Indonesia Mulls Introduction of a 'Probationary' Death Penalty

Source: Al Jazeera (10 October 2022)

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/10/10/indonesia-considers-plans-for-a-probationary-death-penalty

When Indonesia recently unveiled the latest plans to overhaul its ageing Criminal Code, one of the articles that caught everyone’s eye was the one about the death penalty.

While Indonesia has long executed those convicted of crimes such as terrorism, murder, and drug trafficking, the draft of the new Criminal Code describes execution as a “last resort” and offers an alternative: a 10-year probationary period during which those condemned can have the sentence replaced with a life term if they meet certain conditions.

According to the draft, which is expected to be signed into law in the coming months, judges will be empowered to hand down a death sentence with a probationary period of 10 years if the defendant “shows remorse, there is a chance of reform, they did not play a large role in the crime committed, or there were mitigating factors in the case”.

The so-called probationary death sentence, which has echoes of the two-year ‘reprieve’ that China offers to some of those convicted to death, has raised some concerns, however.

Usman Hamid, the head of Amnesty Indonesia, which campaigns for an end to the death penalty in its entirety, says that if a probationary period is going to be used, it should be granted to everyone who is sentenced to death.

“The concept of the death penalty as an alternative punishment is inconsistent, because the government’s formulation has regressed to where the waiting period is dependent on the judge’s decision, something that is prone to abuse,” he said.

Kirsten Han, a Singapore based anti-death penalty campaigner and independent journalist, says Indonesia’s plans for a probationary death penalty were interesting, but that it remained to be seen how it would actually work in practice.

“It is an improvement from what we have because at least it says that the death penalty should be a ‘last resort’ and that there are mitigating factors, whereas what we have here is mandatory death,” she said. “My main question would be how and who evaluates the criteria like ‘good behaviour’ and ‘chance for reform’.”

Dobby Chew, the executive coordinator of the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network based in Malaysia, agrees.

“It is not a bad idea per se and could be described as somewhat progress. But the conception and framework can be highly problematic as the starting point still requires a person to be sentenced to death,” Chew said.

“A probationary death penalty would put inmates in this odd circumstance where they have to live with the idea they need to prove themselves redeemed with the knowledge that their life would be forfeited if they don’t hovering over their head. In such circumstances, can any repentance even be considered genuine by any standards?”

Chew also agreed that the state would need to be careful in determining the criteria or context of the probationary period and have objective and measurable benchmarks in relation to perceptions of reform.

“The impact on the mental health of inmates and families differs substantially, some families are fundamentally broken, traumatised or damaged by the incarceration as the foundation for their family and lives were destroyed with the conviction and sentence. Occurrences of mental breakdown, or inmates living on a knife edge is relatively common,” Chew added.

He worries that a probationary death sentence in Indonesia will become a compromise that fails to address either reform or punishment.

“Trying to sugarcoat it in a probationary system does not solve the fundamental issues around the death penalty, nor would it provide society with the justice expected,” he said.

“And if a person was able to prove their repentance, or was able to show a lesser degree of culpability, would they have suffered unnecessarily on death row for the 10 years?”

“Do they deserve to have a metaphorical gun pointed at them for the 10 years of their incarceration?”

15 foreigners among 48 handed death penalty in Indonesia last year: Amnesty

Source: Jakarta Post (11 April 2019)

https://www.thejakartapost.com/seasia/2019/04/11/15-foreigners-among-48-handed-death-penalty-last-year-amnesty.html

Indonesia sentenced to death 48 people last year, including 15 foreigners convicted of drug crimes, according to the latest global report on capital punishment by human rights organization Amnesty International.

In its annual report released on Wednesday, Amnesty explained that of the 48 death sentences, 39 were in drug-related cases, eight were for murder and one for terrorism.

In 2017, 10 foreigners were among 47 individuals sentenced to death.

At least 308 convicts were on death row by the end of last year, awaiting their execution without a clear date.

Despite its stance on capital punishment, Indonesia has positioned itself as a human rights pioneer in Southeast Asia. But in 2018, the country observed a moratorium on executions for the second year in a row after the government under President Joko "Jokowi" Widodo executed 18 inmates convicted of drug-related offenses, including foreigners, in three batches between 2015 and 2016.

Nonetheless, Amnesty’s records show that Indonesia has not taken any steps toward abolishing the death penalty, much to the frustration of activists who point out that Indonesia is an initiator of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR). The country is currently also seeking a fifth term on the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).

“As a pioneer of human rights in Southeast Asia, Indonesia actually has a wider chance to progress from the moratorium [to abolition],” said Amnesty International Indonesia executive director Usman Hamid. “It is ironic that Indonesia has yet to take any formal steps to abolish the death penalty when the global trends show positive progress. Neighboring Malaysia has even announced an initiative to reform the punishment.”

Amnesty’s report shows a global decrease in executions from 2017 to 2018, down by 31 percent, from 993 to 690 executions – the lowest number in the past decade. The number of death sentences globally also slightly dropped from 2,591 in 2017 to 2,531 in 2018.

Known proponents of capital punishment have even started to abandon it last year. For instance, Gambia declared a moratorium on executions, while Burkina Faso abolished capital punishment for general crimes and Malaysia announced a death penalty reform after previously decided to halt executions.

Usman said that eliminating the death penalty could level up Indonesia's diplomatic efforts to save roughly 188 Indonesian citizens on death row abroad.

“Well, how can Indonesia convince other countries to save its citizens from capital punishment if Indonesia maintains a legal basis to practice inhumane punishments at home?"

Usman urged the House of Representatives to push the government into scrapping the death sentence in the Criminal Code (KUHP).

Lawmaker Charles Honoris of the ruling Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), who attended the report's launch, said that capital punishment was ineffective in curbing crimes, particularly drug offenses, given that the number of drug-related cases continued to increase in the past few years.

However, he shifted the responsibility to the government and the President, saying that the House was divided over the issue, with few lawmakers daring to openly voice their support for abolishing capital punishment. Therefore, the political will of the President was “key to starting the process of repealing the death penalty”.

