude towards the use of the death penalty. This, in turn, created a 
space for public debate and encouraged civil society, lawyers and MPs to drive 
the process of changing the legislation ahead.

Iranian authorities have admitted on several occasions that the political cost 
of drug-related executions has become too high. In a recent meeting with the 
General Secretary and other high ranking officers of Iran’s Drug Control 
Headquarters, the head of the Iranian Parliament, Ali Larijani, said, : ”Death 
penalty must be the last way of combating the drug problems”, and continued, 
“the costs of the executions is very high, you must not underestimate the 
costs”.[16]

It is too early to know whether the change in the Anti-Narcotics Law will lead 
to a reduction in the number of drug-related executions also in the future. The 
international community must monitor the process of commuting death sentences 
closely. Calling for transparency in this process is crucial.

The UNODC, which has been cooperating with the Iranian authorities in fighting 
drugs, must be given access to the list of all death row prisoners for drug 
offences and participate in monitoring and evaluating the process.

The EU and countries which have been funding UNODC projects in Iran must not 
resume funding until clear results are achieved. Moreover, the issue of due 
process for drug offenders must be a top priority in future talks with the 
Iranian authorities.

Strategies to restrict the scope of the death penalty beyond drug offences in 
Iran

The examples from the process of stopping the practice of stoning, and the 
change of the Anti-Narcotic Law show that:

Sustained international pressure is essential

Creating awareness and mobilization of civil society is very important

At the present moment, putting an end to the execution of juvenile offenders 
and stopping the practice of public executions seem to be the most reachable 
goals. Both the international community and the civil society inside Iran are 
sensitive to these issues. Moreover, Iran is among the very few countries in 
the world practising such executions.

Another important step would be to push for legal reforms which promote due 
process and rule of law. Many of those executed would be saved even within the 
current Iranian law if the standards for due process of law had been respected 
by the Iranian authorities. As mentioned earlier in the report, Iran is obliged 
to the principles of due process and fair trials both through the international 
conventions it has ratified and its own Constitution.

Changing the qisas law might seem more challenging. Partly because the Iranian 
authorities consider death sentence for murder (qisas: retribution in kind) as 
a red line which should not be crossed. The Iranian authorities claim that 
qisas (retribution in kind) is a private right which the authorities cannot 
deny or control. On November 11, 2017, following the first round of Iran - EU 
talks after the nuclear negotiations, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Majid 
Takht-Ravanchi told the Iranian media: “The Islamic Republic of Iran will not 
cross its red lines, especially regarding capital punishment and qisas 
(retribution) in human rights talks with the European Union”.[17] Moreover, 
most of the retentionist countries still practice the death penalty for murder 
and therefore, it would take longer to establish a broad international 
consensus around a total abolition for murder cases. However, supporting the 
abolitionist Iranian civil society might lead to a significant reduction in the 
number of qisas executions.

References:

[1] http://www.iran-e-azad.org/stoning/women.html

[2] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2726009.stm

[3] https://tinyurl.com/ybmgsn8l

[4] http://www.wluml.org/action/update-iran-stop-stoning-forever-campaign

[5] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/603/

[6] https://www.nrk.no/urix/store_---steining-stanset-1.2757658

[7] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/460/

[8]

[9] 
https://www.radiofarda.com/a/reducing-violent-punishment-in-iran/29712960.html

[10] 
http://www.france24.com/en/20141204-interview-mohammad-javad-larijani-secretary-human-rights-council-iran-air-strikes-jason-rezaian

[11] http://tn.ai/302871

[12] 
https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/12/17/un-freeze-funding-iran-counter-narcotics-efforts

[13] The Copenhagen Post, 9 April 2013: Denmark ends Iranian drug crime support

[14] Clegg, Nick, 2013. Writing to Maya Foa of Reprieve. [Letter] (Personal 
Communication 17 December)

[15] http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/1108/485366-ireland-anti-drug-iran/

[16] Mehr News Agency, December 5, 2018: https://goo.gl/c4Us7D

[17] http://www.iran-newspaper.com/newspaper/item/403376

(source: Iran Human Rights)

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

Scientist On Death Row In Iran Speaks To Radio Farda On Floods

While Iran is struggling with its flood crisis, a top expert who is on death 
row told Radio Farda from Iran’s notorious Evin prison that authorities should 
strengthen the country’s early warning system. Radio Farda interviewed Ahmad 
Reza Jalali (Djalali), a Swedish- Iranian dual national who is facing the death 
sentence on charges of "Enmity with God through espionage."

