Source: The Washington Post (2 February 2023)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/02/02/myanmar-military-generals-human-rights/
In the two years since Myanmar’s generals seized power, they have steered the country into one of the worst human rights disasters on the planet, with mass killings and detentions, torture, sexual violence and attacks on civilians. Attempts to stop them have so far failed — but there is more the United States can do.
On Feb. 1, 2021, Gen. Min Aung Hlaing grabbed power from a parliament elected the previous November in what had been an overwhelming victory for the National League For Democracy, led by Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi. She previously was de facto leader of a nascent democratic government in a power-sharing arrangement with the military. Since the coup, security forces in Myanmar, also known as Burma, have detained more than 17,600 pro-democracy activists, human rights defenders and their supporters and killed more than 2,900 civilians, according to the nongovernmental Assistance Association for Political Prisoners.
The military has waged indiscriminate ground and air attacks on civilians in villages. About 1.5 million people have been displaced. Not to be forgotten are the more than 940,000 Rohingya Muslims who fled to neighboring Bangladesh after a scorched-earth campaign the military launched in August 2017. A broad opposition, the National Unity Government, is fighting back, along with numerous ethnic groups.
To spread fear, the junta last year began using the death penalty, executing four political prisoners, the first executions of political prisoners in over three decades. In December, seven students and three others were sentenced to death after sham trials. In total, the junta has put at least 139 people on death row. After closed military trials on politically motivated charges, Aung San Suu Kyi was sentenced to 33 years in prison.
The junta has blocked humanitarian aid from reaching millions in need. A five-point “consensus” plan by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, which called for an end to violence and access for humanitarian relief, lies in ruins. The generals have called for an election in August — but with rules that will prolong the military’s control.
Congress recently boosted U.S. efforts to support democratic forces in Myanmar. On Tuesday, the United States, Canada, Britain and Australia imposed a new round of sanctions on the generals, some of them aimed at cutting off supplies of aviation fuel the military uses in aerial attacks on civilians. But the United States and its allies need to do more to liquidate a spider network of businesses and opaque financial deals that sustain the junta, including ties to China and Russia. A new report by the group Justice for Myanmar documented examples in which the junta drew support from 64 foreign governments and organizations. Sanctions and other tools could help take down these networks.
Myanmar’s agony should not slip out of sight. Action now might return the country to the democratic road on which it had previously embarked.
Showing posts with label resumption. Show all posts
Showing posts with label resumption. Show all posts
Saturday, 4 February 2023
Saturday, 6 August 2022
Families of Myanmar’s death row inmates live in fear of execution
Source: Radio Free Asia (4 August 2022)
https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/execution-08042022185223.html
The families of 77 political activists sentenced to death by Myanmar’s military junta say they live in fear that their loved ones will be executed without warning after the military regime hanged four prominent prisoners of conscience.
Frustration with the junta boiled over last week after it put to death veteran democracy activist Ko Jimmy and former opposition lawmaker Phyo Zeya Thaw, as well as activists Hla Myo Aung and Aung Thura Zaw, despite a direct appeal from Hun Sen to Min Aung Hlaing. The executions prompted protests in Myanmar and condemnation abroad.
On Thursday, the daughter of a 56-year-old former junta soldier sentenced to death for allegedly helping pro-democracy People’s Defense Force (PDF) paramilitaries told RFA Burmese that she can’t bear to think that her father might be executed at any point without her knowing.
"As a family member, there is no way I could accept that my father might die all of a sudden,” she said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
“They gave him the death sentence, but did he deserve it? He had no involvement [in the anti-junta protests]. I think it is completely unfair that he was given the death penalty just for planning to get involved.”
She claimed that her father was arrested by the military without having committed any crime and was sentenced to death by a military court without having the opportunity to defend himself legally.
She urged the junta to let her father serve out a life sentence in prison, noting that he is a veteran soldier who spent many years in the military.
Prior to last week, only three people had been executed in Myanmar in the past 50 years: student leader Salai Tin Maung Oo, who helped organize protests over the government’s refusal to grant a state funeral to former U.N. Secretary-General U Thant in 1974; Capt. Ohn Kyaw Myint, who was found guilty of an assassination plot on the life of dictator Gen. Ne Win; and Zimbo, a North Korean agent who bombed the Martyrs’ Mausoleum in Yangon in an attempted assassination of the visiting South Korean President Chin Doo-hwan in 1983.
In the more than 30 years between Myanmar’s 1988 democratic uprising and the military coup of Feb. 1, 2021, death sentences have been ordered, but no judicial executions were carried out. Thailand’s Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (AAPP) has said at least 77 people are currently sentenced to death in Myanmar.
Legality of execution
Legal experts have noted that only the country’s democratically elected head of state has the right to order an execution under existing laws.
Aung Thein, a High Court lawyer from Yangon, said coup leader Sr. Gen. Min Aung Hlaing considers himself Myanmar’s head of state and that carrying out the death penalty is his right.
“[The junta hasn’t] disposed of the 2008 [military-drafted] Constitution. It has only been suspended,” he said.
“Since they have said they are operating according to the 2008 Constitution, [Min Aung Hlaing] believes the responsibility of head of state falls to him. That's why he might be under the impression that he can order executions.”
A lawyer from Yangon, who asked not to be named for security reasons, said that the hanging of a person considered a political challenger to the military appears more like “revenge” than anything legally justifiable.
“Things have gone from political repression to military repression,” the lawyer said. “When a rivalry becomes intense, the execution of the opposition by a rival organization can be seen more as revenge than legal action.”
Junta Deputy Information Minister Maj. Gen. Zaw Min Tun said the four activists executed last week were “perpetrators of terrorism” and were “judged according to the law.”
He told a press conference in the capital Naypyidaw a few days after the executions that ideally the junta would have killed the four more than once.
Aung Myo Min, human rights minister for Myanmar’s shadow National Unity Government (NUG), said the unlawful arrest and execution of the opposition under unjust laws is the same thing as “murder in prison.”
He expressed concern that last week’s executions would lead to more “official” killings in the country’s prisons.
“For a military regime which sees the people as the enemy and kills them wherever they like, executing people in prison is not very unusual. In fact, this is not the death penalty. This is murder in prison, as it is based on unjust laws and unsubstantiated cases and verdicts. After these executions, we worry that the junta may continue, using it as a precedent.”
A mother whose son was recently sentenced to death in Yangon’s Insein prison told RFA she can only pray that no other family members of those on death row be forced to experience such a tragedy.
“It's not good in my heart. I don't know how to describe it,” she said.
“There is anxiety because I'm afraid [another execution] will happen. Nobody wants that to happen. I’m praying that it won't. ... I pray for the speedy release of these young kids."
ASEAN criticism
The current rotating chairman of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, told a meeting of the bloc’s foreign ministers in Phnom Penh on Wednesday that if political prisoners continue to be executed in Myanmar, he would be forced to “reconsider ASEAN’s role” in mediating the country’s political crisis.
Under an agreement Min Aung Hlaing made with ASEAN in April 2021 during an emergency meeting on the situation in Myanmar, known as the Five-Point Consensus (5PC), the bloc’s member nations called for an end to violence, constructive dialogue among all parties, and the mediation of such talks by a special ASEAN envoy. The 5PC also calls for the provision of ASEAN-coordinated humanitarian assistance and a visit to Myanmar by an ASEAN delegation to meet with all parties.
Even Min Aung Hlaing acknowledged that the junta had failed to hold up its end of the bargain on the consensus in a televised speech on Monday in which he announced that the junta was extending by six months the state of emergency it declared following last year’s coup. He blamed the coronavirus pandemic and “political instability” for the failure and said he will implement “what we can” from the 5PC this year, provided it does not “jeopardize the country’s sovereignty.”
Foreign Minister of Singapore Vivian Balakrishnan, who is attending the ASEAN meeting in Cambodia, publicly stated on Thursday that further discussion between the bloc and the junta “would not be beneficial” if there is no progress made in the implementation of the 5PC.
Myanmar’s junta has killed at least 2,148 civilians over the past 18 months and arrested nearly 15,000 — some 12,000 of whom remain in detention, according to the AAPP.
Translated by Khin Maung Nyane. Written in English by Joshua Lipes.
https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/execution-08042022185223.html
The families of 77 political activists sentenced to death by Myanmar’s military junta say they live in fear that their loved ones will be executed without warning after the military regime hanged four prominent prisoners of conscience.
Frustration with the junta boiled over last week after it put to death veteran democracy activist Ko Jimmy and former opposition lawmaker Phyo Zeya Thaw, as well as activists Hla Myo Aung and Aung Thura Zaw, despite a direct appeal from Hun Sen to Min Aung Hlaing. The executions prompted protests in Myanmar and condemnation abroad.
On Thursday, the daughter of a 56-year-old former junta soldier sentenced to death for allegedly helping pro-democracy People’s Defense Force (PDF) paramilitaries told RFA Burmese that she can’t bear to think that her father might be executed at any point without her knowing.
"As a family member, there is no way I could accept that my father might die all of a sudden,” she said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
“They gave him the death sentence, but did he deserve it? He had no involvement [in the anti-junta protests]. I think it is completely unfair that he was given the death penalty just for planning to get involved.”
She claimed that her father was arrested by the military without having committed any crime and was sentenced to death by a military court without having the opportunity to defend himself legally.
She urged the junta to let her father serve out a life sentence in prison, noting that he is a veteran soldier who spent many years in the military.
Prior to last week, only three people had been executed in Myanmar in the past 50 years: student leader Salai Tin Maung Oo, who helped organize protests over the government’s refusal to grant a state funeral to former U.N. Secretary-General U Thant in 1974; Capt. Ohn Kyaw Myint, who was found guilty of an assassination plot on the life of dictator Gen. Ne Win; and Zimbo, a North Korean agent who bombed the Martyrs’ Mausoleum in Yangon in an attempted assassination of the visiting South Korean President Chin Doo-hwan in 1983.
In the more than 30 years between Myanmar’s 1988 democratic uprising and the military coup of Feb. 1, 2021, death sentences have been ordered, but no judicial executions were carried out. Thailand’s Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (AAPP) has said at least 77 people are currently sentenced to death in Myanmar.
Legality of execution
Legal experts have noted that only the country’s democratically elected head of state has the right to order an execution under existing laws.
Aung Thein, a High Court lawyer from Yangon, said coup leader Sr. Gen. Min Aung Hlaing considers himself Myanmar’s head of state and that carrying out the death penalty is his right.
“[The junta hasn’t] disposed of the 2008 [military-drafted] Constitution. It has only been suspended,” he said.
“Since they have said they are operating according to the 2008 Constitution, [Min Aung Hlaing] believes the responsibility of head of state falls to him. That's why he might be under the impression that he can order executions.”
A lawyer from Yangon, who asked not to be named for security reasons, said that the hanging of a person considered a political challenger to the military appears more like “revenge” than anything legally justifiable.
“Things have gone from political repression to military repression,” the lawyer said. “When a rivalry becomes intense, the execution of the opposition by a rival organization can be seen more as revenge than legal action.”
Junta Deputy Information Minister Maj. Gen. Zaw Min Tun said the four activists executed last week were “perpetrators of terrorism” and were “judged according to the law.”
He told a press conference in the capital Naypyidaw a few days after the executions that ideally the junta would have killed the four more than once.
Aung Myo Min, human rights minister for Myanmar’s shadow National Unity Government (NUG), said the unlawful arrest and execution of the opposition under unjust laws is the same thing as “murder in prison.”
He expressed concern that last week’s executions would lead to more “official” killings in the country’s prisons.
“For a military regime which sees the people as the enemy and kills them wherever they like, executing people in prison is not very unusual. In fact, this is not the death penalty. This is murder in prison, as it is based on unjust laws and unsubstantiated cases and verdicts. After these executions, we worry that the junta may continue, using it as a precedent.”
A mother whose son was recently sentenced to death in Yangon’s Insein prison told RFA she can only pray that no other family members of those on death row be forced to experience such a tragedy.
“It's not good in my heart. I don't know how to describe it,” she said.
“There is anxiety because I'm afraid [another execution] will happen. Nobody wants that to happen. I’m praying that it won't. ... I pray for the speedy release of these young kids."
ASEAN criticism
The current rotating chairman of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, told a meeting of the bloc’s foreign ministers in Phnom Penh on Wednesday that if political prisoners continue to be executed in Myanmar, he would be forced to “reconsider ASEAN’s role” in mediating the country’s political crisis.
Under an agreement Min Aung Hlaing made with ASEAN in April 2021 during an emergency meeting on the situation in Myanmar, known as the Five-Point Consensus (5PC), the bloc’s member nations called for an end to violence, constructive dialogue among all parties, and the mediation of such talks by a special ASEAN envoy. The 5PC also calls for the provision of ASEAN-coordinated humanitarian assistance and a visit to Myanmar by an ASEAN delegation to meet with all parties.
Even Min Aung Hlaing acknowledged that the junta had failed to hold up its end of the bargain on the consensus in a televised speech on Monday in which he announced that the junta was extending by six months the state of emergency it declared following last year’s coup. He blamed the coronavirus pandemic and “political instability” for the failure and said he will implement “what we can” from the 5PC this year, provided it does not “jeopardize the country’s sovereignty.”
Foreign Minister of Singapore Vivian Balakrishnan, who is attending the ASEAN meeting in Cambodia, publicly stated on Thursday that further discussion between the bloc and the junta “would not be beneficial” if there is no progress made in the implementation of the 5PC.
Myanmar’s junta has killed at least 2,148 civilians over the past 18 months and arrested nearly 15,000 — some 12,000 of whom remain in detention, according to the AAPP.
Translated by Khin Maung Nyane. Written in English by Joshua Lipes.
Friday, 29 July 2022
Myanmar executes four anti-coup activists, drawing outrage
Source: Al Jazeera (25 July 2022)
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/25/myanmar-executes-four-democracy-activists-state-media
Myanmar’s military regime has executed four anti-coup activists, including a close ally of Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, drawing widespread condemnation and outrage.
The four men were hanged over their involvement in organising “brutal and inhumane terror acts”, the state-run Global New Light of Myanmar newspaper reported on Monday.
The men were sentenced to death in a closed-door trial in January after being accused of helping armed groups fight the military, which seized power in a February 2021 coup led by Senior General Min Aung Hlaing.
Phyo Zeya Thaw, a former legislator from Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) party, and prominent democracy activist Kyaw Min Yu were found guilty of offences under anti-terrorism laws. Their appeals were rejected last month.
Thaw, a hip-hop artist who was previously detained over his lyrics, had been accused of leading attacks on security forces, including a shooting on a commuter train in Yangon in August that left five policemen dead.