The government softened its stance in the past few years by recategorizing the death penalty in the Criminal Code revision bill as an "alternative punishment" that could be commuted to life imprisonment if the convict showed good behavior. However, the draft’s deliberation has progressed at a snail's pace. (ipa)

Iran drug law change could spare thousands on death row

Source: BBC News (10 January 2018)

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-42634252

Thousands of Iranians who have been sentenced to death for drug crimes could be spared following a softening in the country's law.

Capital punishment has been abolished for some drug offences, and the head of the judiciary has said all cases on death row can be reviewed.

The move is set to be applied retroactively, meaning some 5,000 prisoners could escape execution.

Iran executes hundreds of people every year, mostly for drug offences.

In August, Iran's parliament raised the threshold on the amount of drugs that would be considered a capital offence.

Under the previous law, possessing 30g of cocaine would trigger the death penalty but that has been increased to 2kg (4.4lb). The limit on opium and marijuana has been increased tenfold to 50kg.

Judiciary chief Ayatollah Sadegh Larijani told local media that most death sentences would be reduced to extended jail terms.

Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, from Iran Human Rights (IHR), an independent NGO based in Norway, welcomed the law change.

"If implemented properly, this change in law will represent one of the most significant steps towards reduction in the use of the death penalty worldwide," he told the BBC.

But he expressed concern that those on death row might not be able to take advantage.

"Since most of those sentenced to death for drug offences belong to the most marginalised parts of Iranian society, it is not given that they have the knowledge and resources to apply for commuting their sentence," he said.

Human rights group Amnesty International also welcomed the news, but said it would like to see further progress.

"The Iranian authorities must stop using the death penalty for drug-related offences, with a view to eventually abolishing it for all crimes," a spokeswoman said.

"There are currently an estimated 5,000 people on death row for such offences across the country. About 90% of them are first-time offenders aged between 20 and 30 years old."

The group quoted an official who said that, since 1988, Iran had executed 10,000 people for drug crimes.

In 2016, Iran's then justice minister said he was looking for an "effective punishment" for criminals instead of execution. Mostafa Pourmohammadi said he thought the number of capital crimes should be revised and the death penalty kept for "corrupt people".

Pakistan Christians face death for 'blasphemy'

Pakistani Christian Asia Bibi 'has price on her head'
By Orla Guerin
From: BBC News, Punjab province
7 December 2010

Ashiq Masih has the look of a hunted man - gaunt, anxious and exhausted.

Though he is guilty of nothing, this Pakistani labourer is on the run - with his five children.

His wife, Asia Bibi, has been sentenced to death for blaspheming against Islam. That is enough to make the entire family a target.

They stay hidden by day, so we met them after dark.

Mr Masih told us they move constantly, trying to stay one step ahead of the anonymous callers who have been menacing them.

"I ask who they are, but they refuse to tell me," he said.

"They say 'we'll deal with you if we get our hands on you'. Now everyone knows about us, so I am hiding my kids here and there. I don't allow them to go out. Anyone can harm them," he added.

Ashiq Masih says his daughters still cry for their mother and ask if she will be home in time for Christmas.

He insists that Asia Bibi is innocent and will be freed, but he worries about what will happen next.

"When she comes out, how she can live safely?" he asks.

"No one will let her live. The mullahs are saying they will kill her when she comes out.

"Asia Bibi, an illiterate farm worker from rural Punjab, is the first woman sentenced to hang under Pakistan's controversial blasphemy law.

'Old score'
As well as the death penalty hanging over her, Asia Bibi now has a price on her head.

A radical cleric has promised 500,000 Pakistani rupees (£3,700; $5,800) to anyone prepared to "finish her". He suggested that the Taliban might be happy to do it.

Asia Bibi's troubles began in June 2009 in her village, Ittan Wali, a patchwork of lush fields and dusty streets.

Hers was the only Christian household. She was picking berries alongside local Muslim women, when a row developed over sharing water.

Days later, the women claimed she had insulted the Prophet Muhammad. Soon, Asia Bibi was being pursued by a mob.

"In the village they tried to put a noose around my neck, so that they could kill me," she said in a brief appearance outside her jail cell.

Anarchy threat
Asia Bibi says she was falsely accused to settle an old score. That is often the case with the blasphemy law, critics say.

At the village mosque, we found no mercy for her.

The imam, Qari Mohammed Salim, told us he cried with joy when sentence was passed on Asia Bibi.

He helped to bring the case against her and says she will be made to pay, one way or the other.

"If the law punishes someone for blasphemy, and that person is pardoned, then we will also take the law in our hands," he said.

Her case has provoked concern abroad, with Pope Benedict XVI joining the calls for her release.

In Pakistan, Islamic parties have been out on the streets, threatening anarchy if she is freed, or if there is any attempt to amend the blasphemy law.

Under Pakistan's penal code, anyone who "defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet" can be punished by death or life imprisonment. Death sentences have always been overturned on appeal.

Human right groups and Christian organisations want the law abolished.

"It was designed as an instrument of persecution," says Ali Hasan Dayan, of Human Rights Watch in Pakistan. "It's discriminatory and abusive."

'Hanging sword'
While most of those charged under the law are Muslims, campaigners say it is an easy tool for targeting minorities, in this overwhelmingly Muslim state.

"It is a hanging sword on the neck of all minorities, especially Christians," says Shahzad Kamran, of the Sharing Life Ministry, which ministers to prisoners, including Asia Bibi.

"In our churches, homes and workplaces we feel fear," he says.

"It's very easy to make this accusation because of a grudge, or for revenge. Anyone can accuse you.

"Even our little children are afraid that if they say something wrong at school, they will be charged with blasphemy.

"Asia Bibi's story has sparked a public debate in Pakistan about reforming the law, but it is a touchy - and risky - subject which many politicians would prefer to ignore.

Campaigners fear that the talk about reform of the blasphemy laws will amount to no more than that.

Beheading threat
When Pakistan's Minister for Minorities, Shahbaz Bhatti, raised the issue six months ago, he was threatened with death.

"I was told I could be beheaded if I proposed any change," he told us.