Jalali, a medical doctor and an expert on crisis management, explained in the 
interview the ways of confronting the crises caused by recent floods in Iran.

During the interview, a pre-recorded message on the prison's telecom system was 
played automatically. The message is played during all conversations to and 
from the prison making it known that the person on the line is a prisoner.

The interview was conducted through a third party, as it would be impossible 
for media outlets to call a prisoner at Evin for an interview.

Devastating floods swept across a large part of Iran during the past week, 
covering 28 of the country's 31 provinces, leaving tens of people dead and 
causing serious damage to people's property.

Speaking from Evin prison, Jalali said that officials can reduce the extent of 
damage through an early warning system and prevent more damages by training the 
people and exercising ways of surviving the crisis.

He warned people in the flood-hit areas to be careful about possible 
contamination of drinking water in the affected areas.

Jalali said that because of Iran's dry climate, most emergency drills were 
focused on earthquakes and that officials have ignored the threat of floods.

In this interview, Jalali said that the reasons for massive floods during the 
past week in Iran included the destruction of natural plant coverage, 
obstruction of flood outlets as the case of flash flood in Shiraz and 
converting flood routes and dry river beds to residential areas.

Jalali also explained different ways of evacuating flood-hit areas and pumping 
out residual water. He called on citizens to pay careful attention to warnings 
issued by the authorities, and act according to their instructions.

He said gathering at flood hit areas and "flood watching" are the worst kind of 
behavior in critical conditions.

Sweden-based Ahmad Reza Jalali, a guest lecturer at the VUB (Open) university 
in Brussels, was arrested on charges of "espionage" during a visit to Iran in 
2016 to take part at a scientific conference, and was subsequently sentenced to 
death at the Islamic Revolutionary Court in Tehran.

Several international human rights organizations as well as UN legal experts 
have strongly protested against the verdict, which was later confirmed by the 
Iranian Supreme Court.

Jalali's lawyers say that the death sentence was handed to Jalali, based on 
"confessions" he made under duress and that they disagree with the charges made 
against him.

Jalali's family in Iran and Sweden have told the press that charges were made 
against him after he refused to obey Iranian intelligence organization's 
instruction to spy on other Iranian scientists abroad.

(source: Radio Farda)

BRUNEI:

Human Rights: Brunei faces criticism for decision to implement death by stoning 
for gay sex and adultery----Brunei adopted Syariah law in 2014 and joined other 
countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran.

The Southeast Asian country Brunei has decided to introduce a new law, which 
will be in effect from next week. As per the new law, the adultery and 
homosexual sex in the country will be subject to death by stoning but it will 
be applicable to the Muslims only.

The authorities clearly stated that from April 3, 2019, any individual found 
guilty of mentioned offences, will be stoned to death according to a new penal 
code and the punishment will be witnessed by a group of Muslims. The new law 
also includes amputation of a hand and foot for theft.

In 2014, the Sultan of Brunei, Hassanal Bolkiah, who also acts as the country's 
prime minister first announced the strict laws under the Syariah law that has 
been on hold for four years due to heavy criticism. The bizarre new provisions 
were announced through a notice on Brunei's Attorney General's Chambers on 
December 29, 2018.

Human right groups reacted in horror on Wednesday, March 27 after news about 
the new laws came under the spotlight.

Rachel Chhoa-Howard, the Brunei Researcher at Amnesty International, said in a 
statement that the country "must immediately halt its plans to implement these 
vicious punishments and revise its Penal Code in compliance with its human 
rights obligations. The international community must urgently condemn Brunei's 
move to put these cruel penalties into practice."