The two other men, Hla Myo Aung and Aung Thura Zaw, were handed the death penalty for allegedly killing a woman they accused of being an informant for the military government in Yangon.
The executions mark the first use of capital punishment in the Southeast Asian country in decades.
The last judicial executions took place in the late 1980s, according to the Assistance Association of Political Prisoners (AAPP), a human rights group.
Executions in Myanmar have previously been carried out by hanging.
‘Brazen act of cruelty’
Dr Sasa, spokesperson for Myanmar’s National Unity Government, established by members of the elected government the military threw out of office. said the killings were a “dark day” for democracy and human rights.
“We all are devastated by this acts of terror,” Dr Sasa, who goes by the single name, told Al Jazeera. “Indeed they can take away their bodies, but the military generals in Myanmar will not take away the vision of these matters of democracy.”
Yadanar Maung, a spokesperson for Justice For Myanmar, said the executions amounted to crimes against humanity and called for further sanctions against the military’s State Administration Council.
“All perpetrators from Min Aung Hlaing down must be held accountable for this brazen act of cruelty,” Maung told Al Jazeera.
“The international community must act now to end the terrorist junta’s total impunity. The international response to these executions and the junta’s other international crimes must involve coordinated targeted sanctions against the junta and its business interests, a ban on jet fuel and a global arms embargo. Sanctions must be imposed on Myanma Oil and Gas Enterprise, to stop oil and gas funds bankrolling the junta’s atrocities.”
Thomas Andrews, the UN special rapporteur for human rights in Myanmar, said he was “outraged and devastated” over the executions.
“My heart goes out to their families, friends and loved ones and indeed all the people in Myanmar who are victims of the junta’s escalating atrocities … These depraved acts must be a turning point for the international community.”
Japanese Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi said the executions would further isolate Myanmar in the international community.
In a statement, Hayashi called the move a matter of deep concern and said it will sharpen national sentiment and deepen conflict.
A military spokesperson did not answer calls seeking comment.
The men’s death sentences had been condemned by human rights groups, the United States, France and the United Nations, with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres describing the planned executions as “a blatant violation to the right to life.”
The government, which has sentenced dozens of activists to death since the coup, defended the planned executions as lawful and necessary.
“At least 50 innocent civilians, excluding security forces, died because of them,” military spokesperson Zaw Min Tun told a televised news conference last month. “How can you say this is not justice?”
Myanmar was plunged into crisis by the coup, which removed Aung San Suu Kyi from power, with violence spreading across the country after the army crushed mostly peaceful protests in cities.
More than 2,100 people have been killed by the security forces since the coup, according to the AAPP. The government has said that figure is exaggerated.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/25/myanmar-executes-four-democracy-activists-state-media
Myanmar’s military regime has executed four anti-coup activists, including a close ally of Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, drawing widespread condemnation and outrage.
The four men were hanged over their involvement in organising “brutal and inhumane terror acts”, the state-run Global New Light of Myanmar newspaper reported on Monday.
The men were sentenced to death in a closed-door trial in January after being accused of helping armed groups fight the military, which seized power in a February 2021 coup led by Senior General Min Aung Hlaing.
Phyo Zeya Thaw, a former legislator from Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) party, and prominent democracy activist Kyaw Min Yu were found guilty of offences under anti-terrorism laws. Their appeals were rejected last month.
Thaw, a hip-hop artist who was previously detained over his lyrics, had been accused of leading attacks on security forces, including a shooting on a commuter train in Yangon in August that left five policemen dead.
The two other men, Hla Myo Aung and Aung Thura Zaw, were handed the death penalty for allegedly killing a woman they accused of being an informant for the military government in Yangon.
The executions mark the first use of capital punishment in the Southeast Asian country in decades.
The last judicial executions took place in the late 1980s, according to the Assistance Association of Political Prisoners (AAPP), a human rights group.
Executions in Myanmar have previously been carried out by hanging.
‘Brazen act of cruelty’
Dr Sasa, spokesperson for Myanmar’s National Unity Government, established by members of the elected government the military threw out of office. said the killings were a “dark day” for democracy and human rights.
“We all are devastated by this acts of terror,” Dr Sasa, who goes by the single name, told Al Jazeera. “Indeed they can take away their bodies, but the military generals in Myanmar will not take away the vision of these matters of democracy.”
Yadanar Maung, a spokesperson for Justice For Myanmar, said the executions amounted to crimes against humanity and called for further sanctions against the military’s State Administration Council.
“All perpetrators from Min Aung Hlaing down must be held accountable for this brazen act of cruelty,” Maung told Al Jazeera.
“The international community must act now to end the terrorist junta’s total impunity. The international response to these executions and the junta’s other international crimes must involve coordinated targeted sanctions against the junta and its business interests, a ban on jet fuel and a global arms embargo. Sanctions must be imposed on Myanma Oil and Gas Enterprise, to stop oil and gas funds bankrolling the junta’s atrocities.”
Thomas Andrews, the UN special rapporteur for human rights in Myanmar, said he was “outraged and devastated” over the executions.
“My heart goes out to their families, friends and loved ones and indeed all the people in Myanmar who are victims of the junta’s escalating atrocities … These depraved acts must be a turning point for the international community.”
Japanese Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi said the executions would further isolate Myanmar in the international community.
In a statement, Hayashi called the move a matter of deep concern and said it will sharpen national sentiment and deepen conflict.
A military spokesperson did not answer calls seeking comment.
The men’s death sentences had been condemned by human rights groups, the United States, France and the United Nations, with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres describing the planned executions as “a blatant violation to the right to life.”
The government, which has sentenced dozens of activists to death since the coup, defended the planned executions as lawful and necessary.
“At least 50 innocent civilians, excluding security forces, died because of them,” military spokesperson Zaw Min Tun told a televised news conference last month. “How can you say this is not justice?”
Myanmar was plunged into crisis by the coup, which removed Aung San Suu Kyi from power, with violence spreading across the country after the army crushed mostly peaceful protests in cities.
More than 2,100 people have been killed by the security forces since the coup, according to the AAPP. The government has said that figure is exaggerated.
Tuesday, 10 August 2021
Court ruling clears way for first executions in Papua New Guinea in nearly 70 years
Source: The Guardian (9 August 2021)
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/10/court-ruling-clears-way-for-first-executions-in-papua-new-guinea-in-nearly-70-years
A ruling by Papua New Guinea’s national court has cleared the way for the country’s first executions in almost 70 years.
The 14 condemned prisoners have a chance to appeal to a government-appointed committee for clemency, but if that fails the executions will proceed pending a decision by a committee as to the most appropriate mode of execution.
This comes after a five-man bench quashed the National Court temporary orders that had stayed the death sentences.
The 14 men were convicted of crimes including murder and rape. In 2015, 13 of them were sentenced to death after they had exhausted all their appeals.
The prisoners can still apply for clemency. An advisory committee made up of five people – a lawyer, a medical practitioner with experience in psychiatry, a member of the parliament, a minister of religion and a person with experience in community work – will consider their applications.
The last execution in Papua New Guinea took place in November 1954 in Port Moresby. Papua New Guinea abolished capital punishment in 1970 but re-introduced it in 1991, though there have been no executions since the reintroduction.
In 2013, Papua New Guinea took steps to revive capital punishment, at the same time amending legislation to include harsher punishment for certain crimes.
The government then requested the constitutional law reform commission report on the most appropriate method of execution.
The commission travelled to countries with experience in capital punishment including the United States, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Singapore in order to provide advice to the government.
After the commission’s report, the cabinet endorsed hanging, firing squad and lethal injection.
The then prime minister, Peter O’Neill, said that “The level of these serious crimes in our community, particularly crimes of sexual nature and murder are unacceptable. The heinous behaviour is perpetrated by a few, but the country at large is made to suffer. We must act now to protect the majority proposed laws are tough but they are necessary. We have to address a situation which is destroying our country.”
But many in Papua New Guinea are still against the death penalty.
The general secretary of the Catholic Bishops Conference of Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands, Fr Giorgio Licini, said: “As far as the Catholic Church is concerned it has recently ruled out, at its top level, any support, justification, approval for the death penalty under any circumstances.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/10/court-ruling-clears-way-for-first-executions-in-papua-new-guinea-in-nearly-70-years
A ruling by Papua New Guinea’s national court has cleared the way for the country’s first executions in almost 70 years.
The 14 condemned prisoners have a chance to appeal to a government-appointed committee for clemency, but if that fails the executions will proceed pending a decision by a committee as to the most appropriate mode of execution.
This comes after a five-man bench quashed the National Court temporary orders that had stayed the death sentences.
The 14 men were convicted of crimes including murder and rape. In 2015, 13 of them were sentenced to death after they had exhausted all their appeals.
The prisoners can still apply for clemency. An advisory committee made up of five people – a lawyer, a medical practitioner with experience in psychiatry, a member of the parliament, a minister of religion and a person with experience in community work – will consider their applications.
The last execution in Papua New Guinea took place in November 1954 in Port Moresby. Papua New Guinea abolished capital punishment in 1970 but re-introduced it in 1991, though there have been no executions since the reintroduction.
In 2013, Papua New Guinea took steps to revive capital punishment, at the same time amending legislation to include harsher punishment for certain crimes.
The government then requested the constitutional law reform commission report on the most appropriate method of execution.
The commission travelled to countries with experience in capital punishment including the United States, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Singapore in order to provide advice to the government.
After the commission’s report, the cabinet endorsed hanging, firing squad and lethal injection.
The then prime minister, Peter O’Neill, said that “The level of these serious crimes in our community, particularly crimes of sexual nature and murder are unacceptable. The heinous behaviour is perpetrated by a few, but the country at large is made to suffer. We must act now to protect the majority proposed laws are tough but they are necessary. We have to address a situation which is destroying our country.”
But many in Papua New Guinea are still against the death penalty.
The general secretary of the Catholic Bishops Conference of Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands, Fr Giorgio Licini, said: “As far as the Catholic Church is concerned it has recently ruled out, at its top level, any support, justification, approval for the death penalty under any circumstances.”
Wednesday, 7 April 2021
Lame Duck Executioners
When historians look back and evaluate the Trump presidency, one focus will be the instigation of the federal death penalty. Until the execution of Daniel Lee Lewis on Jan 14, 2020, no federal prisoner had been executed in 17 years. The execution of Lisa Montgomery was even more extreme - no woman had been put to death by the federal government in 67 years, the last one being in 1953.
Apart from restarting federal executions, another quagmire was Trump's insistence on carrying out executions even after election defeat. Whether one supports or opposes the death penalty, both sides can likely agree that it is a political issue. And political issues can bring political rewards. In the United States, prosecutors gain accolades when a sentence of death is pronounced. And then a second time - in the not so usual instance - if the accused is put to death.
Politicians often have much to gain. Preaching that law and order is necessary, and that the death penalty keeps our communities safe, brings donations and votes. Judges who oppose the death penalty draw the wrath of police organizations, and can end up as grass by the wayside.
Jilted lovers and defeated politicians share similar mindsets. Like Monday morning quarterbacks, 'what did I do wrong, what could I have done better', are questions which dog the mind. Those who lose in love and politics often indulge in drastic actions. And this phenomenon is hardly indigenous to the United States.
In September 2009, The Democratic Party of Japan, an opposition party, took control of the Japanese parliament. It was only the second time in postwar history that the stalwart conservative Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) was sidelined. Human rights activists and progressives celebrated the victory. In particular, they welcomed the appointment of (Ms) Keiko Chiba, a practicing attorney, as Justice Minister. Chiba had a firm record of supporting human rights, actively opposed the death penalty, and was a member of a non-partisan abolitionist caucus within the parliament.
Death penalty abolitionists in Japan breathed a sigh of relief. From December 2006 until January 2009 - a period of 25 months - Japan had hung 32 prisoners. The country disposed of nearly one third of its death row. By comparison, the US as a whole would have had to carry out more than 700 executions to keep pace.
On July 11, 2010, ten months after assuming office, Chiba, who had served in parliament off and on since 1996, lost her bid for re-election. It is extremely rare for a sitting minister to lose a race for office in Japan. However, in a somewhat unusual move, she was allowed to remain on as minister of justice until the end of her parliamentary term.
A Shocking Reversal
Some two weeks after defeat, Chiba turned face. She ordered two executions. And to add fuel to the fire, she did something no other justice minister had even contemplated: opening the Tokyo gallows, which had never been photographed, to the press (albeit without the noose).
Executions in Japan are shrouded in secrecy. Prisoners need not be informed of when they will hang, and we surmise that most do not know until the morning of the execution. Until about 10 years ago, the Ministry of Justice did not even make public announcements of executions. The public and relatives of the deceased heard the news after the ministry informed prisoner's attorneys, who then alerted concerned family and human rights organizations.
Say it ain't so Keiko
Chiba's title, Minister of Justice, was a bit of a misnomer. A proper translation of the title 'Ministry of Justice' (Houmusho) is better rendered as the 'Ministry of Laws' (as it is called in the Philippines and in Singapore). The ministry is charged with maintaining the dominant social narrative: citizens should work hard, not complain, avoid litigation, and listen to authority. 'Justice' is hardly part of the agenda.
Quite often, ordering an execution is a rite of passage for new justice ministers. Many authorize them soon after appointment. Executions assuage upper-level bureaucrats, fellow ruling party politicians, as well as the public which supports capital punishment.
From the outset, Chiba refused to execute. Why did she renege? The most likely guess is that the apparatchiks teased, "See what your abolitionist tendencies have wrought? We told you to execute and you ignored us. You should have listened. The Japanese public believe in the death penalty. Now you are a lame duck minister."
Penal Populism
Long before running for office, Donald Trump firmly supported the death penalty. In 1989, he paid for several full-page articles, including in The New York Times, screaming for the reinstitution of the death penalty in New York state. This was revenge against five black men who were then alleged to have attacked a white woman and became known as the Central Park Five.
The Central Park Five were falsely accused. All were later exonerated. One would expect a normal mind to bear remorse for advocating what would have constituted wrongful executions. Or at the very least, to avoid making the same mistake twice.
Donald J. Trump was not of a normal mind. And one wonders if former justice minister Chiba also became temporarily deluded. Be it the US, or Japan, support for the death penalty brings political rewards, and from opposition can foster political reprisals. The US and Japan are the only large, advanced democracies that conduct executions. And until complete abolition is reached in both countries, penal populism - political actors teasing voters with executions and other severe criminal justice policies - will likely continue to woo the public.