"But I am committed to the principle of justice for the people of Pakistan. I am ready to die for this cause, and I will not compromise".

Mr Bhatti, himself a Christian, hopes that Asia Bibi will win an appeal to the High Court, or be pardoned by Pakistan's President Asif Ali Zardari.

He says she is one of dozens of innocent people who are accused every year.

"I will go to every knock for justice on her behalf and I will take all steps for her protection".

But even behind bars Asia Bibi may not be safe.

Several people accused of blasphemy have been killed in jail.

Thirty-four people connected with blasphemy cases have been killed since the law was hardened in 1986, according to Pakistan's Justice and Peace Commission, a Catholic campaign group.

The death toll includes those accused, their relatives, and even a judge.

In a neglected graveyard by a railway track in the city of Faisalabad, we found two of the latest victims of the blasphemy law.

'Electric shock'
They are brothers, buried side by side, together in death, as they were in life.

Rashid Emmanuel was a pastor.

His brother, Sajid, was an MBA student. They were gunned down in July during their trial - inside a courthouse, in handcuffs and in police custody.

Relatives, who asked not to be identified, said the blasphemy charges were brought because of a land dispute.

After the killings, the extended family had to leave home and move to another city. They say they will be moving again soon.

"We don't feel safe," one relative told us.

"We are shocked, like an electric shock. We are going from one place to another to defend ourselves, and secure our family members.

"Once a month they come to the cemetery to pray at the graves of their lost loved ones.

They are too frightened to visit more often.

They bow their heads and mourn for two men who they say were killed for nothing - except being Christian.

Pakistan: "Extreme" blasphemy laws need reform

An instrument of abuse?
by annie on 11 26th, 2010
From: Dawn.com

The death sentence handed down to Pakistani Christian woman Aasia Bibi by a court in Punjab province's Nankana district has once again brought attention to Pakistan’s blasphemy laws. And while the 45-year-old mother of five awaits a review of the verdict against her, questions are being raised regarding the intent behind and utility of the said laws.

While the Constitution of Pakistan criminalises "deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage" the religious sentiments of "any" community, the blasphemy laws, in the form of additions to Sections 295 and 298 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), proceed to recommend much more exacting penalties, including death, if the accused is found to be either disrespectful toward or critical of the Quran, Prophet Mohammad, Islam’s caliphs and other important figures mentioned in the statutes. These particular laws therefore do not stand up for religions other than Islam thereby rendering defenceless other religious communities. Moreover, the laws' provisions pertaining to the Ahmedi community in many ways constrain them from practicing their religion. Forbidden from calling themselves, or "posing" as, Muslims, the legislation makes abundantly clear, albeit circuitously, that their faith should not be what it is.

It was in the early 1980s and during the regime of former military dictator Ziaul Haq that committing blasphemy was made a penal offence under the PPC. In its current state, the law prescribes a jail term for anyone found disrespectful toward the Quran and death penalty for anyone found to be reproachful of Prophet Mohammad. Oddly enough, while the question of intent is not considered when it comes to the latter offence, it continues to remain punishable by nothing short of the death penalty. The blasphemy laws also prescribe a fine and a prison term with regard to penal offences associated with the Ahmedi community.

Having survived for nearly three decades in its current and extreme form, the blasphemy laws have so far escaped all reform due to opposition from religio-political groups. At the same time, other, essentially secular, political groups have been succumbing to these hardline forces mostly out of fear of losing clout in regions with conservative leanings and where religious organisations seem to enjoy a considerable degree of influence. Even at this point, with the international community ramping up pressure on the government to pardon Aasia and to eventually repeal the blasphemy laws, certain otherwise antagonistic clerics from the Barelvi and Deobandi schools of thought have come together to caution President Asif Ali Zardari over going ahead with the pardon saying the move may lead to "untoward repercussions".

While the sentencing of Aasia has led to much international uproar, hers is just one of the many cases which have led to blasphemy convictions by the courts. Moreover, many of the blasphemy accused – mostly from the unprotected religious minority groups – have been targeted and sometimes killed by lynch mobs. The still recent killing of two Christian brothers in Faisalabad, the case of Zaibunnisa who remained incarcerated for 14 long years on blasphemy allegations and the violence that targeted Christians in Gojra in 2009 are just some of the recently reported instances which clearly depict how such laws have effectively abandoned the country's religious minorities and emboldened extremists.

These and similar other incidents have inevitably led to questions pertaining to the rationale behind the laws as well as to their outcome in terms of greater social good. And while the laws are frequently used to blackmail and victimise Pakistan's miniscule religious minorities, they also come in handy by those wanting to settle personal scores, sort business rivalries and tackle land disputes with other Muslims. Rights groups have continually demanded that the laws be repealed and have referred to the statutes as fundamentally unjust and discriminatory in nature.

Moreover, legal experts and analysts have frequently termed the text of the laws as vague and even flawed in ways that make it a ready instrument of abuse. Incompatible with the universally accepted human rights charter, the laws and their application also stand in clear violation of the Constitution of Pakistan which guarantees every citizen the "right to profess, practice and propagate" his/her religion and in fact forbids the state from making "any law which takes away" the citizens' fundamental rights.

Given the fact that the blasphemy laws have only served to fuel disharmony and strife in society, a thorough review of the legislation, followed by significant changes to it, can be the first small step toward countering the culture of exploitation that has become all-too-synonymous with these laws.

Qurat ul ain Siddiqui is the Desk Editor at Dawn.com

Pakistan: Filthy Business

by Ali Dayan Hasan
Human Rights Watch

Published in: Dawn

November 15, 2010

WHAT on earth did Aasia Bibi do to merit the dubious distinction of becoming the first woman in Pakistan to be sentenced to death for blasphemy? Basically, she, a Christian, and a peasant to boot, had the gall to feel insulted.

Why? Because Aasia's fellow workers, all daily wage farmhands from the village of Ittanwali in Sheikhupura district, claimed that the water she served was ‘unclean' because of her faith.

Aasia Bibi dared express her outrage at this act of brazen prejudice, maintained that her faith was as good as any and refused to convert to Islam. Up to that point, this was a minor altercation brought on perhaps by a combination of ignorance and blazing tempers due to excessive, underpaid toil in the blistering summer heat.