It has been a while that Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran carry out 
harsh penalties under Syariah law. Now after adopting the same law in 2014, the 
oil-rich kingdom on the island of Borneo also ready to introduce the horrible 
punishment for gay sex and adultery.

It should be noted that homosexuality in Brunei was illegal but now it is a 
capital offence. As per the government's website, the Sultan said that his 
government "does not expect other people to accept and agree with it, but that 
it would suffice if they just respect the nation in the same way that it also 
respects them."

As per The Washington Post, there are 10 countries where homosexuality is 
considered as punishable offence. Example:

Yemen, where under 1994 penal code, married men can be sentenced to death by 
stoning for homosexual intercourse

Mauritania, where Muslim men engaging in gay sex can be stoned to death, 
according to a 1984 law

Sharia law in Qatar applies only to Muslims, who can be put to death for 
extramarital sex, regardless of sexual orientation.

On the other hand, the so called third world country, India recently 
decriminalised consensual sex between adults regardless of their gender and 
partially scrapped Section 377 of the penal code. Even UK brought changes to 
their decades-old homosexual laws through Alan Turing Law. In Singapore, there 
are several human rights and LGBT groups, which are hoping for a change in 
Section 377A penal code.

However, many Twitter users reacted to the implementation of the new law in 
Brunei news and expressed their opinion as well as criticised the decision.

(source: ibtimes.sg)

INDIA:

Repeal Sedition law, Death Penalty, bring in NJAC: How the Left wants to change 
Indian laws

The Communist Party of India (CPI M) today released its manifesto for the 
upcoming Lok Sabha elections. While calling the rule of the BJP an “unmitigated 
disaster for the country”, the CPI M has called upon the people of India to 
elect an “alternative secular government” in the 2019 elections.

Political speak aside, the manifesto provides a glimpse into which laws the 
party will change on the off-chance that it comes into power.

So, what contents of the manifesto are relevant to the legal field? Which new 
laws does it propose to bring in, and which ones does it want to scrap?

Free Speech

The CPI M mourns the recent persecution of intellectuals and lawyers branded as 
“anti-nationals”.

“Attacks on media and those critical of the government on the social media and 
elsewhere; the indiscriminate branding of those critical of the RSS/BJP as 
being anti-national. The criminalization of democratic dissent; harassment and 
intimidation of intellectuals and lawyers standing up in support of those 
targeted by the government like Dalits etc.”

It also addresses the crackdown on dissent through various provisions in the 
statute books. With respect to these, it promises to:

Repeal the colonial era Sedition Law, Section 124A of IPC

Repeal Section 499 of IPC relating to defamation

Suitably amend the definition of “criminal contempt” in order to prevent its 
misuse in suppressing dissent.

Judicial Reforms

The manifesto also calls for a number of judicial reforms, including the 
constitution of a National Judicial Commission for appointments, transfers and 
to examine instances of “commission/omission of judges”. This body will have 
representatives from the judiciary, the executive, the legislature and the Bar.

The other reforms envisioned include:

Reforming the judicial system to provide speedy relief at affordable cost to 
the common people; filling up vacancies in the judiciary.

Public declaration of their assets by the Judges to be made mandatory.

Ensuring adequate representation and diversity in the judiciary at all levels

Curbing Communal Violence The CPI M wants to enact a comprehensive law on 
curbing communal violence. This includes ensuring speedy justice and adequate 
compensation and State support to the victims of communal violence.

Further, it calls for the banning of all “illegal private armies and vigilante 
groups like the various ‘senas’ that are attacking dalits and minorities in the 
name of cow protection and spreading communal hatred”.

It aims to enact laws to rein in organisations that spread communal hatred, as 
well as a law to deal with the menace of lynching.

Police/Army excess

To address the issue of excessive force used by police and the Army, the 
manifesto calls for:

Repeal the Armed Forces Special Powers Act and replace it with a suitable law 
which provides a legal framework for the operation of the armed forces without 
the draconian provisions

Repeal/amend the National Security Act

Ratify the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading 
Treatment or Punishment.

Women’s Rights

The CPI M calls for the criminalization of marital rape, something the present 
government has refused to do when it appeared in courts where the issue was 
brought up. The manifesto also calls for a standalone law to curb honour 
crimes.

