Bali Nine duo families one year on from executions

Source: News.com.au (29 April 2016)

http://www.news.com.au/world/asia/bali-nine-duo-families-one-year-on-from-executions/news-story/982eafef3f15a08a2c37b17b296e5c6c

IT’S been one year today since Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan were executed by firing squad just after midnight on the island of Nusakambangan — 10 years after being found guilty of smuggling 8.3kg of heroin out of Indonesia.

The two Australians were among 14 drug traffickers executed in Indonesia last year, amid intensifying condemnation from human rights activists and international governments.

The outrage over their deaths prompted the Indonesian government to hold off on further executions between then and now.

But one year on, Security Minister Luhut Panjaitan and Attorney General Muhammad Prasetyo have flagged executions are likely to resume this year.

Head of Central Java’s Corrections Division Molyanto said they were currently building more isolation cells — where those awaiting execution are kept — at Nusakambangan prison.

But he denied reports that the “execution field” is being extended.

Sukumaran and Chan’s Australian barrister Julian McMahon said it was “surprising” that executions were back on Indonesia’s agenda.

“The fact is after the international dismay in April 2015 executions have now stopped for 12 months,” he said.

“The reason has not been publicly identified, except by reference to economic priorities. But most commentators think that international reaction would be very relevant.”

Mr McMahon said “this week was proving very difficult for the families as they come to grips with their own grief and the loss of Andrew and Myuran.” In their last few years, he said the pair had “uplifted, educated and improved many prisoners.” “If they had lived that example would have so easily multiplied out for the benefit of more and more prisoners.”

Indonesian lawyer Dr Todung Mulya Lubis — who tweeted “I failed. I lost” after his clients’ executions last year — has been campaigning against capital punishment in the country since 1979. Since then he feels they have made “small progress”.

“We have made people aware of the death penalty ... I believe over time we will be able to score some wins.” While he cannot see the abolition of the death penalty happening in Indonesia “any time soon”, he hopes a bill tabled before parliament last year might prove a “middle way”.

Under the proposed changes, if people show they have rehabilitated themselves, they could see their execution commuted to a life sentence.

He also noted “the international campaign must also be more tactful not to embarrass Indonesia”.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel stressed her country’s wish for Indonesia to put an end to capital punishment, during Indonesian President Joko Widodo’s recent visit to Europe.

According to the Commission for Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS) in Indonesia, more than 100 people are on death row in the country. Just over half of these are for murder while two face capital punishment for terrorism offences.

The rest are due to be executed for drug offences.

When Sukumaran and Chan faced their certain death last year, pastor Christie Buckingham remembers how they sang Bless the Lord until the end.

“(I remember) their kindness, their courage ... the way that they smiled at those about to take their lives,” she said.

She said she also promised to continue their fight against the death penalty.

Australia recalls ambassador after Indonesia executes prisoners

Source: CNN (29 April 2015)

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/04/28/asia/indonesia-firing-squad-executions/

Australia has recalled its ambassador to Indonesia for consultations after two Australians were among eight drug smugglers executed by firing squad early Wednesday.

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott called the executions "cruel and unnecessary" because both men, Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, had been "fully rehabilitated" during a decade in prison.

Abbott didn't say what permanent actions, if any, would be taken against Indonesia. "This is a dark moment in the relationship, but I'm sure the relationship will be restored," he said.

One of the men's Indonesian lawyers, Todung Mulya Lubis tweeted his apologies. "I failed. I lost," he said. "I'm sorry."

Indonesian President Joko Widodo appeared to shrug off the diplomatic recall, telling reporters that "our legal sovereignty must be respected. We also respect other countries' legal sovereignty." Foreign minister Retno Marsudi said the country had no plans to recall its own ambassador in response.

READ: Why Australians are angry

Six other inmates were executed, including Nigerians Raheem Salami, Silvester Obiekwe Nwolise, Okwudil Oyatanze and Martin Anderson; Indonesian Zainal Abidin and Brazilian Rodrigo Gularte, who was said to be mentally ill.

On Wednesday, Brazil's foreign ministry released a statement expressing "deep sadness" at Gularte's execution, saying that Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff had urged her Indonesian counterpart to spare him due to his "psychiatric condition."

Gularte is the second Brazilian to be executed in Indonesia this year, with the first -- Marco Archer Cardoso Moreira -- prompting the country to recall the Indonesian ambassador for consultations.

Filipina spared

The Indonesian government had originally announced that nine prisoners would be executed, but at the last moment Filipina Mary Jane Veloso was spared.

"We are so happy, so happy. I thought I had lost my daughter already but God is so good. Thank you to everyone who helped us," her mother Celia Veloso told CNN.

Philippines embassy officials said Veloso would be returned to Yogyakarta prison in Central Java later on Wednesday.

No reason was given for the reprieve but it may relate to developments in her case late on Tuesday. CNN Philippines reported that Veloso's alleged recruiter, Maria Kristina Sergio and her partner Julius Lacanilao, surrendered to authorities. The report said Sergio had denied all accusations in relation to Veloso's case.

Veloso's lawyers claimed the mother-of-two was the victim of human trafficking. They say she was offered work in Malaysia, but when she arrived she was told the job had been filled and wasn't aware the bag she'd been given for the return journey to Indonesia was filled with drugs.

A tenth prisoner, Frenchman Serge Atlaoui, was also scheduled to be executed but his case was delayed while a court considers a legal challenge.

No reprieve for Australians

Candlelight vigils were held for Chan and Sukumaran in the hours ahead of the expected execution. The men's legal teams had been fighting for years for a stay, but it wasn't to be.

The men -- then aged in their early twenties -- were arrested in 2005 as part of the "Bali Nine," a drug smuggling gang that intended to import 8 kilograms (17.6 pounds) of heroin from Bali to Australia. They failed.

The pair were transported with other prisoners to Indonesia's so-called "execution island" in March, and after being given 72-hours notice of their execution on Saturday, Chan married his longtime girlfriend, Febyanti Herewila, on Monday in prison.

The executions of Sukumaran and Chan came despite the fact that both this week received a court date of May 12 to hear an outstanding legal challenge.

On Tuesday, lawyers for the men also said Indonesia's Judicial Commission had yet to properly investigate claims of corruption during their original trial and sentencing. They said three of the men's Indonesian lawyers had been summoned to attend the commission on May 7.

However, before the executions, Indonesia insisted that all legal avenues had closed.

On Tuesday, the prisoners' families were heard wailing as they boarded a boat for the execution site. Visiting hours were extended until 8 p.m. to give them extra time before they were asked to leave.