Michael H. Fox is associate professor at Hyogo University and
director of the Japan Innocence and Death Penalty Information Center
(www.jiadep.org)
Wednesday, 19 August 2020
Philippines death penalty: A fight to stop the return of capital punishment
Source: BBC News (16 August 2020)
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-53762570
Capital punishment opponents expect a steep battle to prevent President Rodrigo Duterte from reimposing the death penalty, as he renews calls for the law as part of a "drug war" that has already killed thousands of Filipinos.
Few were surprised when Mr Duterte last month pushed, once again, to reintroduce the death penalty for drug offenders.
Since coming to power in 2016 he has waged a brutal crackdown on suspected drug users and dealers, issuing police with shoot-to-kill orders while encouraging citizens to kill drug users too.
Officially the police say they shoot only in self-defence and data shows more than 8,000 people have been killed in anti-drug operations. The nation's human rights commission estimates a toll as high as 27,000.
The piling bodies have been documented by photojournalists whose images of dead suspects face-down in pools of blood after a police raid, or strewn on streets in suspected vigilante murders, have shocked the world.
"The death penalty would give the state another weapon in its ongoing war against drugs," said Carlos Conde, Philippines researcher for Human Rights Watch.
Mr Duterte was restrained, at first, by the upper house of parliament. But last year's mid-term elections saw his allies win control of the senate and many fear the law could now be passed.
Twenty-three bills have been filed across both houses to reinstate the death penalty for drug crimes, including possession and sales. Committee deliberations began last week.
Nuanced views
Mr Conde says he would like to be proved wrong but senses the law "is as good as passed". He points to the swift recent passing of the controversial anti-terrorism law, and the speed at which ABS-CBN, a broadcaster critical of the president, was forced off air.
The move would be a breach of international human rights law.
But this is unlikely to faze Mr Duterte, who frequently expresses his disdain for human rights checks. Last year the Philippines left the International Criminal Court as it was probing accusations of crimes linked to his drugs campaign.
Surveys by the Social Weather Stations, a pollster, have shown the war on drugs remains popular among Filipinos despite experts saying the signature policy has failed to curb drug use or supply. A majority are also in favour of reinstating capital punishment.
But a closer look at the results shows an alternative picture, says Maria Socorro Diokno, secretary-general of the Free Legal Assistance Group, a network of human rights lawyers.
When presented with alternatives to capital punishment for crimes linked to illegal drugs, for instance, most favoured other options.
"They begin to think that death is not always the answer," said Ms Diokno.
Ms Diokno, who leads her group's anti-death penalty task force, has been braced for a battle with Mr Duterte ever since he vowed to bring back the death penalty as part of his election campaign.
She knows that minds can be changed because she was part of the movement that succeeded last time.
The death penalty has been abolished twice before - first in 1987 and then again in 2006 after being reinstated in 1993.
The last push for abolition was led by the Catholic church, which holds considerable influence over Filipinos in the largely Catholic country while Mr Duterte is an open critic.
Last week the Clergy of the Archdiocese of Manila condemned the "lack of independence and imprudence" of some lawmakers in supporting the president on the issue.
"We see such acts as betrayal of the people's interests and an implicit support to the creeping authoritarian tendencies exuded by this administration," it said.
Mistaken convictions
In his annual address to the nation last month Mr Duterte claimed reinstating the death penalty by lethal injection would "deter criminality".
But there is little evidence to prove that the death penalty can be a deterrent. Instead research has shown the punishment frequently affects the most disadvantaged.
In the Philippines alone the Supreme Court said in 2004 that 71.77% of death penalty verdicts handed by lower courts were wrong.
By imposing the death penalty for drug offences, the Philippines would also be moving away from what Harm Reduction International has identified as a downward global trend in using the penalty for such crimes.
It says 35 countries and territories retain capital punishment for drug offenders but only a few carry out executions regularly. Five of the eight "high application states" are in South East Asia.
Raymund Narag, an assistant professor of criminology at Southern Illinois University, knows firsthand the problems of a flawed criminal justice system.
He spent nearly seven years jailed in the Philippines as a pre-trial detainee before he was acquitted of a campus murder that took place at his university when he was 20.
The death penalty was still intact at the time and prosecutors had sought it for the 10 men charged.
Worse than his overcrowded cell and frequent prison riots, he says, was the "agony of waiting" for hearings.
"It was traumatic thinking that you can be put to death for a crime you did not commit," said Dr Narag, speaking from the US.
Now 46, he was one of five men eventually acquitted, while the others were sentenced to life imprisonment.
The experience has shaped his career. He now researches prolonged trial detention in the Philippines, while advocating for criminal justice reform.
Dr Narag says that if he hadn't managed to track down a key witness, an overseas worker, to return home and testify, proving he wasn't at the crime scene, he may have been convicted.
Through his advocacy he wants Filipinos to know the consequences of mistaken convictions, which could become mistaken executions if the law changes, in an already struggling justice system.
The scope of and timeline for the eventual death penalty bill put to vote in parliament is uncertain, especially during the Covid-19 pandemic. Some have argued the bill should not be a priority.
Gloria Lai, Asia director of the International Drug Policy Consortium, says the death penalty has not solved the drug-related problems of any country.
"It is the poor and vulnerable who bear the harsh punishment of criminal justice systems in grossly unjust ways," she says.
Capital punishment opponents expect a steep battle to prevent President Rodrigo Duterte from reimposing the death penalty, as he renews calls for the law as part of a "drug war" that has already killed thousands of Filipinos.
Few were surprised when Mr Duterte last month pushed, once again, to reintroduce the death penalty for drug offenders.
Since coming to power in 2016 he has waged a brutal crackdown on suspected drug users and dealers, issuing police with shoot-to-kill orders while encouraging citizens to kill drug users too.
Officially the police say they shoot only in self-defence and data shows more than 8,000 people have been killed in anti-drug operations. The nation's human rights commission estimates a toll as high as 27,000.
The piling bodies have been documented by photojournalists whose images of dead suspects face-down in pools of blood after a police raid, or strewn on streets in suspected vigilante murders, have shocked the world.
"The death penalty would give the state another weapon in its ongoing war against drugs," said Carlos Conde, Philippines researcher for Human Rights Watch.
Mr Duterte was restrained, at first, by the upper house of parliament. But last year's mid-term elections saw his allies win control of the senate and many fear the law could now be passed.
Twenty-three bills have been filed across both houses to reinstate the death penalty for drug crimes, including possession and sales. Committee deliberations began last week.
Nuanced views
Mr Conde says he would like to be proved wrong but senses the law "is as good as passed". He points to the swift recent passing of the controversial anti-terrorism law, and the speed at which ABS-CBN, a broadcaster critical of the president, was forced off air.
The move would be a breach of international human rights law.
But this is unlikely to faze Mr Duterte, who frequently expresses his disdain for human rights checks. Last year the Philippines left the International Criminal Court as it was probing accusations of crimes linked to his drugs campaign.
Surveys by the Social Weather Stations, a pollster, have shown the war on drugs remains popular among Filipinos despite experts saying the signature policy has failed to curb drug use or supply. A majority are also in favour of reinstating capital punishment.
But a closer look at the results shows an alternative picture, says Maria Socorro Diokno, secretary-general of the Free Legal Assistance Group, a network of human rights lawyers.
When presented with alternatives to capital punishment for crimes linked to illegal drugs, for instance, most favoured other options.
"They begin to think that death is not always the answer," said Ms Diokno.
Ms Diokno, who leads her group's anti-death penalty task force, has been braced for a battle with Mr Duterte ever since he vowed to bring back the death penalty as part of his election campaign.
She knows that minds can be changed because she was part of the movement that succeeded last time.
The death penalty has been abolished twice before - first in 1987 and then again in 2006 after being reinstated in 1993.
The last push for abolition was led by the Catholic church, which holds considerable influence over Filipinos in the largely Catholic country while Mr Duterte is an open critic.
Last week the Clergy of the Archdiocese of Manila condemned the "lack of independence and imprudence" of some lawmakers in supporting the president on the issue.
"We see such acts as betrayal of the people's interests and an implicit support to the creeping authoritarian tendencies exuded by this administration," it said.
Mistaken convictions
In his annual address to the nation last month Mr Duterte claimed reinstating the death penalty by lethal injection would "deter criminality".
But there is little evidence to prove that the death penalty can be a deterrent. Instead research has shown the punishment frequently affects the most disadvantaged.
In the Philippines alone the Supreme Court said in 2004 that 71.77% of death penalty verdicts handed by lower courts were wrong.
By imposing the death penalty for drug offences, the Philippines would also be moving away from what Harm Reduction International has identified as a downward global trend in using the penalty for such crimes.
It says 35 countries and territories retain capital punishment for drug offenders but only a few carry out executions regularly. Five of the eight "high application states" are in South East Asia.
Raymund Narag, an assistant professor of criminology at Southern Illinois University, knows firsthand the problems of a flawed criminal justice system.
He spent nearly seven years jailed in the Philippines as a pre-trial detainee before he was acquitted of a campus murder that took place at his university when he was 20.
The death penalty was still intact at the time and prosecutors had sought it for the 10 men charged.
Worse than his overcrowded cell and frequent prison riots, he says, was the "agony of waiting" for hearings.
"It was traumatic thinking that you can be put to death for a crime you did not commit," said Dr Narag, speaking from the US.
Now 46, he was one of five men eventually acquitted, while the others were sentenced to life imprisonment.
The experience has shaped his career. He now researches prolonged trial detention in the Philippines, while advocating for criminal justice reform.
Dr Narag says that if he hadn't managed to track down a key witness, an overseas worker, to return home and testify, proving he wasn't at the crime scene, he may have been convicted.
Through his advocacy he wants Filipinos to know the consequences of mistaken convictions, which could become mistaken executions if the law changes, in an already struggling justice system.
The scope of and timeline for the eventual death penalty bill put to vote in parliament is uncertain, especially during the Covid-19 pandemic. Some have argued the bill should not be a priority.
Gloria Lai, Asia director of the International Drug Policy Consortium, says the death penalty has not solved the drug-related problems of any country.
"It is the poor and vulnerable who bear the harsh punishment of criminal justice systems in grossly unjust ways," she says.
Sunday, 7 July 2019
Sri Lanka: Resuming Death Penalty a Major Setback
Source: Human Rights Watch (30 June 2019)
https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/06/30/sri-lanka-resuming-death-penalty-major-setback
(New York) – The Sri Lanka government should halt plans to resume executions and restore its de facto 43-year moratorium on the use of the death penalty, Human Rights Watch said today. Sri Lanka’s President Maithripala Sirisena said he has ordered the execution of four drug offenders, claiming it would end increasing addiction problems in the country.
“Sri Lanka’s plan to resume use of the death penalty is a major setback for human rights,” said Brad Adams, Asia director. “Sri Lanka has been a bulwark against capital punishment in Asia for more than four decades, yet now the Sirisena government wants to throw in its lot with less rights-respecting regimes.”
The death penalty has not been carried out in Sri Lanka since 1976. Currently, 1,299 prisoners – 1,215 men and 84 women – are on Sri Lanka’s death row after having been convicted for capital offenses, including 48 people convicted for drug crimes.
Sirisena said he was determined to crack down on drug trafficking after over 300,000 people in Sri Lanka allegedly became addicts, with 60 percent of 24,000 prison inmates incarcerated for drug-related offenses.
The United Nations General Assembly has continually called on countries to establish a moratorium on the death penalty, progressively restrict the practice, and reduce the offenses for which it might be imposed – all with a view toward its eventual abolition.
Where the death penalty is permitted, international human rights law limits the death penalty to “the most serious crimes,” typically crimes resulting in death or serious bodily harm. In a March 2010 report, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime called for an end to the death penalty and specifically urged member countries to prohibit use of the death penalty for drug-related offenses, while urging countries to take an overall “human rights-based approach to drug and crime control.”
In its 2014 annual report, the International Narcotics Control Board, the agency charged with monitoring compliance with UN drug control conventions, encouraged countries to abolish the death penalty for drug offenses. The UN Human Rights Committee and the special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions have concluded that the death penalty for drug offenses fails to meet the condition of “most serious crime.” In September 2015, the UN high commissioner for human rights reaffirmed that “persons convicted of drug-related offences … should not be subject to the death penalty.”
Human Rights Watch opposes capital punishment in all countries and in all circumstances because of its inherent cruelty. The alleged deterrent effect of the death penalty has been repeatedly debunked.
“The death penalty is a cruel practice that has no place in modern society for combating drug crimes or any other offense,” Adams said. “Sri Lanka should work toward upholding its human rights pledges and immediately rescind the execution orders.”
https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/06/30/sri-lanka-resuming-death-penalty-major-setback
(New York) – The Sri Lanka government should halt plans to resume executions and restore its de facto 43-year moratorium on the use of the death penalty, Human Rights Watch said today. Sri Lanka’s President Maithripala Sirisena said he has ordered the execution of four drug offenders, claiming it would end increasing addiction problems in the country.
“Sri Lanka’s plan to resume use of the death penalty is a major setback for human rights,” said Brad Adams, Asia director. “Sri Lanka has been a bulwark against capital punishment in Asia for more than four decades, yet now the Sirisena government wants to throw in its lot with less rights-respecting regimes.”
The death penalty has not been carried out in Sri Lanka since 1976. Currently, 1,299 prisoners – 1,215 men and 84 women – are on Sri Lanka’s death row after having been convicted for capital offenses, including 48 people convicted for drug crimes.
Sirisena said he was determined to crack down on drug trafficking after over 300,000 people in Sri Lanka allegedly became addicts, with 60 percent of 24,000 prison inmates incarcerated for drug-related offenses.
The United Nations General Assembly has continually called on countries to establish a moratorium on the death penalty, progressively restrict the practice, and reduce the offenses for which it might be imposed – all with a view toward its eventual abolition.
Where the death penalty is permitted, international human rights law limits the death penalty to “the most serious crimes,” typically crimes resulting in death or serious bodily harm. In a March 2010 report, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime called for an end to the death penalty and specifically urged member countries to prohibit use of the death penalty for drug-related offenses, while urging countries to take an overall “human rights-based approach to drug and crime control.”
In its 2014 annual report, the International Narcotics Control Board, the agency charged with monitoring compliance with UN drug control conventions, encouraged countries to abolish the death penalty for drug offenses. The UN Human Rights Committee and the special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions have concluded that the death penalty for drug offenses fails to meet the condition of “most serious crime.” In September 2015, the UN high commissioner for human rights reaffirmed that “persons convicted of drug-related offences … should not be subject to the death penalty.”
Human Rights Watch opposes capital punishment in all countries and in all circumstances because of its inherent cruelty. The alleged deterrent effect of the death penalty has been repeatedly debunked.