But little did Aasia Bibi know that life was never going to be the same again after the events of that day in June 2009. A few days later, her perfectly sane reaction resulted, as is often the case, in a frenzied mob led by a local mullah attempting to attack her for blasphemy and the police taking her into ‘protective custody'. And depressingly, as is the case equally often, once in their custody, the police found it expedient to charge Aasia under the heinous Section 295 C of the Pakistan Penal Code otherwise known as the blasphemy law rather than hold accountable those who threatened her life.

Thereafter, Aasia rapidly made the journey from police lockup in Nankana to under-trial prisoner at Sheikhupura District Jail.Aasia Bibi's case is so unremarkable, so commonplace, so routine in its casually callous violation of basic rights that it did not even register in the public consciousness. And, of course, it is no secret that the belief that Christians, and non-Muslims in general, are ‘unclean', though not propagated by any known school of Islamic thought, has widespread currency, particularly in Punjab. In all likelihood, the police felt the mob was justified. There is a thin line between faith-based lack of hygiene and blasphemy goes this logic. And it is crossed if you refuse to view your faith as filth.

But Pakistan's lower-level judiciary managed through a shockingly bigoted judgment passed on Nov 7 to bring Aasia Bibi's case to centre stage. In sentencing Aasia Bibi to death under Section 295 C, Judge Naveed Iqbal of the Sheikhupura district and sessions court "totally ruled out" any chance that Aasia was falsely implicated and said there were "no mitigating circumstances". Apparently, the court thought that it is absolutely fine to argue that Christians are simply unclean and if they respond by accusing the allegers of bigotry, they are guilty of blasphemy.

The Sheikhupura district and sessions court judgment highlights to the world what anyone who has ever traversed the muddy waters of Pakistan's law-enforcement and judicial system knows all too well: the investigative capacity of the police is virtually non-existent and the police habitually caves in to Islamist-inspired mobs in the name of ‘preserving public order', particularly when it comes to vendettas against religious minorities. Too often, the lower-level judiciary lacks the training to adjudicate within the framework of the law and frequently brings its own political and social prejudices to bear in its approach to the law.

It is a sobering thought that, in contrast to the two-year training programme offered to civil servants, district judges receive barely a fortnight of orientation. These judges are meant to dispense justice without any training in judicial ethics and conduct, interpretation and application of the law, or even the basics of judgment writing. And there are complaints that they lack the staple of a proper judiciary: the capacity to dispense justice devoid of personal prejudice.

While Pakistan's independent judiciary engages in constitutional nit-picking with the legislature and the executive, it has singularly failed to meaningfully address what should be its highest priority - putting its own house in order to ensure that there is meaningful justice delivered where it is most urgently needed, at the local level.

And finally, there is the issue of Section 295 C itself. It is ironic that the jurisprudence in favour of the controversial provision has uniformly argued that Section 295-C achieves the declared objective of preventing vigilante justice. The argument suggests that the blasphemy law prevents private citizens from killing blasphemy suspects because it offers them legal routes to carry out the persecution they intend. This argument is fallacious, morally reprehensible and seeks through legalised discrimination to relieve the state of its duty as non-partisan guarantor of the citizens' security.

Not only is 295 C in violation of both international norms and the fundamental rights' provisions of the Pakistani constitution, its vague all-encompassing wording allows it to be used as an instrument of political and social coercion and discrimination against some of the most disempowered sections of society - religious minorities, heterodox Muslims and the poor.

The obscene consequences of the blasphemy laws have been evident for decades now through the continued criminalisation and persecution of those the state ought to actually be protecting. Human Rights Watch has long argued that Sections 295 and 298 of the Pakistan Penal Code ought to be repealed in totality. Failure to repeal makes successive governments, and the state itself, complicit in heinous discrimination and egregious human rights abuse."

So long as the state continues to act as a sectarian, partisan actor and the judiciary continues to uphold discriminatory laws and provide legal justifications for the misplaced values they enshrine, there will be many more victims like Aasia Bibi silently suffering in the shadows.

The writer is Senior South Asia Analyst for the New York-based Human Rights Watch.

Drugs and death: Major new study released

IHRA launches 'The Death Penalty for Drug Offences: Global Overview 2010' report
17 May 2010

The International Harm Reduction Association released a study on the death penalty for drug offences today on the opening day of the 19th session of the UN Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, taking place in Vienna. The report, titled ‘The Death Penalty for Drug Offences: Global Overview 2010’, finds that hundreds of people are executed for drug offences each year around the world, a figure that very likely exceeds one thousand when taking into account those countries that keep their death penalty statistics secret.

The report is the first detailed country by country overview of the death penalty for drugs, monitoring both national legislation and state practice of enforcement. Of the states worldwide that retain the death penalty, 32 jurisdictions maintain laws that prescribe the death penalty for drug offences. The study also found that in some states, drug offenders make up a significant portion – if not the outright majority – of those sentenced to death and/or executed each year.

Direct link to the report. (Please note 2.42MB file.)

Interview with Australian Attorney-General

ATTORNEY-GENERAL
ROBERT McCLELLAND MP

INTERVIEW
ABC NEWS RADIO DRIVE WITH JOHN BARRON
FRIDAY, 12 MARCH 2010

[....]

BARRON: Now, on a separate issue while we have you Attorney-General, the Federal Parliament late yesterday, passed a law which - the way it's being reported is saying that it's kind of outlawed the death penalty for all time, stopping it being reintroduced. What actual change came about yesterday on that?

McCLELLAND: Well, we have introduced legislation at a Federal level that will prevent the death penalty from being introduced in a State or Territory. And certainly unless or until a Federal Parliament subsequently overturned the law that was passed yesterday, there will be a prohibition on the death penalty being introduced in Australia.

So it was an historic day in many ways, if only to declare to the rest of the world as a nation, indeed each and every member of Parliament who spoke from both sides spoke in favour of prohibiting the death penalty. So that was a significant thing and a reflection of the views of modern Australian representatives.