The death penalty

Under Indonesian law, the death penalty is carried out by a 12-man firing squad, although only three guns are loaded with live ammunition.

Prisoners are given the choice of whether to stand or sit, and whether they want to wear a blindfold, hood or nothing. The shots -- aimed at the heart -- are fired from between 5 and 10 meters (16 to 33 feet), according to Amnesty International.

After the executions, the rights group released a statement condemning them as "reprehensible" and issue fresh calls for a moratorium on the death penalty.

Indonesia fighting 'drugs crisis'

While the Bali Nine have garnered much international attention, their punishment is part of a larger government effort to combat illegal drug trafficking.

Indonesian President Widodo has insisted that Indonesia would not be swayed by appeals for clemency because the country is dealing with a "drugs crisis." He told CNN in January that clemency would not be extended to drug traffickers, leading to an appeal from Chan and Sukumaran that their cases hadn't been properly considered.

Lawyers for the two men said they underwent radical rehabilitation during their 10 years in Kerobokan prison and were helping to counsel and support other inmates.

Chan was ordained as a Christian minister who led prayer meetings, while Sukumaran became an accomplished painter and established his own art classes inside the Bali prison.

Foreigners executed

The Indonesian government didn't confirm until late Tuesday that the executions were to go ahead.

Preparations were clearly underway earlier that day, with the arrival of ambulances at the port where boats leave to go to Nusa Kambangan island where the prisoners were being held.

Images showed individual crosses bearing the prisoners' names and the date April 29, 2015.

Families were in little doubt as to what lay ahead.

When reports of his death emerged, Sukumaran's cousin tweeted: "I love you more than you can imagine. Your legacy will live on. I promise. Save me a place in heaven."

Glimpse of Chan family pain

Chan family appeal for Indonesian clemency
19 June 2011

AAP on The Sydney Morning Herald

The brother of Bali Nine ringleader Andrew Chan has appealed to the Indonesian president to give him "a second chance at life".

In an emotional appeal in Sydney on Sunday, Michael Chan said his parents were devastated at the news their son had lost his final appeal against his death sentence for his role in the plot to smuggle heroin from Bali to Australia.

"Mum and dad are finding it very hard and are struggling to come to terms with this
decision," Mr Chan said through his tears.

"Each day is harder to see the pain and anguish they suffer knowing their son is facing execution."

The Indonesian Supreme Court on Friday said it had rejected Chan's final appeal against a death sentence for his involvement in the 2005 attempt to smuggle more than eight kilograms of heroin out of Bali.

A clemency appeal to Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono is the 27-year-old's last hope of escaping the firing squad.

When asked what message he had for the president, Mr Chan said his brother didn't deserve to be shot.

"If he's listening, (please) give him a second chance at life," he said.

Mr Chan said his parents, who live at Enfield in Sydney, had not been given the news officially, but they were assuming it was true.

He said he had spoken to his younger brother since the final decision and Chan was staying positive.

"He's really clear on one thing - he's just going to keep on doing his best to be a better person, lead a good life, whether he's got a short time or a long time to go."

Chan had made great efforts to turn his life around, and was studying theology, participating in church and teaching other inmates English and computer skills, Mr Chan said.

"When he made his mistake he was a kid, he's grown into an adult in the last couple of years ...

"Hopefully the president can see that change in him."

Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd have both said the Australian government would support Chan's likely bid for clemency, but his brother said the family had had no contact with the government in the past few days.

Australian PM backs Chan clemency

Gillard against Chan death penalty
By Petrina Berry
18 June 2011

AAP on The Brisbane Times

Prime Minister Julia Gillard hasn't ruled out appealing to Indonesia's president personally to have the death penalty against convicted Bali Nine ringleader Andrew Chan quashed.

Indonesia's Supreme Court has rejected Chan's final appeal against the death penalty.

His only chance now is a plea for clemency to Indonesia's president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

Ms Gillard, ahead of her address at an ALP conference in Brisbane, said Australia does not support the death penalty and the government will do whatever it can to help.

Asked if she will talk to the president herself, she said: "I'll be happy to do whatever is necessary to put as much force as we can into the appeal for clemency, including personally involving myself.

She said the government was supporting the family and Chan's lawyers.

Foreign Affairs Minister Kevin Rudd, also in Brisbane for the party's annual conference, said the government would stand by Chan.

"We will do what we have done with any other Australians who have been convicted of a capital offence and that is to use every form of representation to government concerned in support of that person," Mr Rudd said.

Indonesia: Andrew Chan appeal lost

Bali Nine ringleader loses final appeal
By Indonesia correspondent Matt Brown, wires

From: ABC Online, 17 June 2011

One of the Bali Nine drug smuggling ringleaders, Andrew Chan, has lost an appeal against his death sentence.

Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran were found guilty of organising a shipment of more than eight kilograms of heroin from Bali to Australia in 2005 and sentenced to death.

Indonesia's supreme court has now rejected his final appeal.

The decision was made on May 10 but was only posted on the supreme court website this afternoon.

His lawyer, Todung Mulya Lubis, says he is shocked at the result and could not comment further until he has spoken with his client.

The supreme court judges reviewing Chan's appeal say they found no obvious error in the original decision to impose the death penalty.

But Chan's Balinese lawyer, Nyoman Gede Sudiantara, says the legal team is shocked because Chan was not caught with any of the drugs the Bali Nine planned to smuggle to Australia.

Chan's last chance for a reprieve would be an appeal for clemency to Indonesian president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

The decision is a bad sign for Sukumaran, who is also waiting on the results of his appeal.

Chan and Sukumaran both launched final appeals in August last year.

The appeals rested on evidence that the men have been successfully rehabilitated and are role models inside prison.

Chan and Sukumaran had both been running education courses for fellow inmates inside Bali's Kerobokan prison as part of their efforts to rehabilitate.

Chan, 26, told the Denpasar District Court last year he knew he could not change the "stupid things" he did in the past.

"But I have genuinely changed my behaviour and I really want to focus on what I can do now and in the future," he said.

Chan, who has also been studying for a bachelor's degree in theology while in prison, said he hoped to become a minister or a counsellor so he could help others avoid his mistakes.

"I accept that I deserve to be punished for my crime but I beg the court that I not be executed," he said.

"I hope I am given another chance in life."

At the hearing, both men apologised for previously pleading not guilty, blaming bad advice from their previous legal team.