“The death penalty is a cruel practice that has no place in modern society for combating drug crimes or any other offense,” Adams said. “Sri Lanka should work toward upholding its human rights pledges and immediately rescind the execution orders.”
Monday, 1 July 2019
After recruitment drive ends, Sri Lanka picks two hangmen as death penalty for drug offences resume
Source: South China Morning Post (29 June 2019)
https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/south-asia/article/3016632/after-recruitment-drive-ends-sri-lanka-picks-two-hangmen-death
Sri Lanka has hired two hangmen as it prepares for executions of four prisoners convicted of drug offences in what would be the country’s first use of the death penalty for over 40 years, prison authorities said on Friday.
The Prisons Department began the recruitment process in March after the last hangman
quit in 2014, citing stress after seeing the gallows for the first time. Another, hired last year, never turned up for work.
President Maithripala Sirisena announced on Wednesday an end to a moratorium on the death penalty in force since 1976, a move political analysts said was meant to boost his chances of re-election if he stands again later this year.
Local and international rights groups, along with Britain, Canada, the European Union and United Nations have raised concerns about the South Asian nation’s restoration of capital punishment
“The recruitment process is finalised and two [hangmen] have been selected. The two need to go through final training which will take about two weeks,” prisons spokesman Thushara Upuldeniya said.
The two were picked from among 100 applicants who responded to an advertisement calling for male Sri Lankans aged between 18 and 45 with “excellent moral character” and “mental strength”.
Prisons Commissioner TMJW Thennakoon declined to provide details of the four convicts whose death penalties were approved by the president.
On Friday, a petitioner – a Sri Lankan journalist – filed public interest litigation seeking to stop any executions, arguing that people’s rights were being violated. A court hearing will be held on July 2, and Thennakoon pledged that there would be no executions for the next seven days.
A spokesman for the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) said on Thursday international drug control conventions cannot be used to justify the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences alone.
“Application of the death penalty may also impede international cooperation in fighting drug trafficking as there are national laws that [bar] the exchange of information and extradition with countries which may impose capital punishment for the offences concerned,” the UNODC spokesman said.
Criminals in Sri Lanka are regularly given death sentences for murder, rape and drug-related crimes but until now their punishments have been commuted to life in prison.
Additional reporting by Agence France-Presse
https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/south-asia/article/3016632/after-recruitment-drive-ends-sri-lanka-picks-two-hangmen-death
Sri Lanka has hired two hangmen as it prepares for executions of four prisoners convicted of drug offences in what would be the country’s first use of the death penalty for over 40 years, prison authorities said on Friday.
The Prisons Department began the recruitment process in March after the last hangman
quit in 2014, citing stress after seeing the gallows for the first time. Another, hired last year, never turned up for work.
President Maithripala Sirisena announced on Wednesday an end to a moratorium on the death penalty in force since 1976, a move political analysts said was meant to boost his chances of re-election if he stands again later this year.
Local and international rights groups, along with Britain, Canada, the European Union and United Nations have raised concerns about the South Asian nation’s restoration of capital punishment
“The recruitment process is finalised and two [hangmen] have been selected. The two need to go through final training which will take about two weeks,” prisons spokesman Thushara Upuldeniya said.
The two were picked from among 100 applicants who responded to an advertisement calling for male Sri Lankans aged between 18 and 45 with “excellent moral character” and “mental strength”.
Prisons Commissioner TMJW Thennakoon declined to provide details of the four convicts whose death penalties were approved by the president.
On Friday, a petitioner – a Sri Lankan journalist – filed public interest litigation seeking to stop any executions, arguing that people’s rights were being violated. A court hearing will be held on July 2, and Thennakoon pledged that there would be no executions for the next seven days.
A spokesman for the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) said on Thursday international drug control conventions cannot be used to justify the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences alone.
“Application of the death penalty may also impede international cooperation in fighting drug trafficking as there are national laws that [bar] the exchange of information and extradition with countries which may impose capital punishment for the offences concerned,” the UNODC spokesman said.
Criminals in Sri Lanka are regularly given death sentences for murder, rape and drug-related crimes but until now their punishments have been commuted to life in prison.
Additional reporting by Agence France-Presse
Thursday, 4 April 2019
Death penalty never a solution to crime: advocates
Source: Asia Times (28 March 2019)
‘Life is sacred’
In his second State of the Nation Address (SONA) in 2017, Duterte expressed his support for the reimposition of the death penalty, triggering criticisms from the Catholic hierarchy, from human-rights activists, and even from senators.
“In the Philippines, it is really an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. You took life, you must pay it with life. That is the only way to [make it] even. You cannot place a premium on the human mind that he will go straight,” Duterte said during the SONA.
The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) disagreed.
“We want punishment for the horrendous act committed but we do not call for the killing of a suspect nor the perpetrator who will be subjected to the imperfect justice system run by imperfect duty bearers,” CHR commissioner Karen Gomez-Dumpit said. She stressed that the death penalty is equated to a murder perpetrated by state agents because it is deliberate and premeditated and purposely kills a person. Father Villanueva agreed that it can never solve crimes, but instead creates a culture of fear and violence.
Aquino said the death penalty “threatens the fundamental rights of people, capital punishment will dismantle any hopes we have of building a peaceful, accountable and equal society which values human life and human rights; it further erodes our hopes for a people-centric governance model.”
‘Dancing with death’
In the only country in Asia to first ban the death penalty, then later reimpose it and ban it again, the international community as well as the Catholic Church and human-rights advocates are focusing again on Duterte’s latest stand on reviving capital punishment.
House Bill 4727, authored by former House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, was approved in Congress. The bill seeks death or life-long imprisonment on conviction of drug-related charges, including trafficking, manufacturing, importing, maintenance of drug dens and other drug-related crimes. The crime of plunder is no longer included. It will not impose the death penalty on convicted persons who were below 18 years of age or more than 70 years old during the commission of the crime.
Flawed justice
According to the Supreme Court decision on the case of People vs Mateo in 2004, after 11 years, it was found that there was a 71.77% error rate in verdicts and decisions impacting disproportionately against the poor. Before 2006, 483 death-penalty cases or 53.25% were reduced to reclusión perpetua or life imprisonment, while 65 cases were acquitted.
Blaming the CHR for the rise of crimes or why criminals get away is illogical.
“CHR does not have the mandate of being a law enforcer. We cannot digress from the issues that matter and must help, within our respective mandates and responsibilities, the police and other law-enforcement agencies’ mission to serve and protect the people. The police as a human-rights protector of all persons (without exception) need to be put at the front and center of the ‘solutions to rising criminality’ debate,” Gomez-Dumpit said.
Aquino also said there was an urgent need for reforms in the justice system. Court cases can can drags on for several years, in addition to biased and prejudicial proceedings and frequent miscarriages of justice.
In a 2018 survey of Social Weather Stations and CHR, it was found out that 7 out of 10 Filipinos do not support the death penalty.
Dual purpose
Capital punishment in the Philippines has a long history. During the Spanish period (1521-1898), American colonization, the Japanese occupation and the martial-law era under the Ferdinand Marcos regime, capital punishment was used not only to deter crimes but also used to curtail freedom.
After the People Power Revolution the death penalty was abolished by the 1987 constitution, “unless for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, Congress hereafter provides for it.” The Philippines thus became the first country in Asia to abolish the death penalty.
However, calls for the reimposition of the death penalty did not abate. The military lobbied for members of the Communist Party of the Philippines to be executed.
But it was only in 1993, during the presidency of Fidel Ramos, a Protestant, that the death penalty was restored by virtue of Republic Act 7659 because of rising criminality.
Despite the death penalty, however, the crime rate continued to soar. In 1999 it increased by 15.3%. President Joseph Estrada issued a de facto moratorium on executions because of pressure from the Catholic Church and rights groups.
Finally, on June 24, 2006, president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed into law the Republic Act 9346, titled “An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of the Death Penalty.” The death penalty was downgraded to life imprisonment. The Philippines entered the ratification of the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights aiming at the abolition of the death penalty in November 2007. This act in effective binds the Philippines never again to reintroduce the death penalty.
Rule of law
Father Villanueva has seen the worst in his ministry to the orphans and widows of Duterte’s drug war. Although he thinks that the Philippines is already desensitized to the point of reaching the “threshold of inhumanity,” he still believes in restorative justice, where society must provide a chance for criminals to reform.
The CHR is always anchored on the universality of human rights and to look at violations of human rights, shortcomings, abuses, and failure of government institutions to uphold the human rights of all persons. The government (the executive) has the primary duty to implement programs that respect, protect and fulfill human rights.
“We are a system of laws. We adhere to the rule of law and the right to due process for everyone. The deprivation of due process is an injustice that will mean more when it is us or family who is affected. The guarantee of due process and the rule of law will ensure that when it is our turn, we are assured that we will be treated evenly and fairly,” Gomez-Dumpit concluded.
But Duterte has already imposed the death sentence on us Filipinos whether we are guilty of heinous crimes or not. His anti-people policies and shoot-to-kill orders are enough to wipe out not only the criminals but those who are opposing him.
https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/03/opinion/death-penalty-never-a-solution-to-crime-advocates/
On March 11, at the beginning of the Lent season in the Philippines, where more than 90% of the population are Catholic Christians, the brutal murder and possible sexual assault of Christine Lee Silawan, a 16-year-old girl from Cebu City, in Central Visayas region, revived the call for the death penalty. The girl’s face was skinned, and the esophagus, tongue, and trachea were missing. A 17-year-old suspect was under the police custody. He was later released because of technicalities. The girl’s gruesome death reminded the nation of President Rodrigo Duterte’s promise: reimposition of capital punishment for drug-related offenses and heinous crimes.
On March 7, 2017, House Bill 4727 was approved in Congress. If it becomes law, the bill will revive the death penalty either by hanging, firing squad, or lethal injection. It was lauded by Malacañang Palace as an effective measure on Duterte’s war on drugs, but the Senate does not see it as a priority.
During the 2016 presidential campaign, Duterte promised to revive the death penalty, believing that it would be a deterrent to criminals, specifically the drug lords. He believes that the “essence of the country’s penal code is retribution.”
In the 2018 Global Peace Index Report conducted by the Australian-based Institute for Economics and Peace, the Philippines ranked as the second least peaceful country in the Asia-Pacific region, despite the lower crime rate recorded by the Philippine National Police (PNP) in the same year.
According to the PNP, the crime rate was reduced to 9.13%, or a total of 473,068 crimes compared with 520,641 crimes posted in 2017. However, the murder rate in the capital city Manila was up by 112%. Common crimes in the Philippines include crime against a person – murder, rape, domestic violence – and crime against property, which includes robbery, theft and fraud. Drug trafficking and trade, human trafficking, and corruption are also rampant despite the government’s effort to curb criminality.
On March 11, at the beginning of the Lent season in the Philippines, where more than 90% of the population are Catholic Christians, the brutal murder and possible sexual assault of Christine Lee Silawan, a 16-year-old girl from Cebu City, in Central Visayas region, revived the call for the death penalty. The girl’s face was skinned, and the esophagus, tongue, and trachea were missing. A 17-year-old suspect was under the police custody. He was later released because of technicalities. The girl’s gruesome death reminded the nation of President Rodrigo Duterte’s promise: reimposition of capital punishment for drug-related offenses and heinous crimes.
On March 7, 2017, House Bill 4727 was approved in Congress. If it becomes law, the bill will revive the death penalty either by hanging, firing squad, or lethal injection. It was lauded by Malacañang Palace as an effective measure on Duterte’s war on drugs, but the Senate does not see it as a priority.
During the 2016 presidential campaign, Duterte promised to revive the death penalty, believing that it would be a deterrent to criminals, specifically the drug lords. He believes that the “essence of the country’s penal code is retribution.”
In the 2018 Global Peace Index Report conducted by the Australian-based Institute for Economics and Peace, the Philippines ranked as the second least peaceful country in the Asia-Pacific region, despite the lower crime rate recorded by the Philippine National Police (PNP) in the same year.
According to the PNP, the crime rate was reduced to 9.13%, or a total of 473,068 crimes compared with 520,641 crimes posted in 2017. However, the murder rate in the capital city Manila was up by 112%. Common crimes in the Philippines include crime against a person – murder, rape, domestic violence – and crime against property, which includes robbery, theft and fraud. Drug trafficking and trade, human trafficking, and corruption are also rampant despite the government’s effort to curb criminality.
Crime against women
According to Edna Aquino, convener of the #Babae Ako (Iamawoman) Campaign, violence against women and girls, particularly rape, has been invoked in arguments to impose the death penalty. However, Aquino instead urges strong enforcement of existing laws such as those against rape and child abuse.
“Most women survivors of violence wish to see true and impartial justice delivered to them through fair trials and convictions, and through more robust enforcement of existing laws,” Aquino said.
According to the Center for Women’s Resources, one woman or child is raped every hour in the Philippines.
Duterte is known for his misogynistic comments and encouragement of killings. During his speech to soldiers and rebel returnees in Mindanao, he was quoted as saying that raping three women is OK, and told them to shoot female rebels in their genitals.
Davao City in Mindanao, Duterte’s bailiwick, had the highest number of rape cases in 2018, according to the PNP.
Father Flavie Villanueva, a Society of the Divine Word coordinator and the founder of Justice-Peace Integrity of Creation and also the executive director of AJ Kalinga Inc, believes that Duterte’s words have impact on how men treat women.
“Mr Duterte is not an ordinary citizen, he has the highest seat in the executive branch. When you say executive, what he says becomes a policy. There is no room here for freedom of expression. Because every expression that you create is regarded by people as something as executive,” Father Villanueva said.
According to Edna Aquino, convener of the #Babae Ako (Iamawoman) Campaign, violence against women and girls, particularly rape, has been invoked in arguments to impose the death penalty. However, Aquino instead urges strong enforcement of existing laws such as those against rape and child abuse.
“Most women survivors of violence wish to see true and impartial justice delivered to them through fair trials and convictions, and through more robust enforcement of existing laws,” Aquino said.
According to the Center for Women’s Resources, one woman or child is raped every hour in the Philippines.
Duterte is known for his misogynistic comments and encouragement of killings. During his speech to soldiers and rebel returnees in Mindanao, he was quoted as saying that raping three women is OK, and told them to shoot female rebels in their genitals.
Davao City in Mindanao, Duterte’s bailiwick, had the highest number of rape cases in 2018, according to the PNP.
Father Flavie Villanueva, a Society of the Divine Word coordinator and the founder of Justice-Peace Integrity of Creation and also the executive director of AJ Kalinga Inc, believes that Duterte’s words have impact on how men treat women.
“Mr Duterte is not an ordinary citizen, he has the highest seat in the executive branch. When you say executive, what he says becomes a policy. There is no room here for freedom of expression. Because every expression that you create is regarded by people as something as executive,” Father Villanueva said.