BARRON: Has there been any suggestion or pressure to bring it back, particularly with the possibility of maybe terrorist trials, that kind of thing?

McCLELLAND: No, I think the bipartisan attitude around Australia has been that we don't want the death penalty to be part of our criminal justice system, and that's been reflected in the views which have been very constructive.

[....]

BARRON: Good to talk to you. Thanks very much.

McCLELLAND: That's my pleasure.

[Ends]

Australia: Laws passed to outlaw death penalty, torture

ATTORNEY-GENERAL
ROBERT McCLELLAND MP
11 March 2010

PASSAGE OF LEGISLATION TO PROHIBIT TORTURE AND THE DEATH PENALTY

Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, today welcomed the passage of legislation through Parliament which prohibits the use of torture and ensures that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future.

The Crimes Legislation Amendment (Torture Prohibition and Death Penalty Abolition) Bill 2009 implements a specific Commonwealth offence of torture into the Commonwealth Criminal Code which will operate concurrently with existing State and Territory offences.

"Introducing a specific Commonwealth offence of torture will fulfil Australia's obligations under the United Nations Convention Against Torture to ban all acts of torture, wherever they occur," Mr McClelland said.

The Bill also amends the Commonwealth Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973 to extend the application of the current Commonwealth prohibition on the death penalty to State laws.

This amendment will safeguard Australia's ongoing compliance with the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which requires all necessary measures be taken to ensure that no one is subject to the death penalty.

"Successive Australian Governments have maintained a long-standing policy of opposition to the death penalty. The passage of this Bill will ensure that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future."

These reforms demonstrate the Australian Parliament's fundamental opposition to acts that are contrary to basic human values and underline the Rudd Government’s ongoing commitment to meeting our international human rights obligations.


Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, today welcomed the passage of legislation through Parliament which prohibits the use of torture and ensures that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future.

The Crimes Legislation Amendment (Torture Prohibition and Death Penalty Abolition) Bill 2009 implements a specific Commonwealth offence of torture into the Commonwealth Criminal Code which will operate concurrently with existing State and Territory offences.

"Introducing a specific Commonwealth offence of torture will fulfil Australia's obligations under the United Nations Convention Against Torture to ban all acts of torture, wherever they occur," Mr McClelland said.

The Bill also amends the Commonwealth Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973 to extend the application of the current Commonwealth prohibition on the death penalty to State laws.

This amendment will safeguard Australia's ongoing compliance with the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which requires all necessary measures be taken to ensure that no one is subject to the death penalty.

"Successive Australian Governments have maintained a long-standing policy of opposition to the death penalty. The passage of this Bill will ensure that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future."

These reforms demonstrate the Australian Parliament's fundamental opposition to acts that are contrary to basic human values and underline the Rudd Government's ongoing commitment to meeting our international human rights obligations.

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

South Korea: "Lost opportunity" to abolish death penalty

Statement from The Anti Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN)
25 Feb, 2010

South Korea: ADPAN regrets the Constitutional Court decision to uphold the death penalty

The Anti Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) that is currently attending the 4th World Congress against the Death Penalty in Geneva regrets today's decision by South Korea’s Constitutional Court to uphold the death penalty.

In a five to four ruling, the Constitutional Court stated that death penalty did not violate "human dignity and worth" protected in the Constitution.

South Korea has lost an opportunity to lead on abolition in the region. This decision now goes against a general worldwide trend towards abolition. More than 70 per cent of countries have a moratorium on executions or have abolished the death penalty. It is particularly disappointing given South Korea has not executed in over 12 years and has joined many other countries in the world that have become abolitionist in practice. There are currently 57 people on the death row in South Korea.

Asia holds the record for the highest number of executions in the world. ADPAN representing a regional voice for abolition calls on South Korean government to take a lead and follow other countries in the region that have abolished death penalty: the Philippines in 2006 and the Cooke Islands in 2007.

The Anti Death Penalty Asia Network(ADPAN) is a cross-regional network made up of over 40 members including lawyers, NGOs and human rights activists from 22 countries. Members are attending 4th World Congress against the Death Penalty which is being held in Geneva from 24 – 26 February.

Australian laws to ban death penalty

ATTORNEY-GENERAL
ROBERT McCLELLAND MP
20 February 2010

STATEMENT ON THE DEATH PENALTY

Successive Australian Governments have maintained a long-standing policy of opposition to the death penalty.

The death penalty has been formally abolished by all jurisdictions in Australia.

It was abolished for Commonwealth and Territory offences in 1973 by the Commonwealth Death Penalty Abolition Act.

Each State has also independently and separately abolished the death penalty and there are no proposals by any State Government to reinstate it.

The Australian Government has also introduced legislation – which has been supported by the Opposition – to amend the Death Penalty Abolition Act to extend the application of the current Commonwealth prohibition on the death penalty to State laws.

The passage of this comprehensive federal legislation, which is currently being debated in the Parliament, will ensure that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future.

Internationally, Australia is also a party to both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Second Optional Protocol which requires all necessary measures be taken to ensure that no one is subject to the death penalty.

China: Guidelines for executions and "mercy"

China issues guidelines to limit death penalty use
From: Xinhua, 9 February 2010

BEIJING, Feb. 9 (Xinhua) -- China's Supreme People's Court (SPC) said Tuesday it had issued guidelines for courts nationwide to handle criminal cases with a policy of "justice tempered with mercy," stressing that death penalty use be limited.

The guidelines say the death penalty should be "resolutely" handed down to those who have committed "extremely serious" crimes, but that the punishment should be reserved for the tiny minority of criminals against which there is valid and ample evidence.

The guidelines also say that capital punishment reprieves should be granted for as long as they are allowed by law.

The guidelines are an interpretation of the "justice tempered with mercy" policy and details on the judicial principles used when handling criminal cases, SPC spokesman Sun Jungong said.

The "justice tempered with mercy" policy was first enacted in a document approved in 2006 by the Sixth Plenary Session of the 16th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC).

The policy required courts to issue both severe and lenient sentences, depending on the seriousness of each crime.