They also apologised for their behaviour at earlier court appearances, conceding they did not show appropriate respect.

A spokeswoman for Foreign Affairs Minister Kevin Rudd says the Government will vigorously support clemency for Mr Chan.

She says the Minister's thoughts are with Mr Chan and his family at this deeply distressing time.

A supreme court decision in May spared fellow Bali Nine death-row inmate Scott Rush the death penalty, instead sentencing him to life in prison.

Five other members of the drug smuggling plot - Martin Stephens, Matthew Norman, Michael Czugaj, Si Yi Chen and Tan Duc Thanh Nguyen - are also serving life sentences.

The final member of the drug ring, courier Renae Lawrence, is serving a 20-year sentence.

- ABC/AAP

Indonesia: Bali prosecutors claim deterrence

Push for Bali nine execution
Tom Allard DENPASAR
November 20, 2010
From: The Sydney Morning Herald online

INDONESIAN prosecutors yesterday urged that the Australians Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran be executed, saying the punishment was just, supported by the Indonesian people and would act as a deterrent.

The prosecution argument concluded the hearings of the final legal appeal by the members of the so-called Bali nine heroin smuggling syndicate against the death penalty.

Chan and Sukumaran, who were not in court, have asked for their sentence to be commuted to a 20-year prison term, citing their rehabilitation in prison and that the crime was not serious enough to warrant the death sentence given Indonesia's recognition of the sanctity of life.

But the prosecutors argued: "Every human has the right to live but upholding this right doesn't mean they are allowed to violate someone else's rights… Sentencing is not only to rehabilitate, but also to deter."

Chan and Sukumaran can expect to hear the verdict in about six months, after the evidence from the Bali hearings has been sent to Jakarta and considered by a panel of judges.

The prosecutors agreed with the defence, that only the most serious crime should receive the death penalty, but said arranging the export of more than eight kilograms of heroin fitted into that category.

The prosecution's assessment was not unexpected. It is required to defend the decision of the previous court and the duo has been consistently handed the death sentence in each court case so far.

In the Australians' favour is that executions have not been carried out in Indonesia in the two years since a Constitutional Court ruling found the punishment should be used sparingly and those on death row should be given the chance to rehabilitate.

Indonesia: Bali prosecutors argue for death

Prosecutors urge death penalty for Bali 9 ringleaders Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran
From: AAP (in The Australian online)
November 19, 2010 4:45PM

INDONESIAN prosecutors have called on the country's supreme court to uphold the death sentences of Bali Nine ringleaders Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran.

Prosecutor Siti Sawiyah said today that death by firing squad was the appropriate punishment for the Sydney drug traffickers and that their final appeal - known as a judicial review - should be thrown out of court.

"These man have committed a crime that was organised, with a neatly arranged plan, it was orderly and secretive," Ms Sawiyah told the Denpasar District Court.

"The Indonesian Supreme Court in Jakarta, which will examine this case should ... reject the judicial review."

Fellow prosecutor Ida Ayu Sulasmi said the death penalty was necessary to deter others from committing similar crimes.

"The Indonesian people and society, especially the people of Bali, consider Bali a tourist destination and illegal distribution of narcotics is a serious threat that could alter the image of Bali tourism," she said.

Chan, 26, and Sukumaran, 29, were two of nine Australians convicted over a 2005 attempt to smuggle more than eight kilograms of heroin out of Bali.

Their judicial review seeks to have their death sentences reduced to 20 years' prison.

Appeal hearings have been held in the Denpasar court, but the case will now be sent to the supreme court for a verdict.

The appeal rests in large part on evidence the men have been successfully rehabilitated and are now role models inside prison.

It also argues previous rulings against the men erred by finding them guilty of exporting drugs, even though they were caught before exportation actually occurred.

If the appeal fails, the pair will be forced to seek clemency from Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who generally takes a dim view of drug smugglers.Fellow Bali Nine death row inmate Scott Rush's judicial review is also currently before the supreme court.

Five other members of the drug smuggling plot - Martin Stephens, Matthew Norman, Michael Czugaj, Si Yi Chen and Tan Duc Than Nguyen - are serving life sentences.

The final member of the drug ring, courier Renae Lawrence, is serving a 20-year sentence.

Indonesia: Chan and Sukumaran speak

Bali Nine pair speak out
15 November 2010 07:02:23AM
Source: AAP/SBS Dateline (World News Australia)

Two Australians on death row for their role in the Bali Nine drug smuggling operation have revealed exclusively to Dateline on SBS ONE why they gambled with their lives and how they are trying to make amends.

Myuran Sukumaran, 29, and Andrew Chan, 26, have not spoken before about the bungled attempt to smuggle 8.3kg of heroin out of Bali five years ago or about their lives inside "Death Row Tower", the super-max section of Kerobokan Prison.

The men are making a final bid to get their death sentences overturned, with a final hearing expected to be held in Bali on Friday before their appeals are sent to Indonesia's Supreme Court for a verdict.

Sukumaran told Dateline reporter Mark Davis he gets a "a lot" of hate mail from Australians who tell him that he deserves to die.He also revealed he joined the Bali Nine because he didn't want to work in a mailroom for the next 50 years of his life.

"I thought, nup, can't do this, and then you see all these people in, like, nightclubs with nice BMWs and nice Mercedes and, you know, there's always chicks there and you know they're always buying drinks for everybody and you think, f***, you know, how do you do this on a mailroom salary?"

Chan told Dateline he is a pastor in the prison church, is studying religion and has fallen in love with a Balinese woman. He also apologises for his role in the Bali Nine operation.

"I'm thankful that every day I actually get to wake up.

"I'm studying and a lot of people might see that and say oh, you know, there's probably no use towards that but I believe that if you want to try to build yourself up to something, you know, you gotta start somewhere.

"You gotta start today, you know? Maybe tomorrow I won't exist. (It) makes me want to become a better person today and not tomorrow."

Watch the episode or read the transcript here.

Australians must confront death penalty

Looking away from the death penalty abroad is collusion
By Brigid Delaney
From: Sydney Morning Herald, 22 October 2010

Globalisation has swept the world, but the mediaeval remedy remains.

Poor Colin Campbell Ross. The 29-year-old Victorian was hanged in 1922 for the rape and murder of a 12-year-old girl. It was later found that they got the wrong man.

On Monday, Victorian Attorney-General Rob Hulls formally returned Ross's cremated remains to his family.

In 1981, France's Justice Minister abolished the death penalty, saying it was untenable as it depended on the impossible premise of "totally responsible guilty parties" and "absolutely infallible judges".