‘Life is sacred’
In his second State of the Nation Address (SONA) in 2017, Duterte expressed his support for the reimposition of the death penalty, triggering criticisms from the Catholic hierarchy, from human-rights activists, and even from senators.
“In the Philippines, it is really an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. You took life, you must pay it with life. That is the only way to [make it] even. You cannot place a premium on the human mind that he will go straight,” Duterte said during the SONA.
The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) disagreed.
“We want punishment for the horrendous act committed but we do not call for the killing of a suspect nor the perpetrator who will be subjected to the imperfect justice system run by imperfect duty bearers,” CHR commissioner Karen Gomez-Dumpit said. She stressed that the death penalty is equated to a murder perpetrated by state agents because it is deliberate and premeditated and purposely kills a person. Father Villanueva agreed that it can never solve crimes, but instead creates a culture of fear and violence.
Aquino said the death penalty “threatens the fundamental rights of people, capital punishment will dismantle any hopes we have of building a peaceful, accountable and equal society which values human life and human rights; it further erodes our hopes for a people-centric governance model.”
‘Dancing with death’
In the only country in Asia to first ban the death penalty, then later reimpose it and ban it again, the international community as well as the Catholic Church and human-rights advocates are focusing again on Duterte’s latest stand on reviving capital punishment.
House Bill 4727, authored by former House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, was approved in Congress. The bill seeks death or life-long imprisonment on conviction of drug-related charges, including trafficking, manufacturing, importing, maintenance of drug dens and other drug-related crimes. The crime of plunder is no longer included. It will not impose the death penalty on convicted persons who were below 18 years of age or more than 70 years old during the commission of the crime.
Flawed justice
According to the Supreme Court decision on the case of People vs Mateo in 2004, after 11 years, it was found that there was a 71.77% error rate in verdicts and decisions impacting disproportionately against the poor. Before 2006, 483 death-penalty cases or 53.25% were reduced to reclusión perpetua or life imprisonment, while 65 cases were acquitted.
Blaming the CHR for the rise of crimes or why criminals get away is illogical.
“CHR does not have the mandate of being a law enforcer. We cannot digress from the issues that matter and must help, within our respective mandates and responsibilities, the police and other law-enforcement agencies’ mission to serve and protect the people. The police as a human-rights protector of all persons (without exception) need to be put at the front and center of the ‘solutions to rising criminality’ debate,” Gomez-Dumpit said.
Aquino also said there was an urgent need for reforms in the justice system. Court cases can can drags on for several years, in addition to biased and prejudicial proceedings and frequent miscarriages of justice.
In a 2018 survey of Social Weather Stations and CHR, it was found out that 7 out of 10 Filipinos do not support the death penalty.
Dual purpose
Capital punishment in the Philippines has a long history. During the Spanish period (1521-1898), American colonization, the Japanese occupation and the martial-law era under the Ferdinand Marcos regime, capital punishment was used not only to deter crimes but also used to curtail freedom.
After the People Power Revolution the death penalty was abolished by the 1987 constitution, “unless for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, Congress hereafter provides for it.” The Philippines thus became the first country in Asia to abolish the death penalty.
However, calls for the reimposition of the death penalty did not abate. The military lobbied for members of the Communist Party of the Philippines to be executed.
But it was only in 1993, during the presidency of Fidel Ramos, a Protestant, that the death penalty was restored by virtue of Republic Act 7659 because of rising criminality.
Despite the death penalty, however, the crime rate continued to soar. In 1999 it increased by 15.3%. President Joseph Estrada issued a de facto moratorium on executions because of pressure from the Catholic Church and rights groups.
Finally, on June 24, 2006, president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed into law the Republic Act 9346, titled “An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of the Death Penalty.” The death penalty was downgraded to life imprisonment. The Philippines entered the ratification of the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights aiming at the abolition of the death penalty in November 2007. This act in effective binds the Philippines never again to reintroduce the death penalty.
Rule of law
Father Villanueva has seen the worst in his ministry to the orphans and widows of Duterte’s drug war. Although he thinks that the Philippines is already desensitized to the point of reaching the “threshold of inhumanity,” he still believes in restorative justice, where society must provide a chance for criminals to reform.
The CHR is always anchored on the universality of human rights and to look at violations of human rights, shortcomings, abuses, and failure of government institutions to uphold the human rights of all persons. The government (the executive) has the primary duty to implement programs that respect, protect and fulfill human rights.
“We are a system of laws. We adhere to the rule of law and the right to due process for everyone. The deprivation of due process is an injustice that will mean more when it is us or family who is affected. The guarantee of due process and the rule of law will ensure that when it is our turn, we are assured that we will be treated evenly and fairly,” Gomez-Dumpit concluded.
But Duterte has already imposed the death sentence on us Filipinos whether we are guilty of heinous crimes or not. His anti-people policies and shoot-to-kill orders are enough to wipe out not only the criminals but those who are opposing him.
Wednesday, 13 February 2019
Sri Lanka ready for landmark hanging of drug convicts: Minister
Source: Channel News Asia (5 February 2019)
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/sri-lanka-ready-for-landmark-hanging-of-drug-convicts-minister-11204456
COLOMBO: Sri Lanka is ready to execute five drug convicts and end its 42-year capital punishment moratorium once President Maithripala Sirisena signs the death warrants and a hangman is appointed, officials said Tuesday (Feb 5).
Sirisena announced last year a tougher line on spiralling narcotics-related crime including executions for repeat drug offenders, inspired by a similar crackdown in the Philippines.
The country's justice minister told parliament Tuesday that legal and administrative procedures for the five condemned Sri Lankans were completed last month, paving the way for the first hangings since 1976.
"We have already complied with the president's request to restart capital punishment," Thalatha Athukorale said.
Five names had been sent to the president between Oct 12 and the end of January, but Sirisena was yet to sign the warrants and fix the execution dates, Athukorale added. There was no immediate comment from Sirisena's office on the cases.
Following a visit to the Philippines last month, Sirisena reaffirmed his plans to replicate his counterpart Rodrigo Duterte's "success" in dealing with illegal drugs.
Sirisena praised the "decisive action" of Duterte who has offered anti-narcotics help to Sri Lanka.
Duterte ran on a law-and-order platform that included promises to kill thousands of people involved in the drug trade, even officials.
"Even though I have not implemented some of the decisions of President Duterte, I will not bow to international non-governmental (rights) organisations and change my decision on death penalty for drug offences," Sirisena said last month.
Athukorale said there were 18 drug convicts who would qualify under Sirisena's guidelines to be hanged out of 376 convicts on death row.
But prisons spokesman Thushara Upuldeniya said authorities were still trying to fill a vacancy for an executioner.
Light work and a salary of 35,000 rupees (US$200) a month was offered in advertisements placed last year, but no suitable candidate came forward, he said.
"Technically, we don't have a hangman right now, but if the need arises, we should be able to get one fairly quickly," Upuldeniya told AFP.
While Sri Lanka's last execution was more than four decades ago, an executioner functioned until his retirement in 2014. Three replacements since have quit after short stints at the unused gallows.
Criminals are regularly given death sentences for murder, rape and drug-related crimes but their punishments have been commuted to life.
International rights groups have urged Sri Lanka not to revive capital punishment.
Source: AFP/aa
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/sri-lanka-ready-for-landmark-hanging-of-drug-convicts-minister-11204456
COLOMBO: Sri Lanka is ready to execute five drug convicts and end its 42-year capital punishment moratorium once President Maithripala Sirisena signs the death warrants and a hangman is appointed, officials said Tuesday (Feb 5).
Sirisena announced last year a tougher line on spiralling narcotics-related crime including executions for repeat drug offenders, inspired by a similar crackdown in the Philippines.
The country's justice minister told parliament Tuesday that legal and administrative procedures for the five condemned Sri Lankans were completed last month, paving the way for the first hangings since 1976.
"We have already complied with the president's request to restart capital punishment," Thalatha Athukorale said.
Five names had been sent to the president between Oct 12 and the end of January, but Sirisena was yet to sign the warrants and fix the execution dates, Athukorale added. There was no immediate comment from Sirisena's office on the cases.
Following a visit to the Philippines last month, Sirisena reaffirmed his plans to replicate his counterpart Rodrigo Duterte's "success" in dealing with illegal drugs.
Sirisena praised the "decisive action" of Duterte who has offered anti-narcotics help to Sri Lanka.
Duterte ran on a law-and-order platform that included promises to kill thousands of people involved in the drug trade, even officials.
"Even though I have not implemented some of the decisions of President Duterte, I will not bow to international non-governmental (rights) organisations and change my decision on death penalty for drug offences," Sirisena said last month.
Athukorale said there were 18 drug convicts who would qualify under Sirisena's guidelines to be hanged out of 376 convicts on death row.
But prisons spokesman Thushara Upuldeniya said authorities were still trying to fill a vacancy for an executioner.
Light work and a salary of 35,000 rupees (US$200) a month was offered in advertisements placed last year, but no suitable candidate came forward, he said.
"Technically, we don't have a hangman right now, but if the need arises, we should be able to get one fairly quickly," Upuldeniya told AFP.
While Sri Lanka's last execution was more than four decades ago, an executioner functioned until his retirement in 2014. Three replacements since have quit after short stints at the unused gallows.
Criminals are regularly given death sentences for murder, rape and drug-related crimes but their punishments have been commuted to life.
International rights groups have urged Sri Lanka not to revive capital punishment.
Source: AFP/aa
Sunday, 24 June 2018
Officials Silent on Thailand's 1st Execution in 9 Years
Source: Khao Sod English (19 June 2018)
http://www.khaosodenglish.com/featured/2018/06/19/officials-silent-on-thailands-1st-execution-in-9-years/
BANGKOK — Death penalty opponents were caught by surprise by Thailand’s first execution in nine years Monday night while officials are offering no explanation.
After 26-year-old Teerasak Longji was executed at Bangkok’s Bang Kwang Central Prison by lethal injection for aggravated murder, the leading group calling for abolition of capital punishment said Tuesday it deplored the decision and had no idea why the unexpected execution occurred now.
“We are not sure,” Amnesty International Thailand Director Piyanut Kotsan said Tuesday morning when asked about the timing.
Piyanut said Amnesty was not in the loop despite years of discussions with the Justice Ministry. She said her understanding was that Thailand has committed to becoming an abolitionist state as reflected in its master plan for human rights.
The last execution occurred in 2009 when two men were put to death for drug-related crimes. This past October, the head of the government’s human rights agency signaled the death penalty, which had been in de facto moratorium since 2009, would eventually be abolished.
“I can’t say when it will end but in practice it will soon be 10 years since no execution has taken place,” Pitikan Sitthidej said in October. “We don’t know when the death penalty will be abolished.”
Amnesty Thai director Piyanut said that standard practice for the last resort of clemency has been to obtain a royal pardon commuting death to life in prison. She said it’s unclear whether a royal pardon had been sought by Teerasak, who six years ago stabbed a 17-year-old high school student 24 times to steal his smartphone and wallet in Trang province.
Corrections Department chief Narat Savettan declined to comment Tuesday on the circumstances.
“I cannot give any comment about this,” he said, adding that the department would not issue any further statement on the matter.
A statement from Narat released Monday shed new light on why an execution had taken place after nine years. The last paragraph of the statement stated hope the execution would serve as deterrence.
“It is hoped that this execution will give pause to those thinking of committing heinous crimes or violating the law to consider the penalty,” it read.
The statement also pointed out that since the introduction of modern execution in 1935, 325 executions have taken place.
Someone who answered the phone at Bang Kwang Prison said its director, Sophon Yimpreecha was out for a meeting and could not be immediately reached.
Amnesty Thailand issued a statement Monday saying execution is deplorable and will not reduce crime.
“This is a deplorable violation of the right to life. Thailand is shockingly reneging on its own commitment to move towards abolition of the death penalty and the protection of the right to life, and is also putting itself out of step with the current global shift away from capital punishment,” wrote Katherine Gerson, an Amnesty campaigner in Thailand.
According to Amnesty Thailand, 510 people were on death row as of the end of 2017, 94 of which were women. The number of those who have exhausted all final appeals is 193.
Gerson wrote that there is no evidence that the death penalty has any unique deterrent effect, “so the Thai authorities’ hopes that this move will reduce crime is deeply misguided.”
Kingsley Abbot, senior legal advisor for the Geneva-based International Commission of Jurists, tweeted on Monday that execution is never justifiable and “flies in the face of Thailand’s repeated commitments on the international to work towards abolition.”
Amnesty announced it will hold a demonstration outside Bang Kwang at 2pm this afternoon.
http://www.khaosodenglish.com/featured/2018/06/19/officials-silent-on-thailands-1st-execution-in-9-years/
BANGKOK — Death penalty opponents were caught by surprise by Thailand’s first execution in nine years Monday night while officials are offering no explanation.
After 26-year-old Teerasak Longji was executed at Bangkok’s Bang Kwang Central Prison by lethal injection for aggravated murder, the leading group calling for abolition of capital punishment said Tuesday it deplored the decision and had no idea why the unexpected execution occurred now.
“We are not sure,” Amnesty International Thailand Director Piyanut Kotsan said Tuesday morning when asked about the timing.
Piyanut said Amnesty was not in the loop despite years of discussions with the Justice Ministry. She said her understanding was that Thailand has committed to becoming an abolitionist state as reflected in its master plan for human rights.
The last execution occurred in 2009 when two men were put to death for drug-related crimes. This past October, the head of the government’s human rights agency signaled the death penalty, which had been in de facto moratorium since 2009, would eventually be abolished.
“I can’t say when it will end but in practice it will soon be 10 years since no execution has taken place,” Pitikan Sitthidej said in October. “We don’t know when the death penalty will be abolished.”
Amnesty Thai director Piyanut said that standard practice for the last resort of clemency has been to obtain a royal pardon commuting death to life in prison. She said it’s unclear whether a royal pardon had been sought by Teerasak, who six years ago stabbed a 17-year-old high school student 24 times to steal his smartphone and wallet in Trang province.
Corrections Department chief Narat Savettan declined to comment Tuesday on the circumstances.
“I cannot give any comment about this,” he said, adding that the department would not issue any further statement on the matter.
A statement from Narat released Monday shed new light on why an execution had taken place after nine years. The last paragraph of the statement stated hope the execution would serve as deterrence.
“It is hoped that this execution will give pause to those thinking of committing heinous crimes or violating the law to consider the penalty,” it read.
The statement also pointed out that since the introduction of modern execution in 1935, 325 executions have taken place.