According to the guidelines, crimes involving officials taking advantage of their position and mafia-style gangs should be handled "with severity."

Severity should also be applied to repeat offenders.

On the other hand, the document says minors and senior citizens who commit crimes should be punished with leniency.

Commutation and paroles for ex-officials who took advantage of their public position, especially those at county-level or above, are required to be heard at court.

Commutations for criminals convicted of major crimes like murder and robbery are to be strictly limited, the guidlines say.

Australia: Abolition bill introduced in parliament

ATTORNEY-GENERAL
HON ROBERT McCLELLAND MP
SECOND READING
CRIMES LEGISLATION AMENDMENT(TORTURE PROHIBITION AND DEATH PENALTY ABOLITION) BILL
THURSDAY, 19 NOVEMBER 2009

I am pleased to introduce the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Torture Prohibition and Death Penalty Abolition) Bill 2009.

The Bill contains two key measures.

First, it enacts a specific Commonwealth torture offence in the Commonwealth Criminal Code, to operate concurrently with existing offences in State and Territory criminal laws.

Second, it amends the Commonwealth Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973 to extend the application of the current prohibition on the death penalty to State laws, to ensure the death penalty cannot be introduced anywhere in Australia.

The overarching purpose behind these amendments is, in the spirit of engagement with international human rights mechanisms, to ensure that Australia complies fully with its international obligations to combat torture and to demonstrate our commitment to the worldwide abolitionist movement.

[Speech addresses the abolition of torture aspects of the bill]

Abolition of the Death Penalty
Australia has a long-standing policy of opposition to the death penalty. Australia is a party to both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Second Optional Protocol to the Covenant Aiming at the Abolition of the Death Penalty.

The ICCPR only permits the death penalty for the 'most serious crimes'. The Second Optional Protocol goes further and requires Australia to take all necessary measures to abolish the death penalty within its jurisdiction and to ensure that no one within its jurisdiction is subject to the death penalty.

The death penalty has been formally abolished in all jurisdictions in Australia.

It was first abolished for Commonwealth and Territory offences in 1973, by the Commonwealth Death Penalty Abolition Act. Each State has independently and separately abolished the death penalty, and there are no proposals by any State or Territory Government to reinstate the death penalty.

The purpose of the legislation is to extend the application of the current prohibition on the death penalty to State laws. This will ensure that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future.

The amendments emphasise Australia's commitment to our obligations under the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and ensure that Australia continues to comply with those obligations.

Such a comprehensive rejection of capital punishment will also demonstrate Australia’s commitment to the worldwide abolitionist movement, and complement Australia’s international lobbying efforts against the death penalty.

In summary, this Bill contains important measures which again demonstrate this Government's ongoing commitment to better recognise Australia's international human rights obligations.

I therefore commend the Bill to the House.

Australia acts to outlaw death penalty

Media release from Robert McClelland, Attorney-General of Australia
19 November 2009

AUSTRALIA TAKES ACTION AGAINST TORTURE AND THE DEATH PENALTY

Attorney-General Robert McClelland today introduced the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Torture Prohibition and Death Penalty Abolition) Bill 2009.

The Bill implements a specific Commonwealth offence of torture into the Commonwealth Criminal Code.

The new offence will operate concurrently with existing offences in State and Territory laws.

"Introducing a specific Commonwealth offence of torture will more clearly fulfil Australia's obligations under the United Nations Convention Against Torture to ban all acts of torture, wherever they occur," Mr McClelland said.

The Bill also amends the Commonwealth Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973 to extend the application of the current prohibition on the death penalty to State laws, to ensure the death penalty cannot be introduced anywhere in Australia.

The Bill was developed in consultation with the States and Territories.

Amending the Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973 to cover State laws will safeguard Australia's ongoing compliance with the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights aiming at the Abolition of the Death Penalty.

"It will ensure the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia in the future," Mr McClelland said.

"The purpose of these amendments is to ensure that Australia complies fully with its international obligations to combat torture and to demonstrate our commitment to the worldwide movement for the abolition of the death penalty."

"Taking these steps demonstrates our fundamental opposition to acts that are contrary to basic human values."

Japan: Will new minister cut hangings?

New DPJ Cabinet might slow down executions
Kyodo News

From The Japan Times online
24 September 2009

With the inauguration of the new government led by the Democratic Party of Japan, there could be a lull in executions of death-row inmates, at least for the time being. Recent years have seen accelerated hangings under Liberal Democratic Party-led governments.

Political commentators have taken particular notice of the appointment of Upper House member Keiko Chiba as justice minister. She opposes capital punishment and belongs to the nonpartisan Parliamentary League for the Abolition of the Death Penalty. The justice minister has the final say in authorizing executions.

Any move toward carrying out executions could also trigger resistance from other members of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama's Cabinet. Shizuka Kamei, leader of the People's New Party, leads the anti-death penalty league, and Mizuho Fukushima, leader of the Social Democratic Party, also is staunchly opposed to capital punishment.

After the Cabinet was seated on Wednesday, Chiba said at her inaugural news conference that it is her "personal feeling that it would be good" if there were moves toward a moratorium on executions or abolition of the death penalty.

But she added: "The fact remains that the justice minister is tasked with professional duties under the law. I am fully aware (that a justice minister) is obliged institutionally to deal with executions."

Said Toyo Atsumi, a professor of criminal procedure at Kyoto Sangyo University's law school, "If (a minister) avoids executions when the institution of execution exists, there will be no rule of law. I am sure Justice Minister Chiba is fully aware of that and if executions are to be done away with, it must be after (relevant) revisions to the law have been made."

Nobuto Hosaka, secretary general of the death penalty opponents' parliamentary league, is hopeful about the new justice minister. "I would think she will probably institute a moratorium. No doubt a brake will be put on executions," he said.

The ministry itself was noncommittal. "For the time being, various matters will come under review and a judgment will probably be made after fully considering the circumstances," a spokesman said.
The Code of Criminal Procedure provides that the justice minister order an execution within six months after a death sentence is finalized. Not all ministers, however, have signed execution orders.