French philosopher Bernard Henri-Levy said recently, with a note of Gallic exasperation, "To think we still have to argue against the death penalty".

In the case of the Bali nine, Scott Rush, Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran are literally arguing for their lives. They may have admitted various levels of culpability in their roles after the April 2005 heroin bust, and it is proper they should be brought to account, but the great injustice here is that the punishment does not fit the crime. Moreover, the punishment should be regarded as a crime.

It's interesting watching Australian politicians on this matter - their responses speak somehow to character, like a low tide revealing water marks; the Christian who thinks that only God has the power to take life, the humanist who recoils at such awesome power invested in the state, and the diplomat who believes state sovereignty is sacred.

The narrative that engulfs death row cases flows on regardless: the grainy footage of the arrests, the shock and denial of the accused, the deep distress to the families and friends. The introduction into their lives of the media. The organisation of legal teams. The diplomatic approaches, the hearings and appeals, the religious awakening in prison, the vigils of supporters, the masses, the pleas for clemency, the prayers and the petitions.

Towards the end there is, as there was with Australian Nguyen Tuong Van (executed almost five years ago in Singapore for drug trafficking), a sort of public turning. Compassion for the prisoner, sorrow for his family, an acknowledgment that perhaps people can change. Then a lump in the throat, or sudden tearfulness watching the evening news when you hear he has been hanged.

But the central, unmovable thing in all this activity is the legal system that supports the death.

It is before such a legal system that many objections wilt, where we answer our own disquiet about the death penalty with a fey "well, it's their law, so we have to abide by their punishment", as if the legal systems of others were beyond critique. As if they never get it wrong.

Sovereignty is the trump card and for many our inner diplomat speaks louder than our inner Christian or humanist. But what if you believe that the immovable thing, the thing at the centre of it all, is not the legal system but the sanctity of life?

While globalisation has swept the world and continues to radically transform cultures and economies, the barbaric, mediaeval ''remedy'' of the death penalty remains like a recessive gene in a body that has successfully evolved and adapted to modern life.

You wouldn't recognise parts of Shanghai or Beijing, so modern have they become, yet China executes unreported thousands (sending the bill for the single bullet to the families). In December 2009, in great secrecy, they executed Akmal Shaikh, a mentally ill Briton accused of drug smuggling.

You may go to Singapore to buy the most advanced electronic gear (and so cheap) - yet that is where they killed 25-year-old Nguyen with a noose, where he went dignified and prayerfully to his death.

You may go to Bali for an Eat, Pray, Love experience when down the road is Kerobokan prison and the young men are in sweaty little rooms with their lawyers and their hopes.

And the US, where 3000 men and women are waiting in dread (maybe after a while in a kind of toxic boredom) to be put to death by the state. Why do we tolerate the continued existence of this?

Anyone like me who studied humanities at a university in the '90s had it drilled into them not to assume your legal system is better or more enlightened than theirs.

But what is this triumph of cultural relativism in the face of the great opportunity that exists for everyone of personal transcendence? That is the unforgettable lesson Nguyen taught us, and repeated in the Kerobokan transformations of Sukumaran and Chan - the computer and art classes they are teaching the other prisoners, their faces more open and luminous with each court appearance.

How is it possible to accept the sovereignty of countries where the legal "remedy" is death?

There are some things so fundamentally abhorrent that to cough politely and look away is uncomfortably close to collusion, at one remove from some baying mob in Tehran gathered at the scaffolding in the square.


Brigid Delaney is a former lawyer, journalist and author of This Restless Life.

Indonesia: Australian police appeal for mercy

Aussie Cops Seek Mercy for Bali 9 Drug Smuggler
Made Arya Kencana & AFP
September 16, 2010
From: The Jakarta Globe

Denpasar. The former Australian Federal Police commissioner who passed on intelligence to Indonesian police that helped doom the so-called Bali Nine drug smugglers, asked a court here on Thursday to spare the life of one of the smugglers.

Testifying at the appeal of 24-year-old Scott Rush, Mick Keelty, the former AFP commissioner, told the court that Rush was a "small-time player" and did not deserve his sentence of death by firing squad.

"His [Rush's] role was minimal. He was a courier," Keelty said during the hearing at the Denpasar District Court.

Keelty told the court that as the AFP's top-ranking officer in 2005, he had given the green light on two occasions for information to be passed on to his Indonesian counterparts about the nine Australians who conspired to smuggle 8.2 kilograms of heroin from Bali into Australia.

The Australian, a daily newspaper, reported in August that the AFP asked the Indonesian police in April 2005 to "attempt to keep the group under surveillance, identify the source of the drugs and obtain as much evidence and intelligence as possible to help the AFP nail the organizers in Australia."

The newspaper also reported that four days later, the AFP sent Indonesian authorities another letter containing the "dates, times and flight details of the Bali Nine's return to Australia."

Keelty told the court that the AFP, which was tipped off about the plan by a lawyer working for Rush's father, included intelligence on Rush's "minimal role" and his young age at the time of the foiled drug run.

Rush, whose original life sentence was changed to death on appeal by prosecutors, was 19 years old when he was caught with heroin strapped to his body at Bali's Ngurah Rai International Airport.

"This young man had just gone to Indonesia for the first time. In fact, it was the very first time he ever got out of Australia," Keelty told the court.

Michael Phelan, the current AFP deputy commissioner, told the court that Rush did not have a criminal record in Australia and because it was his first drug offense he would face "less than 10 years" if convicted of the same crime at home.

The hearing was adjourned until Sept. 26.

Rush was not in court on Thursday but last month he publicly apologized to the court and begged for forgiveness. Two other Bali Nine members, Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan, have also launched appeals against their death sentences.

Bali appeals with Indonesian court

Two Bali Nine convicts lodge death sentence appeals
Desy Nurhayati, The Jakarta Post, Denpasar
Sat, 08/14/2010 9:46 AM

Two Australian drug convicts on death row have formally launched final appeals on Friday, seeking to have their sentences commuted to 20 years in prison.

Attorneys for Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, members of the so-called "Bali Nine" syndicate of heroin smugglers, lodged the appeal to the Supreme Court via the Denpasar District Court.

Attorneys Todung Mulya Lubis said the appeal was not filed on the basis of new evidence, but due to a misapplication of the law by the judges.

"We filed the appeal as we consider this case violates the right to life. It is a basic right guaranteed in our Constitution," he said, adding that the death sentence would not discourage people from committing crimes and violated human rights.