Someone who answered the phone at Bang Kwang Prison said its director, Sophon Yimpreecha was out for a meeting and could not be immediately reached.
Amnesty Thailand issued a statement Monday saying execution is deplorable and will not reduce crime.
“This is a deplorable violation of the right to life. Thailand is shockingly reneging on its own commitment to move towards abolition of the death penalty and the protection of the right to life, and is also putting itself out of step with the current global shift away from capital punishment,” wrote Katherine Gerson, an Amnesty campaigner in Thailand.
According to Amnesty Thailand, 510 people were on death row as of the end of 2017, 94 of which were women. The number of those who have exhausted all final appeals is 193.
Gerson wrote that there is no evidence that the death penalty has any unique deterrent effect, “so the Thai authorities’ hopes that this move will reduce crime is deeply misguided.”
Kingsley Abbot, senior legal advisor for the Geneva-based International Commission of Jurists, tweeted on Monday that execution is never justifiable and “flies in the face of Thailand’s repeated commitments on the international to work towards abolition.”
Amnesty announced it will hold a demonstration outside Bang Kwang at 2pm this afternoon.
Man executed by lethal injection
Source: Bangkok Post (18 June 2018)
https://m.bangkokpost.com/news/general/1487782/man-executed-by-lethal-injection
A man has been executed, a first in eight years, according to the Corrections Department.
Teerasak Longji, 26, who was convicted of aggravated robbery, received a lethal injection at 3-6pm on Monday, said Pol Col Narat Svetanan, director-general of the department.
Teerasak robbed and killed a man in Trang province on July 17, 2012. He took a mobile phone and a wallet from the victim and stabbed him 24 times.
The first court handed down a death sentence on him, and the Appeal Court and the Supreme Court upheld it.
He was the seventh prisoner executed by lethal injection after the method replaced firing squad 15 years ago.
Since 1935, 325 convicts have been executed. Firing squad was used on 319 prisoners. The last time was on Dec 11, 2003.
Lethal injection replaced it on Dec 12, 2003. Before Teerasak, it was administered on Aug 24, 2009.
Punishments under the Thai Criminal Code are fining, asset seizures, detention, imprisonment and execution.
https://m.bangkokpost.com/news/general/1487782/man-executed-by-lethal-injection
A man has been executed, a first in eight years, according to the Corrections Department.
Teerasak Longji, 26, who was convicted of aggravated robbery, received a lethal injection at 3-6pm on Monday, said Pol Col Narat Svetanan, director-general of the department.
Teerasak robbed and killed a man in Trang province on July 17, 2012. He took a mobile phone and a wallet from the victim and stabbed him 24 times.
The first court handed down a death sentence on him, and the Appeal Court and the Supreme Court upheld it.
He was the seventh prisoner executed by lethal injection after the method replaced firing squad 15 years ago.
Since 1935, 325 convicts have been executed. Firing squad was used on 319 prisoners. The last time was on Dec 11, 2003.
Lethal injection replaced it on Dec 12, 2003. Before Teerasak, it was administered on Aug 24, 2009.
Punishments under the Thai Criminal Code are fining, asset seizures, detention, imprisonment and execution.
Wednesday, 22 March 2017
Erdogan sees Turkey parliament restoring capital punishment
Source: Channel News Asia (19 March 2017)
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/erdogan-sees-turkey-parliament-restoring-capital-punishment/3606628.html
ISTANBUL: Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Saturday (Mar 18) he expected parliament to approve restoring capital punishment after next month's referendum in a move that could end Ankara's bid to join the EU.
His remarks came as Ankara was locked in a bitter standoff with Europe after Germany and the Netherlands blocked Turkish ministers from campaigning for a 'yes' vote ahead of the Apr 16 referendum on expanding Erdogan's powers.
The spat has seen Erdogan unleashing a volley of barbs against Berlin and The Hague, even likening Germany's leaders to Nazis, in remarks which were on Saturday rubbished by Berlin's top diplomat as "ludicrous".
With the bitter standoff showing no sign of ending, his remarks on restoring the death penalty looked set to further strain relations.
Turkey completely abolished the death penalty in 2004 as part of its efforts to join the European Union and the bloc has made clear that any move to restore it would scupper Ankara's already-embattled membership bid.
Erdogan raised the idea of bringing back the death penalty after the failed coup of Jul 15, suggesting it would bring justice to the families of the victims.
"I believe, God willing, that after the April 16 vote, parliament will do the necessary concerning your demands for capital punishment," Erdogan said at a televised rally in the western city of Canakkale, his words greeted by loud cheers.
To become law, the bill would still need to be signed by the head of state. But Erdogan said he would sign it "without hesitation".
'IGNORE HANS AND GEORGE'
EU officials have repeatedly warned Turkey that restoring capital punishment would spell the end of its decades-long bid to join the bloc.
But Erdogan and his ministers have said they need to respond to popular demand for such a move to deal with the ringleaders of the coup.
The Turkish strongman said he did not care what Europe thought about such a move.
"What Hans and George say is not important for me," he said, using two common European names. "What the people say, what the law says, that's what is important for us," he added.
Erdogan has repeatedly raised the idea that Turkey could restore capital punishment. But this is the first time he has directly called on parliament to approve it after the referendum on constitutional change.
No judicial executions have taken place since Oct 25, 1984 when leftwing militant Hidir Aslan was hanged following the 1980 military coup.
After the measure was outlawed, the 1999 death sentence against Kurdish separatist leader Abdullah Ocalan - and others on death row - was commuted to life behind bars.
A POLITICAL GAMBIT
In his latest salvo, Erdogan blasted German Chancellor Angela Merkel for backing a Dutch refusal to let Turkish ministers hold rallies in Rotterdam. "Shame on you! You are all the same," he said.
"You will not divert this nation from its path. On Apr 16, my nation will give the West the most beautiful response to its false behaviour, God willing," he added.
Analysts say Erdogan is happy to pick a fight with Europe in a drive for nationalist votes that could prove crucial in determining the outcome of what is expected to be a tight referendum.
He has particularly needled Germany and the Netherlands by saying their behaviour was reminiscent of Nazi Germany.
Denouncing his remarks as "ludicrous", German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel also accused the Turkish leader of openly playing to the gallery ahead of the referendum.
"He needs an enemy for his election campaign: Turkey humiliated and the West arrogant," Gabriel said in an interview with Der Spiegel magazine on Saturday.
GULEN GUILT? BERLIN UNCONVINCED
And in comments likely to further anger Ankara, Germany's intelligence chief said Berlin was unconvinced by Turkish assertions that US-based Islamic preacher Fethullah Gulen was the mastermind behind the July 15 coup.
"Turkey has tried on different levels to convince us of that fact, but they have not succeeded," foreign intelligence service chief Bruno Kahl told Der Spiegel.
In the wake of the putsch, Ankara launched an unprecedented purge of alleged Gulen supporters, with some 43,000 people jailed and awaiting, or on, trial.
Kahl said that the coup was launched by "part of the military" who expected to be hit by a purge.
- AFP/ec
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/erdogan-sees-turkey-parliament-restoring-capital-punishment/3606628.html
ISTANBUL: Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Saturday (Mar 18) he expected parliament to approve restoring capital punishment after next month's referendum in a move that could end Ankara's bid to join the EU.
His remarks came as Ankara was locked in a bitter standoff with Europe after Germany and the Netherlands blocked Turkish ministers from campaigning for a 'yes' vote ahead of the Apr 16 referendum on expanding Erdogan's powers.
The spat has seen Erdogan unleashing a volley of barbs against Berlin and The Hague, even likening Germany's leaders to Nazis, in remarks which were on Saturday rubbished by Berlin's top diplomat as "ludicrous".
With the bitter standoff showing no sign of ending, his remarks on restoring the death penalty looked set to further strain relations.
Turkey completely abolished the death penalty in 2004 as part of its efforts to join the European Union and the bloc has made clear that any move to restore it would scupper Ankara's already-embattled membership bid.
Erdogan raised the idea of bringing back the death penalty after the failed coup of Jul 15, suggesting it would bring justice to the families of the victims.
"I believe, God willing, that after the April 16 vote, parliament will do the necessary concerning your demands for capital punishment," Erdogan said at a televised rally in the western city of Canakkale, his words greeted by loud cheers.
To become law, the bill would still need to be signed by the head of state. But Erdogan said he would sign it "without hesitation".
'IGNORE HANS AND GEORGE'
EU officials have repeatedly warned Turkey that restoring capital punishment would spell the end of its decades-long bid to join the bloc.
But Erdogan and his ministers have said they need to respond to popular demand for such a move to deal with the ringleaders of the coup.
The Turkish strongman said he did not care what Europe thought about such a move.
"What Hans and George say is not important for me," he said, using two common European names. "What the people say, what the law says, that's what is important for us," he added.
Erdogan has repeatedly raised the idea that Turkey could restore capital punishment. But this is the first time he has directly called on parliament to approve it after the referendum on constitutional change.
No judicial executions have taken place since Oct 25, 1984 when leftwing militant Hidir Aslan was hanged following the 1980 military coup.
After the measure was outlawed, the 1999 death sentence against Kurdish separatist leader Abdullah Ocalan - and others on death row - was commuted to life behind bars.
A POLITICAL GAMBIT
In his latest salvo, Erdogan blasted German Chancellor Angela Merkel for backing a Dutch refusal to let Turkish ministers hold rallies in Rotterdam. "Shame on you! You are all the same," he said.
"You will not divert this nation from its path. On Apr 16, my nation will give the West the most beautiful response to its false behaviour, God willing," he added.
Analysts say Erdogan is happy to pick a fight with Europe in a drive for nationalist votes that could prove crucial in determining the outcome of what is expected to be a tight referendum.
He has particularly needled Germany and the Netherlands by saying their behaviour was reminiscent of Nazi Germany.
Denouncing his remarks as "ludicrous", German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel also accused the Turkish leader of openly playing to the gallery ahead of the referendum.
"He needs an enemy for his election campaign: Turkey humiliated and the West arrogant," Gabriel said in an interview with Der Spiegel magazine on Saturday.
GULEN GUILT? BERLIN UNCONVINCED
And in comments likely to further anger Ankara, Germany's intelligence chief said Berlin was unconvinced by Turkish assertions that US-based Islamic preacher Fethullah Gulen was the mastermind behind the July 15 coup.
"Turkey has tried on different levels to convince us of that fact, but they have not succeeded," foreign intelligence service chief Bruno Kahl told Der Spiegel.
In the wake of the putsch, Ankara launched an unprecedented purge of alleged Gulen supporters, with some 43,000 people jailed and awaiting, or on, trial.
Kahl said that the coup was launched by "part of the military" who expected to be hit by a purge.
- AFP/ec
Saturday, 11 March 2017
Philippine House approves reinstating death penalty
Source: The Straits Times (8 March 2017)
http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/philippine-house-approves-reinstating-death-penalty
The Philippine House of Representatives approved on third and final reading a Bill to reinstate the death penalty, more than a decade after it was abolished.
Despite intense lobbying by the influential Roman Catholic church and human rights and pro-life groups, the proposal was passed yesterday 216 to 54, with one abstention, eight months after it was filed.
President Rodrigo Duterte pushed for the reinstatement to add even more teeth to his brutal war on the narcotics trade.
"The death penalty to me is retribution… You pay for what you did in this life," he said last year.
Under the House-approved Bill, so-called heinous crimes would be punishable by death. Those include some forms of rape and murder, as well as drug offences, including the import, sale, manufacture, delivery and distribution of narcotics.
Capital punishment would typically be carried out by hanging, firing squad or lethal injection.
The Philippines abolished capital punishment in 1987, shortly after dictator Ferdinand Marcos was ousted in a popular revolt. President Fidel Ramos reinstated it in 1993, citing "crime control". In 2006, President Gloria Arroyo, following a vote in Congress, suspended it.
Mrs Arroyo, now allied with Mr Duterte's party, voted against the Bill. So did Mrs Imelda Marcos.
The debate now moves to the Senate where legislators are expected to await a ruling by the Justice Department on whether it contravenes the country's commitment to international conventions.
But Justice Secretary, Mr Vitaliano Aguirre II, is a fraternity brother of Mr Duterte's, and is not expected to oppose the Act. Senate President Aquilino Pimentel III, an ally of the president, is expecting a close fight. "I'm predicting maybe anywhere from 14 versus 10 or 10 versus 14 either way," he said.
The opposition Liberal Party, of former president Benigno Aquino, is already digging in. "We maintain that the death penalty is cruel, degrading, inhuman. We commit to stopping the death penalty in the Senate," Senator Francis Pangilinan, the party president, said.
At least nine senators have said they oppose capital punishment. The Senate has to pass its own Bill, that will then have to be reconciled with the one the House passed.
Once consolidated, it will be sent to Mr Duterte for his signature.
Senator Richard Gordon, chair of the Senate justice committee, said he would hold hearings on the Bill but the soonest he expects the debates to start is June. He added that if the committee can agree on a proposal, he will have one of the death penalty advocates in the Senate sponsor it. He mentioned, in particular, Mr Manny Pacquiao, a boxing champion and Christian preacher who believes death as punishment is sanctioned in biblical teachings.
http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/philippine-house-approves-reinstating-death-penalty
The Philippine House of Representatives approved on third and final reading a Bill to reinstate the death penalty, more than a decade after it was abolished.
Despite intense lobbying by the influential Roman Catholic church and human rights and pro-life groups, the proposal was passed yesterday 216 to 54, with one abstention, eight months after it was filed.
President Rodrigo Duterte pushed for the reinstatement to add even more teeth to his brutal war on the narcotics trade.
"The death penalty to me is retribution… You pay for what you did in this life," he said last year.
Under the House-approved Bill, so-called heinous crimes would be punishable by death. Those include some forms of rape and murder, as well as drug offences, including the import, sale, manufacture, delivery and distribution of narcotics.
Capital punishment would typically be carried out by hanging, firing squad or lethal injection.
The Philippines abolished capital punishment in 1987, shortly after dictator Ferdinand Marcos was ousted in a popular revolt. President Fidel Ramos reinstated it in 1993, citing "crime control". In 2006, President Gloria Arroyo, following a vote in Congress, suspended it.
Mrs Arroyo, now allied with Mr Duterte's party, voted against the Bill. So did Mrs Imelda Marcos.
The debate now moves to the Senate where legislators are expected to await a ruling by the Justice Department on whether it contravenes the country's commitment to international conventions.
But Justice Secretary, Mr Vitaliano Aguirre II, is a fraternity brother of Mr Duterte's, and is not expected to oppose the Act. Senate President Aquilino Pimentel III, an ally of the president, is expecting a close fight. "I'm predicting maybe anywhere from 14 versus 10 or 10 versus 14 either way," he said.