Japan saw a lull in executions for three years and four months starting in November 1989. That period included Megumu Sato's term as justice minister from 1990 to 1991. A Buddhist monk, Sato refused to sign execution orders, citing his faith.

Masaharu Gotoda restarted executions in March 1993. Since then almost all justice ministers, except for those serving brief stints, have ordered executions. A notable exception was Seiken Sugiura, who assumed the justice minister's post in October 2005.

At his inaugural press conference, Sugiura openly said he would not sign an execution order on religious and philosophical grounds but retracted the statement one hour later. During his nearly one-year tenure, however, he never signed an execution order.

Since then, the number of people on death row has grown to around 100, and executions also have risen.

Among recent justice ministers, Kunio Hatoyama signed orders for 13 executions, while his predecessor, Jinen Nagano, signed 10.

Taiwanese group stirs debate on abolition

A Taiwanese abolitionist group has encouraged the government to set an example in Asia by abolishing the death penalty and is holding a series of events to promote debate on the issue.

The Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP) staged a concert on 10 October, the World Day Against the Death Penalty, to promote its campaign and next month it will hold a series of international forums on criminal code reform.

Taiwan was one of six countries chosen by the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty (WCADP) for the day of action, and human rights campaigners worldwide encouraged the government to introduce a moratorium on executions.

The TAEDP pointed to global trends against the death penalty and recent statements by senior government leaders.

"Abolishing the death penalty is actually a global trend," said TAEDP executive director Lin Hsin-yi (林欣怡) on the World Day, according to the Taipei Times.

"We've seen too many cases around the world in which people are found innocent only after they were executed — There is unfortunately no chance of reversing the sentence for them."

She said there were positive signs Taiwan could play a leading role in abolition across Asia.

"There has been no execution at all in Taiwan for nearly three years, and there are already debates on the topic," she said.

"We think there’s a hope, especially because Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng [王清峰] has openly spoken against the death penalty and President Ma Ying-jeou [馬英九] hinted so as well during the [presidential] campaign."

Wang has said she supported abolition and Ma campaigned on a promise to uphold international human rights standards.

"Although Ma did not say it clearly, ending the death penalty is one of the ideas outlined in these documents," Lin said.

Partnerships stimulate debate
Next month the TAEDP will hold forums with experts from three European countries to share perspectives on abolition and inform debate about reform.

The Taipei Times reported the first forum on 3 November would hear from two leading French lawyers, who would speak about reform of the criminal code and international law.

The event is being organised in conjunction with the French office in Taiwan, the National Taipei University and the Taiwan Law Society, with support from the European Economic and Trade Office.

"The objective of Taiwan's Criminal Code is to re-educate and reform prisoners, not to kill them," a TAEDP volunteer told the Taipei Times.

German academics will discuss abolition, social safety, victim protection and prison reform at a seminar on 6 and 7 November, organised by the TAEDP and the German Institute in Taipei.

Death penalty experts from Great Britain will address the process of ending the death penalty on 13 and 14 November.

Related stories:
Life Watch to save Taiwan's innocent from death -- 12 February 2008
Torment on Taiwan's death row -- 15 May 2007
Taiwan limits mandatory penalties -- 29 January 2007
Abolition debate for Taiwan in 2007 -- 12 January 2007
Taiwan: Death penalty benefit an 'illusion' -- 14 December 2006
Taiwan working towards abolition? -- 21 February 2006

Asia death penalty in decline: Researcher

An expert in the use of the death penalty across Asia has said that "in the long run" it will probably disappear in the region, in line with trends in the rest of the world.

Professor David Johnson from the University of Hawai'i told the Associated Press there had been dramatic declines in the number of executions in Asia, and he expected a trend towards abolition as the death penalty became increasingly seen as a human rights issue.

"I think in the long run, probably the death penalty is going to disappear in Asia as it seems to be doing in many parts of the rest of the world," he said.

He pointed to reductions in the number of executions in China and Singapore, two leading executing states, and Pakistan's proposal to commute the death sentences of about 6,000 prisoners.

The death penalty was being viewed more as a human rights issue, rather than an issue of criminal justice, which tended to undermine public confidence in it as a form of punishment.

Professor Johnson said "the frame that regards the death penalty as a human rights issue has become more conspicuous and salient in Asia than it was in the past".

"And when you frame the death penalty as a human rights issue instead of a crime issue, you invite anxiety and concern and resistance to the death penalty because, after all, it's a state killing," he said.

While the death penalty was strongest in authoritarian states, even there its use was in decline.

"The most dramatic execution decreases occurred in the rapidly developing democracies of South Korea and Taiwan, but declines have also occurred in nations such as India and Malaysia," he said.

"When development and plural democracy take root in Asia, the decline of the death penalty usually comes sooner rather than later."

A book on the death penalty in Asia, co-written by Professor Johnson, will be published later this year.

He was visiting Australia this month to speak on the death penalty at Griffith University and the Australian National University.

Viet Nam: Reduction in death penalty offences?

Viet Nam is considering a further reduction in the number of crimes that attract the death penalty, according to a report last week by China's Xinhua newsagency.

The Vietnam News reportedly said on 15 July that the Ministry of Public Security had proposed the death penalty be removed from 12 offences.

Xinhua's report said the proposal would amend Article 35 of the Criminal Code, which provides for the death penalty.

The changes would limit its use to "only those committing the most heinous crimes and people considered to be a serious danger to the community and the nation's security".

The 12 offences included:

• appropriating property by fraud
• smuggling
• producing and trading fake goods and medical products
• being involved in producing, storing and circulating counterfeit money, bonds and checks
• organising the illegal use of drugs
• hijacking planes or ships
• corruption
• taking and giving bribes
• destroying army weapons or technical equipment
• being involved in an invasion
• "anti-human crimes", and
• war crimes.

Gradual reductions
Human rights campaigners have long urged Viet Nam to reduce the scope of the death penalty.

After increasing the number of capital offences to 44 in 1992, Viet Nam reduced it to 29 offences in July 1999.

In April this year, Amnesty International said there were at least 25 known executions in Viet Nam in 2007, which placed it fourth on the list of the top executioners in the world.