He said that according to the UN, the death penalty should only be imposed for the most serious crimes, which excludes drug-related crimes.

"It's true they should be punished, but they don't deserve the death penalty. We are seeking to have it reduced to a 20-year prison term."

Chan, 26, and Sukumaran, 29, were convicted for an attempt in 2005 to smuggle 8.3 kilograms of heroin from Bali to Australia.

In the appeal, both argue that they had been successfully rehabilitated and were now teachers and role models for fellow inmates at Kerobokan Prison.

"The judges should take into consideration that both convicts have changed a lot. They teach their fellow inmates skills such as operating computers and painting."

The appeal also argues that previous rulings against the pair erred by finding them guilty of exporting drugs. It said the pair should have been given more lenient sentences because while they attempted to export the drugs, they did not succeed in doing so.

"Technically speaking, there was no export of the drugs. An attempt to export is not the same as exporting," Todung said. attorneys Nyoman Sudiantara said the pair’s legal team would request that both men be present at the appeals hearing.

Four witnesses will be called to testify at fresh hearings, likely to begin next month. They a prominent Australian psychologist from Monash University Paul Mullen, prominent Ireland-based human rights law expert William Schabas, Kerobokan Prison head Siswanto and former Indonesian Supreme Court justice Yahya Harahap.

Chan and Sukumaran are launching their appeal less than a month after fellow death row inmate Scott Anthony Rush launched his own. If this final appeal fails, the three men will be left with one last chance to avoid the death sentence — clemency from President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

Five other members of the drug smuggling plot are serving life sentences in Bali’s Kerobokan Prison.

Of the remaining two, Martin Stephens’ judicial review is currently being considered by the Supreme Court, while courier Renae Lawrence is serving a 20-year prison sentence.

Indonesia: remorse appeal for life

Bali nine pair admit guilt in bid to avoid firing squad
Tom Allard
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
August 13, 2010

Sydneysiders Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran have, for the first time, admitted their role in the Bali nine heroin smuggling syndicate, but asked to be handed a 20-year prison term as they launch their final judicial appeals to avoid the firing squad.

The admission of guilt, contained in documents submitted to a Denpasar court today, follows repeated pleas of not guilty at three previous trials.

The two were arrested with seven other Australians in 2005 for trying to smuggle eight kilograms of heroin from Bali to Australia.

Chan and Sukumaran were found guilty of smuggling the drugs and sentenced to death at the three other trials, accused of being the ringleaders of the plot.

The appeal requests the Indonesian Supreme Court consider their efforts to rehabilitate themselves and take on leadership roles in Kerobokan prison by training other prisoners in skills to prepare them for life outside the prison walls.

Both Chan and Sukumaran acknowledge that what they did had been harmful to the community and themselves, but that they had vowed to be "better" men.

Their court submissions argue both have "changed radically" since being imprisoned.

As for their lack of previous co-operation with authorities, Chan and Sukumaran apologise and put it down to an "inability to think clearly".

Sukumaran's submission argues he was traumatised by the arrest in a foreign country and had "poor advice from a certain party".

As required by law, the judicial review is based on legal argument that previous rulings made manifest errors, including not properly considering that the two had been rehabilitated and a finding by Indonesia's constitutional court that the death penalty should only be used sparingly as a "special and alternative punishment".

Sukumaran's submission also argues that Indonesia has signed the UN convention of civil and political rights, a treaty which underpins a body of international law that explicitly rejects the use of the death penalty for narcotics crimes.

Evidence from other members of the Bali nine needs to be treated with caution, it says. It also cites the Indonesian constitution's recognition that all people have a basic right to life.

A key argument is that previous rulings had mistakenly found them guilty of exporting drugs. As the drug mules were arrested before they left Indonesia's customs area at Denpasar airport, the judicial review argues that the act of exporting did not take place.

Rather, they had only attempted to smuggle the heroin to Australia.

"An attempted crime is usually subject to a more lenient sentence compared to one that has been completed. This is because of the consequences that arise differ between the two crimes," the judicial reviews say.

"The narcotics did not reach its users."The fact that the crime was only an "attempt", and that Chan and Sukumaran had made strong efforts, with the assistance of prison officials, to rehabilitate themselves warranted a 20-year sentence, they argue.

The trial of Chan and Sukumaran is likely to begin in a couple of weeks and a verdict handed down before the end of the year.

The other Bali nine member facing the death penalty, Scott Rush, launched his final appeal last month. Rush's first hearing before the court is on Wednesday.

Tom Allard is the Herald's correspondent in Indonesia.

Australia: No death penalty, no shades of grey

By Professor George Williams
From The Sydney Morning Herald, 2 March 2010

The Death Penalty Abolition Bill debated in Federal Parliament last week is the most important initiative on the death penalty for decades. If passed, it will block any state attempt to bring back capital punishment. If it did, the law would be a clear and principled statement that Australia renounces the death penalty now and into the future.

Although the death penalty has been absent from the statute book for 25 years - NSW was the last to eradicate it in 1985 - the new law is needed. The silence in federal law on capital punishment means the death penalty could be reintroduced by any state at any time. This is not only a legal but a political possibility due to statements made over many years by our leaders.

The Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, is the latest to try to have it both ways. He said recently he had ''always been against the death penalty'', but went on to say that, in the case of someone ''who cold-bloodedly brought about the deaths of hundreds or thousands of innocent people'', you ''start to think that maybe the only appropriate punishment is death''.

Abbott is not alone in attempting to combine a principled stand with an inconsistent appeal to raw emotion. Politicians from both sides have taken the same course. The attraction is obvious as it is an appeal to populism.

A 2005 Bulletin poll showed that most Australians supported capital punishment. The Australian National University's 2007 Electoral Survey found that 44 per cent of people thought the death penalty should be reintroduced - 38 per cent disagreed. Australia may not have the death penalty, but a sizeable part of the population supports its return.

This leaves Australian law in an unsatisfactory state and our citizens facing the death penalty overseas in an even worse situation. Equivocation on the death penalty by our leaders, such as by recognising it as appropriate for someone like Saddam Hussein, makes it harder to oppose the execution of Australians overseas.

Regarding the Bali bombers, John Howard, as prime minister, said that if the death penalty ''is what the law of Indonesia provides, that is how things should proceed''. Such statements undermine Australian arguments against the death penalty for Australians tried in Indonesia and elsewhere.