With regard to property and marital rights of women, the CPI M aims to:

“Enact a law for equal rights in marital and inherited property for all women; 
strengthen laws relating to maintenance for women and children; ensure 
protection and adequate maintenance and rehabilitation for all deserted women 
including those who are victims of instantaneous talaq.”

Corruption

The manifesto calls for the strengthening of the Right to Information Act, 
including strict implementation of Section 4 of the Act. It calls for a 
“transparent and participatory pre-legislative process soliciting citizen 
feedback before laws are passed”.

To tackle the issue of corruption, the CPI M calls for the amending of the 
Prevention of Corruption Act and the Lokpal Act to bring under their purview 
all contracts, agreements or MOUs of any kind between the government and the 
private sector.

With the recent constitution of the Lokpal, the manifesto aims to bring private 
financial sector institutions – banking and insurance companies in particular- 
under the purview of Lokpal Act, Whistleblowers Protection Act and other 
related anti-corruption legislation.

The other amendments to laws called for include:

Amend the Indian Penal Code and other statutes to remove the death penalty from 
the statutes.

Scrapping of the use of Aadhaar and biometrics for all social welfare measures.

Amend the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, 
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 to ensure its universal application on 
all laws requiring land acquisition, rigorous definition of public purpose, 
full and prior informed consent from all affected persons, binding social 
impact assessment and compensation and R&R in such manner as to ensure a far 
better quality of life and share in enhanced land value.

The food supplies through ICDS and Mid-Day Meal Schemes will get higher 
allocations to ensure hot cooked nutritious meals and be brought under the Food 
Security law as a legal right.

Harmonising all laws in the country in tune with the United Nations Convention 
on Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Reviewing and amending the National 
Disability Policy

Defend India’s patent laws and ensure no dilution.

(source: barandbench.com)

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

Acid attack case: Death row convict says had no intention of killing victim

The counsel for Ankur Panwar, the death row convict in the Preeti Rathi acid 
attack case, told the Bombay High Court Wednesday that his client had no 
intention of killing her.

Panwar said he threw a bottle containing sulphuric acid at Rathi here in May 
2013 merely to injure her.

His counsel Trideep Pais told a bench of Justices B P Dharmadhikari and P D 
Naik that though Panwar knew his action was likely to cause grave injury to 
Rathi and leave her face disfigured, he had "no intention of causing her 
death".

Therefore, Panwar should have been charged under section 304 II of the IPC for 
culpable homicide not amounting to murder, and not section 302 (murder) of the 
IPC under which he was convicted and sentenced to death.

Section 304 II provides for the maximum punishment of life imprisonment for an 
act that "is done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death, but 
without any intention to cause death, or to cause such bodily injury as is 
likely to cause death".

Rathi, a 23-year-old nurse from Delhi who was to join a hospital of the Indian 
Navy in the city, was attacked with acid by Panwar, her neighbour in the 
national capital.

On May 2, 2013, as Rathi got off the train from Delhi at Bandra Terminus here, 
the convict Panwar flung a bottle containing sulphuric acid on her face.

Rathi lost her vision and sustained major injuries due to the attack.

She spent a month in various hospitals, and on June 1, succumbed to multiple 
organ failure at the Bombay Hospital in the city.

Panwar, 25, was awarded the death penalty by a special court here in 2016.

This was the 1st instance of death penalty being awarded by a court in the 
country in a case of acid attack.

As per police, Panwar was jealous of Rathi's success and was unhappy after she 
had turned down his marriage proposal.

The HC is hearing a confirmation petition filed by the Maharashtra government 
seeking ratification of the special court order convicting Panwar and awarding 
him the death penalty.

Advocate Pais had earlier argued that Panwar had been framed in the case.

He had said there was no forensic evidence linking Panwar to the crime and that 
the prosecution had produced tailor-made witness statements to prove its case.

He said Wednesday that even if one were to assume that Panwar was the person 
who flung acid at Rathi, the evidence on record proved he had no intention of 
killing her.

(source: Press Trust of India)