Xinhua said Viet Nam sentenced 116 people to death in 2006 and 95 in 2007.

Dramatic increase but positive signs
In June 2006, an Amnesty International alert said there had been a "dramatic increase in Viet Nam's use of the death penalty, especially for drug-related crimes".

"Concern about the use of the death penalty in Viet Nam is compounded by the routine unfairness of trials that do not conform to international standards," the organisation said.

However, it said there were "some positive signs that the death penalty is being discussed within the Vietnamese government".

Related stories:
Drug penalty violates international law -- 06 May, 2007
Viet Nam death penalty "not deterring drugs" -- 25 November, 2006
Asia leads the world's known executions -- 15 April, 2008
20,000 waiting to be killed -- 23 April, 2006

China’s deadly world record under attack

With five months to go until the Beijing Olympic Games, anti-death penalty campaigners are ramping up the pressure on the Chinese government - and ultimately the Olympic movement - to deliver on promises of human rights reform.

The World Coalition against the Death Penalty (WCADP) and the Anti Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) today issued an open letter to the upcoming National People's Congress, urging it to ensure it "takes concrete steps towards the abolition of the death penalty in China".

The World Coalition is also encouraging people to sign a petition calling for an end to the secrecy surrounding China's use of the death penalty, and an immediate moratorium on executions.

Activists point to estimates of up to 8,000 executions in China last year, with thousands more sentenced to death by a substantially flawed justice system. The death penalty is applied to 68 offences in China, including non-violent economic and drug-related crimes.

The hidden world record
The open letter welcomes last year's restoration of Supreme Court review of all death sentences in China, and notes official claims there has been a corresponding significant drop in the number of executions.

"However, full national statistics on the application of the death penalty remain classified as a state secret in China," it says.

"It will only be possible for Chinese scholars and other independent observers to assess the impact of this reform if China publishes these statistics in full."

The letter urges the National People's Congress to amend state secrets laws at this session to allow the release of death penalty related information. It says this is needed both to allow debate about the death penalty and to provide "procedural openness" in individual capital cases.

The secrecy surrounding individual cases, and problems for lawyers and families gaining access to suspects, is "of particular concern given the widespread use of torture or ill-treatment by police in China to obtain 'confessions' from suspects".

"As has been proven in China on several occasions in the past, hasty and unfair trials are likely to lead to miscarriages of justice, with innocent persons being executed for crimes they have not committed."

Flawed trials before death
Amnesty International reports in its campaign brochure, Legacy of the Beijing Olympics: Issues and facts, that China's justice system cannot guarantee a fair trial before a person is given the ultimate irreversible punishment of execution.

"No one who is sentenced to death in China receives a fair trial in accordance with international human rights standards," the brochure says.

"Failings include: lack of prompt access to lawyers, lack of presumption of innocence, political interference in the judiciary and failure to exclude evidence extracted under torture."

It says a number of cases recently reported in the Chinese press, including the case of Nie Shubin, "reveal that innocent people have been put to death in China due to such shortcomings in the system".

Amnesty International welcomes the restoration of Supreme Court review, but says "there is still concern that it would not expose serious human rights violations, such as torture to extract confessions, if evidence of such abuses had not been introduced during an earlier trial".

Race for money or dignity?
Human rights organisations have also continued their campaign for the government of China and the International Olympic Committee to show how they will meet their promises that awarding the games to Beijing will contribute to improvements in human rights.

In its brochure Legacy of the Beijing Olympics: China’s Choice, Amnesty International points out that in effect the Olympic movement claims to be a human rights movement.

"Olympism seeks to create a way of life based on the joy found in effort, the educational value of good example and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles." (Olympic Charter, Fundamental Principles of Olympism, paragraph 1)

Amnesty International says if "grave human rights violations are not being sufficiently addressed as part of the preparations for the Games, the International Olympic Committee is compelled to take action".

The brochure says Chinese authorities declared during their campaign to secure the games that "the human rights situation in China would improve if Beijing were chosen to host the games".

It quotes Wang Wei, Secretary General of the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games Bid Committee, as saying: "We are confident that the Games coming to China not only promotes our economy but also enhances all social conditions, including education, health and human rights."

Similarly, Mayor of Beijing Liu Qi, said in 2001: "[The Olympic Games] will help promote all economic and social projects and will also benefit the further development of our human rights cause."

Chinese authorities now have "a unique opportunity to honour the pledges they made to advance human rights if awarded host nation of the 2008 Summer Olympics".

"China’s international human rights commitments, as well as the spirit of Olympism which assert that “the practice of sport is a human right”, and avow respect for “universal fundamental ethical principles”, suggest that respect for human rights lies at the heart of the Olympic movement," the brochure says.

The World Coalition against the Death Penalty said it "would like to believe that the reforms to which the Chinese Government is pledged are not just a pre-Olympics PR operation".

"A country like China, which steadfastly likes to think that it is on the road to modernity and says that it is committed to the rule of law, is duty-bound to apply these commitments throughout the country."

One world, different dream
China, which is promoting the games under the slogan of "One World One Dream", is seriously out of step with the worldwide trend towards limiting and abolishing the use of the death penalty.

The country executes more people each year than the rest of the world combined, and was among the minority of countries that voted against a resolution calling for a United Nations moratorium on executions, passed by the UN General Assembly on 18 December 2007.

The World Coalition open letter was co-signed by 74 organisations from Europe, Africa, Asia, the Middle East and the Americas.

The signed petition will be delivered to Chinese authorities before the Olympic Games begin.

Related stories:
AI condemns China's expanded lethal injection -- 5 January, 2008
Party claims economic penalty 'prudent' -- 4 August, 2007
China: Courts claim fewer executions -- 31 July, 2007
China executes drug regulator -- 12 July, 2007
China call for cautious death penalty - again -- 8 April, 2007
China: Judges try to limit death penalty -- 14 November, 2006
China reforms good, but not enough -- 8 November, 2006
China: Supreme Court review from January -- 1 November, 2006
Political questions over China's new appeal judges -- 2 July, 2006
China to retain death penalty, with reforms -- 13 March 2006