This has been pointed out by Scott Rush, one of the Bali Nine, who is facing death. He wrote to the government: ''I don't want to be in any way political but, from a practical point of view of someone inside on death row, it makes practical and good sense to have a consistent position of opposing the death penalty without discrimination.''

Ambiguous statements by our politicians, combined with the silence in our law on the reintroduction of the death penalty, leave the door ajar for its return in a state. A political leader seeking high office could take the law and order debate to a new low by arguing for the reintroduction of the death penalty in response to a particularly heinous crime.

Such a course has even had federal support. In 2003, Howard called for a national debate on the reintroduction of capital punishment as part of new anti-terrorism laws. While he said that he did not personally support this, he nonetheless suggested the death penalty could be raised by state opposition parties as an election issue.

It is time that Australian law and our leaders spoke against capital punishment wherever it is applied and without reservation. The notion that it is acceptable to execute terrorists but not other criminals, or to execute foreign nationals but not Australians, is morally and logically unsustainable. The value of a life is not contingent on a person's nationality or the nature of their crime. Opposition to the death penalty does not permit such shades of grey. Its removal from the law in Australia and elsewhere must be an unequivocal demand.

Unfortunately, no federal law can prevent the reintroduction of the death penalty by a future federal parliament. Prohibiting its reintroduction at the state level is as far as we can go without changing the constitution.

The death penalty was abolished in Australia decades ago but the battle against capital punishment was left incomplete. The possibility remains that it may return under state law. The Federal Parliament must pass the Death Penalty Abolition Bill to ensure this cannot happen.

George Williams is the Anthony Mason Professor of Law at the University of NSW

Australia: Police guidelines announced

Media Release
INTERNATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT COOPERATION
18 December 2009

Attorney-General
Hon Robert McClelland MP

Minister for Home Affairs
Brendan O'Connor MP

Attorney-General, Robert McClelland and Minister for Home Affairs, Brendan O’Connor, today announced a new policy to govern law enforcement cooperation with countries that may apply the death penalty.

Successive Australian Governments have maintained a long-standing policy of opposition to the death penalty and it is appropriate that this position is reflected in our law enforcement practices.

From today, new Australian Federal Police (AFP) guidelines governing police-to-police assistance in possible death penalty cases will take effect.

The new guidelines will require senior AFP management to consider a set of prescribed factors before providing assistance in matters with possible death penalty implications, including:
* the purpose of providing the information and the reliability of that information;
* the seriousness of the suspected criminal activity;
* the nationality, age and personal circumstances of the person involved;
* the potential risks to the person, and other persons, in providing or not providing the information; and
* Australia’s interest in promoting and securing cooperation from overseas agencies in combating crime.

The new guidelines will also require:
* Ministerial approval of assistance in any case in which a person has been arrested, detained, charged with, or convicted of, an offence which carries the death penalty; and
* the AFP Commissioner to report biannually to the Minister for Home Affairs about the number and nature of cases where information is provided to foreign law enforcement agencies in potential death penalty cases.

These changes follow a thorough examination of existing policy and represent a balanced and responsible approach that provides greater clarity and accountability, while maintaining our commitment to combating transnational crime.

A copy of the new AFP Practical Guide on International Police-to-Police Assistance in Potential Death Penalty Situations is attached and available at http://www.afp.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/21096/Guideline_for_international_death_penalty_situation.pdf.

Death penalty rules for Australian police

Police get rules on suspects
JONATHAN PEARLMAN

From The Age
19 December 2009

THE Federal Government has issued guidelines to the Australian Federal Police on co-operating with countries that have the death penalty, including a stipulation that senior police consider a suspect's age, nationality and whether capital punishment is likely to be imposed.

The guidelines could prevent a repeat of the controversy surrounding the Bali nine case in which the AFP passed on information to Indonesian authorities about a group of Australians involved in a heroin smuggling operation in 2005.

This followed a tip-off from Lee Rush, whose son, Scott Rush, is one of the nine. He faces execution.

The guidelines, released yesterday by Attorney-General Robert McClelland and Home Affairs Minister Brendan O'Connor, require ministerial approval for assistance in cases where a person has been arrested and faces the death penalty. Previous guidelines allowed police to co-operate without approval for months in cases - such as the Bali nine - where the suspects had been arrested but not charged.

While ministerial approval is not required before the AFP helps foreign police in investigations, the co-operation must be approved by one of two high-ranking AFP officers who must consider factors such as the seriousness of the crime, the reliability of the information and the degree of risk to the suspect.

Other factors include Australia's interest in securing future co-operation from foreign agencies, the person's personal circumstances and the risk to the person or others of not providing the information.

A spokesman for Mr McClelland said yesterday the guidelines would clear up confusion in cases involving foreign assistance, but would not say whether they would have led to a different outcome in the Bali nine case. ''That is hypothetical,'' he said.

Legal advocates and family members of the Bali nine expressed outrage at the AFP for allegedly reneging on a deal to intervene before the drugs were smuggled.

The former commissioner, Mick Keelty, who retired in September, refused to apologise. He had insisted the AFP could not have arrested the suspects in Australia and would act the same way in future cases.

Mr Rush, who unsuccessfully took legal action against the AFP, said yesterday he did not want to comment. ''There is nothing more to say. Maybe Mr Keelty would like to comment.''

Mr Keelty could not be reached.

Labor MP Chris Hayes, who befriended Scott Rush's parents and has urged Australia to push other countries to abolish the death penalty, welcomed the guidelines.

''Which parent of a 17-year-old has not been concerned about what they are doing and who they are hanging out with?'' he said.

''Lee Rush told me he did what he did knowing his son would probably never talk to him again but he was determined to end his life of crime. But he didn't realise he would be signing his death warrant.''

The AFP said yesterday the guidelines followed consultation with legal and civil rights groups and would provide greater clarity and accountability.

Australia tries to reclaim principle

The Australian government has attempted to restore its credibility on the death penalty after the prime minister last month appeared to support the execution of the Bali bombers.

Ten days before the executions were carried out, prime minister Kevin Rudd said Australia was "universally opposed to the death penalty".

And hours after the three convicted terrorists were shot by firing squad, foreign minister Stephen Smith said Australia would support an upcoming moratorium resolution in the United Nations (UN) General Assembly.

However no senior member of the government has publicly said the men should not have been shot for the 2002 attacks which killed 88 Australians.

Lawyers acting for three Australians on death row in Indonesia criticised the government's silence on the executions, saying this selective approach would be detrimental to their clients' interests.

'Deserve the justice'
Rudd appeared to adopt his predecessor's double standards on the death penalty when he said on 2 October that they "deserve the justice that we delivered to them".