The opposition Liberal Party, of former president Benigno Aquino, is already digging in. "We maintain that the death penalty is cruel, degrading, inhuman. We commit to stopping the death penalty in the Senate," Senator Francis Pangilinan, the party president, said.
At least nine senators have said they oppose capital punishment. The Senate has to pass its own Bill, that will then have to be reconciled with the one the House passed.
Once consolidated, it will be sent to Mr Duterte for his signature.
Senator Richard Gordon, chair of the Senate justice committee, said he would hold hearings on the Bill but the soonest he expects the debates to start is June. He added that if the committee can agree on a proposal, he will have one of the death penalty advocates in the Senate sponsor it. He mentioned, in particular, Mr Manny Pacquiao, a boxing champion and Christian preacher who believes death as punishment is sanctioned in biblical teachings.
Sunday, 28 November 2010
Taiwan justice minister willing to hang
New justice minister faces up to death penalty controversy
From: Focus Taiwan News Channel
22 March 2011
Taipei, March 22 (CNA) Taiwan's new justice minister Tseng Yung-fu, who entered office Monday under pressure to address a recent controversy over the death penalty, said enforcing capital punishment would not violate United Nations human rights conventions.
Former Justice Minister Wang Ching-feng was forced to resign on March 11, after her insistence on not signing off on the executions of 44 inmates currently on death row sparked outrage from victims' families and some legislators.
The furor died down while acting Minister Huang Shih-ming temporarily held the post, but public pressure remained to name a new justice minister who would be willing to see the executions through, even if the country has not carried out an execution of a death penalty inmate since late 2005.
Asked if carrying out the death penalty would not violate the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) , which Taiwan has signed into law, Tseng said the covenant only hopes that countries reduce the use of capital punishment.
That has happened in Taiwan, Tseng said, citing the reduction in the number of death sentences meted out and the elimination of laws in which the death penalty is the only punishment option.
"Carrying out a death penalty cannot be considered as violating the treaties," Tseng said.
He indicated that there was no deadline binding the minister of justice to sign the execution orders of the 44 death row inmates but said those who were sentenced to death for the most heinous of crimes would have their cases reviewed first.
Despite the controversy, a ministry task force on studying ways to abolish capital punishment will hold its first meeting Tuesday as scheduled, and the ministry will conduct a survey every six months to gauge public opinion on the issue.
At Monday's handover ceremony, acting Minister Huang praised Wang for her enthusiasm and lauded her as an official who stood up for principles.
"It was to everyone's regret that she left," Huang said.
Meanwhile, Tseng also pledged that he would promote a mechanism during his tenure that would make it possible to dismiss incompetent judicial personnel.
"He who laughs at crooked men better walk very straight, " he stressed.
Tseng, 67, a former deputy justice minister, has served as chief prosecutor in Taipei and Tainan cities and Taitung, Yunlin and Chiayi counties as well as the outlying island of Kinmen.
He has also served as the chief prosecutor with the Public Prosecutors Office for the Taiwan High Court and as the Ministry of Justice's chief secretary.
(By An Chi-hsien and Elizabeth Hsu)
From: Focus Taiwan News Channel
22 March 2011
Taipei, March 22 (CNA) Taiwan's new justice minister Tseng Yung-fu, who entered office Monday under pressure to address a recent controversy over the death penalty, said enforcing capital punishment would not violate United Nations human rights conventions.
Former Justice Minister Wang Ching-feng was forced to resign on March 11, after her insistence on not signing off on the executions of 44 inmates currently on death row sparked outrage from victims' families and some legislators.
The furor died down while acting Minister Huang Shih-ming temporarily held the post, but public pressure remained to name a new justice minister who would be willing to see the executions through, even if the country has not carried out an execution of a death penalty inmate since late 2005.
Asked if carrying out the death penalty would not violate the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) , which Taiwan has signed into law, Tseng said the covenant only hopes that countries reduce the use of capital punishment.
That has happened in Taiwan, Tseng said, citing the reduction in the number of death sentences meted out and the elimination of laws in which the death penalty is the only punishment option.
"Carrying out a death penalty cannot be considered as violating the treaties," Tseng said.
He indicated that there was no deadline binding the minister of justice to sign the execution orders of the 44 death row inmates but said those who were sentenced to death for the most heinous of crimes would have their cases reviewed first.
Despite the controversy, a ministry task force on studying ways to abolish capital punishment will hold its first meeting Tuesday as scheduled, and the ministry will conduct a survey every six months to gauge public opinion on the issue.
At Monday's handover ceremony, acting Minister Huang praised Wang for her enthusiasm and lauded her as an official who stood up for principles.
"It was to everyone's regret that she left," Huang said.
Meanwhile, Tseng also pledged that he would promote a mechanism during his tenure that would make it possible to dismiss incompetent judicial personnel.
"He who laughs at crooked men better walk very straight, " he stressed.
Tseng, 67, a former deputy justice minister, has served as chief prosecutor in Taipei and Tainan cities and Taitung, Yunlin and Chiayi counties as well as the outlying island of Kinmen.
He has also served as the chief prosecutor with the Public Prosecutors Office for the Taiwan High Court and as the Ministry of Justice's chief secretary.
(By An Chi-hsien and Elizabeth Hsu)
Saturday, 5 June 2010
Taiwan: Activists' plea for abolition
Government must clarify death penalty policy: activists
Focus Taiwan News
2 June, 2010
Taipei, June 2 (CNA) Disappointed anti-death penalty activists said Wednesday that they will stop pursuing a constitutional interpretation on capital punishment after the Justices of Constitutional Court rejected a petition last week on halting the death penalty.
However, they urged President Ma Ying-jeou to live up to his pledge to end the practice in the future.
Accusing Ma of duplicity, the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP) , along with over 50 supporters from the medical, environmental, religious and legal sectors, complained that while the president has vowed to abolish the death penalty, he continues to allow the Ministry of Justice to execute people.
In April, Taiwan ended a four-year de facto moratorium on capital punishment by executing four of its 44 death row inmates.
Justice Minister Tseng Yong-fu, who was appointed after his predecessor resigned for refusing to sign off on executions, has been vague on the eventual plight of the remaining 40, saying only that he will respect the decision of the Constitutional Court.
According to the court, the government's adherence to its death penalty policy does not go against the two U.N. covenants -- the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights -- signed by the president in late March.
Human rights lawyer Wellington Koo lamented the court's decision, saying the rejection means the group has exhausted all legal means of swaying the government and that "all we can do now is to plead with the government to hear us out."
According to the TAEDP, Taiwan is one of 18 countries, including the United States and China, that continue to enforce capital punishment.
"The president and the justice minister have publicly vowed to end the death penalty but yet they continue to sign off on death warrants. Their actions make us highly dubious of their true intentions, " said TAEDP Chairwoman Chiu Hei-yuan, urging Ma to clarify his stance.
Another of the activists, Catholic Archbishop John Hung, said that "it has been proven over and over again that the death penalty is not an antidote for reducing violence in society." (By Jenny W. Hsu) ENDITEM/J
Focus Taiwan News
2 June, 2010
Taipei, June 2 (CNA) Disappointed anti-death penalty activists said Wednesday that they will stop pursuing a constitutional interpretation on capital punishment after the Justices of Constitutional Court rejected a petition last week on halting the death penalty.
However, they urged President Ma Ying-jeou to live up to his pledge to end the practice in the future.
Accusing Ma of duplicity, the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP) , along with over 50 supporters from the medical, environmental, religious and legal sectors, complained that while the president has vowed to abolish the death penalty, he continues to allow the Ministry of Justice to execute people.
In April, Taiwan ended a four-year de facto moratorium on capital punishment by executing four of its 44 death row inmates.
Justice Minister Tseng Yong-fu, who was appointed after his predecessor resigned for refusing to sign off on executions, has been vague on the eventual plight of the remaining 40, saying only that he will respect the decision of the Constitutional Court.
According to the court, the government's adherence to its death penalty policy does not go against the two U.N. covenants -- the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights -- signed by the president in late March.
Human rights lawyer Wellington Koo lamented the court's decision, saying the rejection means the group has exhausted all legal means of swaying the government and that "all we can do now is to plead with the government to hear us out."
According to the TAEDP, Taiwan is one of 18 countries, including the United States and China, that continue to enforce capital punishment.
"The president and the justice minister have publicly vowed to end the death penalty but yet they continue to sign off on death warrants. Their actions make us highly dubious of their true intentions, " said TAEDP Chairwoman Chiu Hei-yuan, urging Ma to clarify his stance.
Another of the activists, Catholic Archbishop John Hung, said that "it has been proven over and over again that the death penalty is not an antidote for reducing violence in society." (By Jenny W. Hsu) ENDITEM/J
Saturday, 8 May 2010
Taiwan: Asian human rights criticism
TAIWAN: ADPAN Appeals for Taiwan to continue to Take a Lead
Statement by ADPAN
The Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) joins others around the world in regretting that the Presidential Office of Taiwan accepted the resignation of former Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng on 11 March amid political pressure against the moratorium of the death penalty. ADPAN urges the Taiwanese government to maintain the moratorium and to take a lead towards abolition among Asian countries.
In 2001, the Taiwanese Government announced a policy to gradually abolish the death penalty. The number of executions every year since then had been on the decline. In 2006, mandatory death sentences were eliminated, and no executions have been carried out since the same year. This is in keeping with the global trend toward abolition evident in UN General Assembly resolutions in 2007 and 2008 calling for a global moratorium on executions as a first step toward abolition.
On 14 March, President Ma Ying-jeou pointed out that the general public of Taiwan needs to engage in open discussion on the death penalty and that Taiwan cannot afford to ignore this international trend toward abolition.
ADPAN appeals to the Taiwanese government to do everything within its power to continue its efforts toward abolition, and that any future Minister of Justice shall take all necessary measures to lead Taiwan towards abolition, including ensuring the life of all 44 prisoners currently on death row.
More than two-thirds of the countries of the world have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. World opinion and practice is shifting inexorably towards abolition.
Representing a regional voice for abolition, ADPAN welcomes the steps taken thus far by the Taiwanese government towards abolition, but urges the Taiwan government to ensure that it does not fall behind other countries in the region that have abolished or are restricting the use of the death penalty: Mongolia’s president announced an official moratorium in January, South Korea has not executed anyone for over 12 years, the Philippines and the Cook Islands respectively abolished the death penalty in 2006 and 2007.
ADPAN is a cross-regional network made up of over 40 members including lawyers, NGOs and human rights activists from 22 countries mainly from Asia and the Pacific.
Statement by ADPAN
The Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) joins others around the world in regretting that the Presidential Office of Taiwan accepted the resignation of former Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng on 11 March amid political pressure against the moratorium of the death penalty. ADPAN urges the Taiwanese government to maintain the moratorium and to take a lead towards abolition among Asian countries.
In 2001, the Taiwanese Government announced a policy to gradually abolish the death penalty. The number of executions every year since then had been on the decline. In 2006, mandatory death sentences were eliminated, and no executions have been carried out since the same year. This is in keeping with the global trend toward abolition evident in UN General Assembly resolutions in 2007 and 2008 calling for a global moratorium on executions as a first step toward abolition.
On 14 March, President Ma Ying-jeou pointed out that the general public of Taiwan needs to engage in open discussion on the death penalty and that Taiwan cannot afford to ignore this international trend toward abolition.
ADPAN appeals to the Taiwanese government to do everything within its power to continue its efforts toward abolition, and that any future Minister of Justice shall take all necessary measures to lead Taiwan towards abolition, including ensuring the life of all 44 prisoners currently on death row.
More than two-thirds of the countries of the world have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. World opinion and practice is shifting inexorably towards abolition.
Representing a regional voice for abolition, ADPAN welcomes the steps taken thus far by the Taiwanese government towards abolition, but urges the Taiwan government to ensure that it does not fall behind other countries in the region that have abolished or are restricting the use of the death penalty: Mongolia’s president announced an official moratorium in January, South Korea has not executed anyone for over 12 years, the Philippines and the Cook Islands respectively abolished the death penalty in 2006 and 2007.
ADPAN is a cross-regional network made up of over 40 members including lawyers, NGOs and human rights activists from 22 countries mainly from Asia and the Pacific.
Taiwan: International condemnation for hangings
Taiwan carries out first executions in five years
Statement by Amnesty International, 4 May 2010
Amnesty International has condemned the execution of four prisoners by the Taiwanese authorities, the first since December 2005.
Chang Chun-hung, Hung Chen-yao, Ko Shih-ming and Chang Wen-wei were executed in prisons in Taipei, Tainan and Taichun on the evening of 30 April.
The executions come just two weeks after new Minister of Justice Tseng Yung-fu was reported as saying that his ultimate goal is the abolition of the death penalty.
"These executions cast a dark shadow on the country's human rights record, and blatantly contradict the Justice Minister's previously declared intention to abolish the death penalty," said Catherine Baber, deputy director of Amnesty International's Asia-Pacific programme.
The resignation of Wang Ching-feng as Minister of Justice last March sparked international attention over the issue of the death penalty in Taiwan. Wang Ching-feng had refused to sign execution orders because of her opposition to the death penalty.
"The world was looking to the Taiwanese authorities to choose human rights, and to show leadership on the path towards abolishing the death penalty in the Asia-Pacific. Today's executions extinguished that hope," said Catherine Baber.
The Taiwanese Alliance to End the Death Penalty has raised concerns over the legality of the executions.
The Taiwanese authorities stated today that they are still considering alternatives to the death penalty, but such commitments are of little value while executions continue.
139 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice. Amnesty International calls upon the Taiwanese authorities to immediately establish a moratorium on executions and take all the necessary steps to abolish the death penalty in the country.
Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases, as a violation of the right to life and the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.
Amnesty International believes that the death penalty legitimizes an irreversible act of violence by the state.
Research demonstrates that the death penalty is often applied in a discriminatory manner, being used disproportionately against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic and religious communities. The death penalty is often imposed after a grossly unfair trial.
But even when trials respect international standards of fairness, the risk of executing the innocent can never be fully eliminated – the death penalty will inevitably claim innocent victims, as has been persistently demonstrated.
Scientific studies have consistently failed to find convincing evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments.
Two resolutions, calling for a worldwide moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty, were adopted at the United Nations General Assembly in December 2007 and 2008 by an overwhelming majority of states.
Statement by Amnesty International, 4 May 2010
Amnesty International has condemned the execution of four prisoners by the Taiwanese authorities, the first since December 2005.
Chang Chun-hung, Hung Chen-yao, Ko Shih-ming and Chang Wen-wei were executed in prisons in Taipei, Tainan and Taichun on the evening of 30 April.
The executions come just two weeks after new Minister of Justice Tseng Yung-fu was reported as saying that his ultimate goal is the abolition of the death penalty.
"These executions cast a dark shadow on the country's human rights record, and blatantly contradict the Justice Minister's previously declared intention to abolish the death penalty," said Catherine Baber, deputy director of Amnesty International's Asia-Pacific programme.
The resignation of Wang Ching-feng as Minister of Justice last March sparked international attention over the issue of the death penalty in Taiwan. Wang Ching-feng had refused to sign execution orders because of her opposition to the death penalty.
"The world was looking to the Taiwanese authorities to choose human rights, and to show leadership on the path towards abolishing the death penalty in the Asia-Pacific. Today's executions extinguished that hope," said Catherine Baber.
The Taiwanese Alliance to End the Death Penalty has raised concerns over the legality of the executions.
The Taiwanese authorities stated today that they are still considering alternatives to the death penalty, but such commitments are of little value while executions continue.
139 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice. Amnesty International calls upon the Taiwanese authorities to immediately establish a moratorium on executions and take all the necessary steps to abolish the death penalty in the country.
Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases, as a violation of the right to life and the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.
Amnesty International believes that the death penalty legitimizes an irreversible act of violence by the state.
Research demonstrates that the death penalty is often applied in a discriminatory manner, being used disproportionately against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic and religious communities. The death penalty is often imposed after a grossly unfair trial.
But even when trials respect international standards of fairness, the risk of executing the innocent can never be fully eliminated – the death penalty will inevitably claim innocent victims, as has been persistently demonstrated.
Scientific studies have consistently failed to find convincing evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments.
Two resolutions, calling for a worldwide moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty, were adopted at the United Nations General Assembly in December 2007 and 2008 by an overwhelming majority of states.
Taiwan: Human rights protest over executions
Protest Against The Ministry of Justice’s Illegal Executions
Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP) Press Release May, 1st, 2010
Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP), Judicial Reform Foundation (JRF), Taiwan Association for Human Rights (TAHR), Amnesty International Taiwan (AI Taiwan), Taiwan Labor Front, Human Rights Committee of the Taipei Bar Association, Regional Tibetan Youth Congress Taiwan, Taiwan Green Party and Humanistic Education Foundation together handed a letter of protest to the Ministry of Justice on May, 1st to remonstrate with the Minister of Justice, Tseng Yung- Fu, about the cursory order to execute four death row prisoners. Amnesty International (AI) published a news release to denounce the Taiwanese government for resuming executions and stated that this move has seriously damaged Taiwan’s human rights record.
The Minster of Justice, Tseng Yung-Fu, signed the orders for the executions, killing the four death row inmates, Chang Chun-Hong, Chang Wen-Wei, Hong Chen Yeow, and Ke Shi-Ming, in the space of just over an hour on April 30th. Their families weren’t informed and they were not able to meet the four men for the last time before they died.
We are shocked and enraged at these so-called "executions according to law". Below are our responses to the reasons for the executions given by the Ministry of Justice:
Illegal Execution of Chang Chun-Hong
On behalf of the 44 death row inmates, TAEDP asked 7 lawyers to demand a constitutional interpretation from the Grand Justices of the Judicial Yuan. But due to time constraints, legal letters of authorization were not obtained in time from Chang Chun-Hong, Chang Wen-Wei, Hong Chen Yeow, and Ke Shi-Ming. Nevertheless, concerning the procedural items, the Department of Clerks for the Justices of the Constitutional Court sent letters to the 7 lawyers to asking them to provide these document within ten days (up to May 3rd, 2010). Besides, at the same time, it also tried to reach the four death row inmates in different prisons to learn their wills regarding the constitutional interpretation.
TAEDP contacted the four death row inmates after receiving the letter. Chang Chun-Hong then sent the letter of authorization with his signature on April 26th. He showed his willingness to appoint TAEDP’s lawyers to demand a constitutional interpretation. Therefore, Chang’s demand was without question totally legal.
In accordance with the Ministry of Justice’s "Implementation Guidelines of The Review of Death Penalty Cases," the first rule of the first item of the second article states that, for cases pending constitutional interpretation, the highest court cannot send the orders of executions to the Minister of Justice. It is a shame that the Minister, however, ignored the demand, signing the orders for the executions illegally and said that they acted in accordance with the law.
Unknown Will of Ke
While Chang Wen-Wei and Hong Chen Yeow directly refused to approve the demand for constitutional interpretations, the fourth death row inmates Ke Shi-Ming didn’t actually reply. TAEDP sent representatives to the Tainan prison to meet Ke in person, but the staff replied that Ke was banned from meeting anyone. They could not tell the representatives of TAEDP if Ke received TAEDP’s letter and if he was able to write letters freely. Thus, we had no idea whether Ke refused to approve the demand for constitutional interpretations.
No Fair Trial
Three of the death row inmates executed didn’t have any defense lawyers when they receiving the final rulings upholding the death penalty from the highest court. According to the International Covenant of the Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) ratified by President Ma, any death row inmates should have defense lawyers in any stage of the trial as legitimate legal procedures. However, Article 388 of the Criminal Procedure Law in Taiwan violates the ICCPR. Given the opportunity, the Grand Justices might have a chance to uphold this basic right recognized by the international society and might rule the death penalty unconstitutional. The Minster of Justice Tseng, nonetheless, intentionally and recklessly ignored this and acted before the decisions of the Grand Justices. The Ministry of Justice exceeded its powers over the mandates of the Judicial Yuan, claiming its action was "in accordance with the law," treating human life as if it were worthless. It proves that the Ministry of Justice’s promises to be cautious regarding execution were nothing but lies. Therefore, the Minister of Justice needs to shoulder the political responsibility.
Blindness to the ICCPR
On March, 29th, TAEDP also helped the 44 death row inmates demand pardons (the commutation of the penalty) from the President. President Ma didn’t refuse and stated that he had received the demand and asked the Ministry of Justice for further discussions. Nothing about this was mentioned in the press release of the Ministry of Justice. It could be seen as blindness to the ICCPR and overstepping its authority. If the government really wants to "administer in accordance with the law," it should make it clear how they processed the demand for commutation of the death penalty.
The Indignation of Men and Gods?
The Minister of Justice claimed that he would exercise his power carefully. Beside the original procedures, Tseng said another consultative group would be formed for circumspect consideration of the cases "arousing the indignation of men and gods." But now the only standard we can see is "the right to seal and authorize." After the handling of the letter of authorization in this case, the Minister of Justice should announce the names of the members of this consultative group and related information for public scrutiny.
The TAEDP feels deeply distressed that the 4 year and half moratorium on the death penalty was destroyed in one day and firmly appeals to the general public to rethink the death penalty. While there is still controversy over the death penalty, without careful procedures, the Ministry of Justice speeded up the executions instead of reexamining related laws and rules. It is again another manifestation of how the government signed the ICCPR with one hand and broke it with the other.
In the press release of the Ministry of Justice, it was said that "as for the 40 people demanding constitutional interpretations, the Ministry of Justice would see how it develops and act in accordance with the law." Consequently, we request the passage of legislation concerning commutation and an immediate stop to executions.
Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP) Press Release May, 1st, 2010
Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP), Judicial Reform Foundation (JRF), Taiwan Association for Human Rights (TAHR), Amnesty International Taiwan (AI Taiwan), Taiwan Labor Front, Human Rights Committee of the Taipei Bar Association, Regional Tibetan Youth Congress Taiwan, Taiwan Green Party and Humanistic Education Foundation together handed a letter of protest to the Ministry of Justice on May, 1st to remonstrate with the Minister of Justice, Tseng Yung- Fu, about the cursory order to execute four death row prisoners. Amnesty International (AI) published a news release to denounce the Taiwanese government for resuming executions and stated that this move has seriously damaged Taiwan’s human rights record.
The Minster of Justice, Tseng Yung-Fu, signed the orders for the executions, killing the four death row inmates, Chang Chun-Hong, Chang Wen-Wei, Hong Chen Yeow, and Ke Shi-Ming, in the space of just over an hour on April 30th. Their families weren’t informed and they were not able to meet the four men for the last time before they died.
We are shocked and enraged at these so-called "executions according to law". Below are our responses to the reasons for the executions given by the Ministry of Justice:
Illegal Execution of Chang Chun-Hong
On behalf of the 44 death row inmates, TAEDP asked 7 lawyers to demand a constitutional interpretation from the Grand Justices of the Judicial Yuan. But due to time constraints, legal letters of authorization were not obtained in time from Chang Chun-Hong, Chang Wen-Wei, Hong Chen Yeow, and Ke Shi-Ming. Nevertheless, concerning the procedural items, the Department of Clerks for the Justices of the Constitutional Court sent letters to the 7 lawyers to asking them to provide these document within ten days (up to May 3rd, 2010). Besides, at the same time, it also tried to reach the four death row inmates in different prisons to learn their wills regarding the constitutional interpretation.
TAEDP contacted the four death row inmates after receiving the letter. Chang Chun-Hong then sent the letter of authorization with his signature on April 26th. He showed his willingness to appoint TAEDP’s lawyers to demand a constitutional interpretation. Therefore, Chang’s demand was without question totally legal.
In accordance with the Ministry of Justice’s "Implementation Guidelines of The Review of Death Penalty Cases," the first rule of the first item of the second article states that, for cases pending constitutional interpretation, the highest court cannot send the orders of executions to the Minister of Justice. It is a shame that the Minister, however, ignored the demand, signing the orders for the executions illegally and said that they acted in accordance with the law.
Unknown Will of Ke
While Chang Wen-Wei and Hong Chen Yeow directly refused to approve the demand for constitutional interpretations, the fourth death row inmates Ke Shi-Ming didn’t actually reply. TAEDP sent representatives to the Tainan prison to meet Ke in person, but the staff replied that Ke was banned from meeting anyone. They could not tell the representatives of TAEDP if Ke received TAEDP’s letter and if he was able to write letters freely. Thus, we had no idea whether Ke refused to approve the demand for constitutional interpretations.
No Fair Trial
Three of the death row inmates executed didn’t have any defense lawyers when they receiving the final rulings upholding the death penalty from the highest court. According to the International Covenant of the Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) ratified by President Ma, any death row inmates should have defense lawyers in any stage of the trial as legitimate legal procedures. However, Article 388 of the Criminal Procedure Law in Taiwan violates the ICCPR. Given the opportunity, the Grand Justices might have a chance to uphold this basic right recognized by the international society and might rule the death penalty unconstitutional. The Minster of Justice Tseng, nonetheless, intentionally and recklessly ignored this and acted before the decisions of the Grand Justices. The Ministry of Justice exceeded its powers over the mandates of the Judicial Yuan, claiming its action was "in accordance with the law," treating human life as if it were worthless. It proves that the Ministry of Justice’s promises to be cautious regarding execution were nothing but lies. Therefore, the Minister of Justice needs to shoulder the political responsibility.
Blindness to the ICCPR
On March, 29th, TAEDP also helped the 44 death row inmates demand pardons (the commutation of the penalty) from the President. President Ma didn’t refuse and stated that he had received the demand and asked the Ministry of Justice for further discussions. Nothing about this was mentioned in the press release of the Ministry of Justice. It could be seen as blindness to the ICCPR and overstepping its authority. If the government really wants to "administer in accordance with the law," it should make it clear how they processed the demand for commutation of the death penalty.
The Indignation of Men and Gods?
The Minister of Justice claimed that he would exercise his power carefully. Beside the original procedures, Tseng said another consultative group would be formed for circumspect consideration of the cases "arousing the indignation of men and gods." But now the only standard we can see is "the right to seal and authorize." After the handling of the letter of authorization in this case, the Minister of Justice should announce the names of the members of this consultative group and related information for public scrutiny.
The TAEDP feels deeply distressed that the 4 year and half moratorium on the death penalty was destroyed in one day and firmly appeals to the general public to rethink the death penalty. While there is still controversy over the death penalty, without careful procedures, the Ministry of Justice speeded up the executions instead of reexamining related laws and rules. It is again another manifestation of how the government signed the ICCPR with one hand and broke it with the other.
In the press release of the Ministry of Justice, it was said that "as for the 40 people demanding constitutional interpretations, the Ministry of Justice would see how it develops and act in accordance with the law." Consequently, we request the passage of legislation concerning commutation and an immediate stop to executions.
Thursday, 27 August 2009
Thailand: Civil libertarians condemn executions
Statement by the Thailand Union for Civil Liberty, 25 August 2009
Statement by UCL
It is wrong that Thailand has executed two men on 24th August 2009:
It ignores the majority vote of the United Nations General Assembly in December 2007 and again in December 2008 in favour of a universal moratorium on the death penalty.
It flouts the greater certainty expressed world wide that the death penalty is a transgression of the most basic of all human rights, the right to life.
It goes against the interpretation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights expressed to representatives of the Royal Thai government by the UN Human Rights Committee, on 28th July 2003, that drug offenses did not constitute a crime subject to Capital Punishment within the terms of the Covenant which it has ratified.
The execution of the two with a mere one hour notice is a flagrant transgression of the procedures established by the UN for the enactment of Capital Punishment.
It is a useless measure of no greater consequence than other punishment in the fight against drugs.
It is a cruel and inhumane punishment, with no place in a civilised state.
It is counter to the Buddhist belief in the sanctity of life.
Danthong Breen
Union for Civil Liberty, Thailand
Related stories:
Thailand: Executions a backward step -- 27 August 2009
Thailand: Drug dealers put to death -- 26 August 2009
Statement by UCL
It is wrong that Thailand has executed two men on 24th August 2009:
It ignores the majority vote of the United Nations General Assembly in December 2007 and again in December 2008 in favour of a universal moratorium on the death penalty.
It flouts the greater certainty expressed world wide that the death penalty is a transgression of the most basic of all human rights, the right to life.
It goes against the interpretation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights expressed to representatives of the Royal Thai government by the UN Human Rights Committee, on 28th July 2003, that drug offenses did not constitute a crime subject to Capital Punishment within the terms of the Covenant which it has ratified.
The execution of the two with a mere one hour notice is a flagrant transgression of the procedures established by the UN for the enactment of Capital Punishment.
It is a useless measure of no greater consequence than other punishment in the fight against drugs.
It is a cruel and inhumane punishment, with no place in a civilised state.
It is counter to the Buddhist belief in the sanctity of life.
Danthong Breen
Union for Civil Liberty, Thailand
Related stories:
Thailand: Executions a backward step -- 27 August 2009
Thailand: Drug dealers put to death -- 26 August 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