The following day he claimed the nature of that justice was a matter for the Indonesian justice system, but he would only say the government's policy was one of "general opposition" to the death penalty.

He was criticised for seeming to support the executions, and only speaking out against death sentences when Australian lives were at stake.

Media reports suggested government backbenchers later expressed concerns about the prime minister's equivocation on the issue.

With mounting speculation over the timing of the executions, Rudd was asked on Melbourne radio on 30 October a series of five questions about whether he approved the execution of terrorists, and the Bali bombers in particular.

His answers tried to tread a fine line by opposing the death penalty in the most general terms possible, while saying nothing that could be quoted as a direct criticism of the impending executions in Java.

He repeated that the government was "universally" opposed to the death penalty and twice said the government only intervened on behalf of Australian citizens.

He described the October 2002 attack as a "murderous, cowardly and callous act".

"But I’m not going to pretend to you ... that our policy on the death penalty has changed. It’s always been one of universal opposition."

Opposition -- but afterwards
Hours after the executions were carried out on 9 November, foreign minister Stephen Smith said the government would soon co-sponsor a UN General Assembly resolution calling for a moratorium.

"In the near future at the UN General Assembly we will be co-sponsoring a resolution calling effectively on a moratorium on capital punishment and that's been Australia's position for some considerable time," he said.

Some commentators reported this as a new development in Australian human rights policy in the wake of the executions. But in fact Australia has for many years co-sponsored UN resolutions opposing the death penalty, a fact which has not often been the subject of public discussion.

Smith did not say if Australia would do anything different at the UN in the coming weeks than last year, when it was one of 75 countries that co-sponsored the 18 December moratorium resolution.

Cautious welcome
Lawyers for the three Australians on death row in Indonesia welcomed Smith's comments, but criticised the government's silence on the latest executions.

Julian McMahon, part of the legal team advising Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, said he thought it "would have been better for us to stand up more clearly and speak more firmly and loudly in the region prior to the execution".

"To be pro-active if you like but the response after the execution has been exactly what I would have hoped for," he said.

"I just think that we should have been doing it consistently rather than just after the execution."

John North, who represents Scott Rush, said the government should consistently oppose the death penalty.

"They shouldn't try and cherry pick those that should be executed and those that should not," he said.

In another interview he said: "When the death penalty is hanging over the heads of young Australians there is no room for ambivalence."

Australian government reminded of death penalty opposition

The Australian government has been reminded of the stance it took on the death penalty before it won office, after a member of parliament introduced a resolution yesterday calling for clemency for three young Australians under sentence of death in Indonesia.

New South Wales MP Chris Hayes introduced the private member's bill yesterday, which noted three members of the so-called 'Bali 9' faced execution for drug trafficking, and called on the Australian government to advocate clemency.

A shorter version of the same resolution was introduced on 29 May 2007, by Robert McClelland, who is now attorney-general in the Rudd Labor government.

The two resolutions differ in three significant respects, with the latest resolution:

* expressing "opposition to the imposition of the death penalty", whereas the earlier version explicitly opposed only "the imposition of the death penalty on any Australian citizen"

* calling on the Australian government to "advocate clemency for these three Australian citizens [on death row in Bali], as and whenever appropriate", and

* encouraging law reform to implement the Indonesian Constitutional Court's October 2007 recommendation that alternatives be provided to a mandatory death penalty.

Robert McClelland was publicly rebuked by his leader Kevin Rudd during the 2007 election campaign, after he made public remarks encouraging consistent opposition to the use of the death penalty and "shrewd diplomatic activism" for abolition within the region.

(Thanks to Cynthia Banham for the tip about the Hayes resolution, in her article in today's Sydney Morning Herald.)

Related stories:
Australia defends selective appeals for life -- 16 August 2008
'Only Australians' should be spared execution -- 06 January 2008
Three of 'Bali 9' off death row: Indonesia -- 6 March 2008
Indonesia: Right to life and execution -- 30 October 2007
No Australian government will oppose terrorist executions -- 10 October 2007
Australia: Rudd would oppose death penalty -- 24 June 2007
Australia 'should act against death penalty' -- 03 August 2006

Australia defends selective appeals for life

The Australian government has again opened itself up to accusations of double standards over the death penalty, with the confirmation it would only consistently oppose the execution of Australian citizens.

Foreign affairs minister Stephen Smith said this week he would raise the cases of three Australians on death row in Indonesia but not the three convicted Bali bombers.

Australian newspapers reported that Cabinet recently discussed whether the government could argue more effectively -- and avoid accusations of hypocrisy in Asia -- if it opposed all executions (stories here and here).

"I'm not going to indicate what may or may not have been discussed at Cabinet, but our position is quite straightforward. We don't support the use of capital punishment," Smith reportedly told Australia's Nine Network.

"When an Australian overseas has been convicted and is subject to capital punishment as a sentence, we make representations on behalf of Australian citizens.

"When it comes to other individuals who aren't Australian citizens, we'll make a judgment on a case-by-case basis as to whether it's appropriate to make representations or to join in representations at a regional or multilateral level."

The report said Smith pointed to Australia's recent involvement in international appeals for Iran to stop executing children.

"But the Prime Minister and I have both made clear that we don't propose to make representations on behalf of terrorists who have been subject to the death penalty," he said.

"So I won't be making any individual representations so far as the Bali bombers are concerned."

New Zealand's Prime Minister Helen Clark said at a media conference on 21 July that her government did not support the execution of the bombers.

"The New Zealand Government does not support the death penalty under any circumstances," she said.

"Clearly these men are guilty of heinous crimes and those crimes, in any jurisdiction, would justify them [getting] very serious penalties available under law but the New Zealand Government will not and does not support the death penalty."

Government silence
Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said last October, when he was opposition leader, that he would only speak out against the execution of Australians overseas.

Rudd humiliated his opposition colleague Robert McClelland, now commonwealth attorney-general, scolding him for public remarks that Australia should consistently oppose executions.

"When it comes to the question of the death penalty, no diplomatic intervention will ever be made by any government that I lead in support of any individual terrorist life," Rudd said at the time.

Drawing a line -- against comment
The language used by Rudd in October 2007 and Smith this week refers to no "diplomatic resources" or "individual representations" being devoted to appeals in terrorist cases.

The policy appears to mean that ministers will not draw any public link between the government's policy of "opposition" to the death penalty and the execution of a non-Australian.

In practice, it is therefore likely that the Australian government will take no consistent public position on the execution of foreigners, apart from some exceptions determined on "a case-by-case basis".

Although there have been claims a Rudd government would push for abolition of the death penalty through multilateral forums, there has so far been no public sign that the new government is doing anything new at the international level.

Amnesty International Australia has argued over several years that the country undermined its credibility in opposing the death penalty if it only took a stand when Australian lives were at stake.

Principally hypocritical
The new Labor government's position on the death penalty is similar to the policy of the previous conservative government -- with one important difference.

Under former Prime Minister John Howard, the Liberal-National government claimed it opposed the death penalty "consistently" and "in principle", but it only made representations when Australian citizens faced death.

However this inconsistency was further undermined when Howard and senior government ministers repeatedly indicated their support for particular executions being carried out.

Related stories:
'Only Australians' should be spared execution -- 06 January, 2008
No Australian government will oppose terrorist executions -- 10 October, 2007
Australia: Rudd would oppose death penalty -- 24 June, 2007
Australia 'should act against death penalty' -- 03 August, 2006

Three of 'Bali 9' off death row: Indonesia

The death threat hanging over three Australians convicted of heroin smuggling has been overturned after a judicial review of their sentences, according to their Indonesian lawyers.

Australian newspapers reported today that Si Yi Chen, Tan Duc Thanh Nguyen and Matthew Norman were successful in their bid for the Supreme Court to overturn the decision that raised their punishment to the death penalty.

A different panel of Supreme Court judges imposed the death penalty on the three in September 2006.

The Australian reported the decision was made on 11 February, and a copy had since been sent to the Denpasar District Court, where the application for judicial review was heard.

Their Jakarta-based lawyer Farhat Abbas said it was the first time the Supreme Court had overturned a death sentence in a drugs case.

The Courier-Mail reported one of the judges said their youth, good character and remorse before the court were all factors in its decision to grant mercy.

The three men were part of a group of nine Australians convicted of attempting to smuggle 8.3 kilograms of heroin from Bali to Australia in April 2005.

Four of the group -- the so-called 'mules' -- were arrested at Denpasar Airport with the drugs strapped to their bodies. Chen, Nguyen and Norman were arrested at the Melasti Hotel, with 350 grams of heroin in a suitcase in their room. Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran were arrested and charged with organising the conspiracy.

The decision leaves just three of the group on death row: Chan and Sukumaran, and Scott Rush, the only 'mule' now under sentence of death.

Cautious hope for Rush
Rush's father and his Australian lawyers said the decision offered hope he could successfully appeal his death sentence, although they were cautious about raising hopes at this stage.

His father Lee told the ABC that "there's an opportunity there, but we're dealing with the unknown".

"We've had them up before and you go down again. So we don't want to get our hopes up."

Colin McDonald, Rush's Darwin-based barrister, told Fairfax Media reporters the decision offered a "very valuable - and potentially very powerful - legal precedent to have his sentence downgraded to 20 years' jail".

He described his client as "a drug mule on the bottom of the hierarchy of drug importation crimes", saying Rush's co-accused who had played an identical role in the operation received either 20 years or life.

"From here, we are going to proceed cautiously and carefully in a long history of rollercoaster emotions and disappointments," he said.

He said "now, combined, all of the drug mules save Scott Rush have avoided the death penalty".

"It would be manifestly excessive, and now wrong, to allow the death sentence to stand."

Mr McDonald said Rush would make an application to the Supreme Court in the next three weeks.

Another of his Australian lawyers, John North, agreed Rush was "a unique position ... as being the only one of the airport couriers who has received the death sentence".

"And so we've always felt he's had a strong case. But it's good to see the Indonesian Supreme Court has recognised that the Melasti three don't deserve the death penalty," he said.

Relief
The decision reported today brings a measure of certainty for the three men, who have seen their original sentence of life in prison reduced on appeal to twenty years, then raised to the death penalty after a further appeal by prosecutors.

The Supreme Court sentenced them to death in September 2006, despite prosecutors only asking that the original life sentences be reinstated.

The three still face the daunting prospect of spending the rest of their lives in an Indonesian jail.

Related stories:
Indonesia: Right to life and execution -- 30 October, 2007
Bali 9 challenge may win and fail -- 03 June, 2007
Drug penalty violates international law -- 06 May, 2007
Australians appeal Bali death sentences -- 02 May, 2007
Firing squad for six of Bali nine -- 10 September, 2006
Bali 9 death sentence confirmed -- 26 April, 2006

Bali court: Australians deserve death

Bali's Denpasar District Court has recommended an appeal by three members of the Bali 9 should be rejected, saying international drug trafficking offences "deserved the death penalty".

The lower court's recommendation is not binding on the Supreme Court, which will decide the appeal. But for the appeal to succeed, the Supreme Court would have to overturn its earlier decision upgrading their sentences to death.

Fairfax journalist Mark Forbes reported in today's Sydney Morning Herald that the three judges who heard the appeal have prepared a report rejecting legal arguments used by convicted heroin traffickers Matthew Norman, Si Yi Chen and Tan Duc Thanh Nguyen.

The newspaper said it had seen a copy of the report, which stated: "In our opinion the judicial review request is DISMISSED."

The Denpasar judges reportedly found the Supreme Court had the right to impose the death penalty even though prosecutors had requested a maximum of life imprisonment.

They said the original penalties were not proportional to the crime and "therefore the panel of judges sees no errors have been made".

"Drug-related crimes are considered as an extraordinary anti-social act," the judges found.

They also said international drug trafficking was included in "the most serious crime and deserved the death penalty".

Erwin Siregar, one of the lawyers for the three men, told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) that the the Supreme Court did not have to take the opinion into account.

The ABC reported he said it was not good news for his clients, but the Supreme Court was totally independent.

"The judges' court, when they make a decision, nobody can influence them," he said.

"They are free to make a decision."

Background

In May 2007, Si Yi Chen, 22, Matthew Norman, 20 and Thanh Duc Tan Nguyen, 24, appeared in Bali's Denpasar District Court for hearings into their judicial review.

Written submissions lodged by their lawyers argued the Supreme Court did not consider the full facts of the cases when it changed their sentences from 20 years to death.

Related stories:
Bali 9 challenge may win and fail -- 03 June, 2007
Drug penalty violates international law -- 06 May, 2007
Australians appeal Bali death sentences -- 02 May, 2007
Firing squad for six of Bali nine -- 10 September, 2006
Bali 9 death sentence confirmed -- 26 April, 2006