Dramatic Drop in Saudi Executions After Laws Changed in 2020

Source: Bloomberg (18 January 2021)

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-18/dramatic-drop-in-saudi-executions-after-laws-changed-in-2020

Dubai, United Arab Emirates (AP) -- Saudi Arabia, for years one of the world's most prolific executioners, dramatically reduced the number of people put to death last year, following changes halting executions for non-violent drug-related crimes, according to the government’s tally and independent observers.

The Saudi government’s Human Rights Commission said Monday it documented 27 executions in 2020. That's compared to an all-time high of 184 executions the year before as documented by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. The change represents an 85% reduction in the number of people put to death last year, compared to 2019.

"The sharp decrease was brought about in part by a moratorium on death penalties for drug-related offenses,” the Saudi rights commission said.

When asked by The Associated Press, the commission said the new law ordering a stop to such executions came into effect sometime last year. The new directive for judges does not appear to have been published publicly and it was not immediately clear whether the law was changed by royal decree, as is typically the case.

The AP previously reported that Saudi Arabia last year also ordered an end to the death penalty for crimes committed by minors and ordered judges to end the controversial practice of public flogging, replacing it with jail time, fines or community service.

The force behind these changes is 34-year-old Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has the backing of his father, King Salman. In an effort to modernize the country, attract foreign investment and revamp the economy, the prince has spearheaded a range of reforms curtailing the power of ultraconservative Wahhabis, who adhere to a strict interpretation of Islam that many Saudis still practice.

For years, the kingdom's high rate of executions was in large part due to the number of people executed for non-lethal offenses, which judges had wide discretion to rule on, particularly for drug-related crimes.

Amnesty International ranked Saudi Arabia third in the world for the highest number of executions in 2019, after China where the number of executions is believed to be in the thousands, and Iran. Among those put to death that year by Saudi Arabia were 32 minority Shiites convicted on terrorism charges related to their participation in anti-government protests and clashes with police.

While some crimes, such as premeditated murder, can carry fixed punishments under the Saudi interpretation of Islamic law, or Shariah, drug-related offenses are considered “ta’zir,” meaning neither the crime nor the punishment is defined in Islam. Discretionary judgments for “ta’zir” crimes led to arbitrary rulings with contentious outcomes.

The kingdom has long been criticized by independent rights groups for applying the death sentence for non-violent crimes related to drug trafficking. Many of those executed for such crimes were often poor Yemenis or low-level drug smugglers of South Asia descent, with the latter having little to no knowledge of Arabic and unable to understand or read the charges against them in court.

Saudi Arabia carries out executions mainly by beheading and sometimes in public. The kingdom had argued that public executions and those of drug traffickers serve as a deterrent to combat crime.

“The moratorium on drug-related offenses means the kingdom is giving more non-violent criminals a second chance," the president of the government's Human Rights Commission, Awwad Alawwad, said. In a statement obtained by the AP, he said the change represents a sign the Saudi justice system is focusing more on rehabilitation and prevention rather than solely on punishment.

According to Human Rights Watch, there were just five executions for drug-related crimes last year in Saudi Arabia, all in January 2020.

COVID-hit Indonesia orders executions via Zoom, video apps

Source: Public News (23 April 2021)

https://publicnews.in/world/covid-hit-indonesia-orders-executions-via-zoom-video-apps/

Amnesty says virtually 100 inmates sentenced nearly by judges since early final 12 months.

Indonesia has sentenced a number of prisoners to demise over Zoom and different video apps in the course of the coronavirus pandemic in what critics say is an “inhumane” insult to these dealing with the firing squad.

The Southeast Asian nation turned to digital courtroom hearings as COVID-19 restrictions shut down most in-person trials, together with homicide and drug trafficking circumstances, which might carry the demise penalty.

Since early final 12 months, virtually 100 inmates have been condemned to die in Indonesia by judges they might solely see on a tv monitor, in line with Amnesty International.

The Muslim-majority nation has a number of the world’s hardest drug legal guidelines and each Indonesian and international traffickers have been executed, together with the masterminds of Australia’s Bali Nine heroin gang.

This month, 13 members of a trafficking ring, together with three Iranians and a Pakistani, realized via video that they’d be shot for smuggling 400kg (880 kilos) of methamphetamine into Indonesia.

On Wednesday, a Jakarta courtroom sentenced six fighters to demise utilizing a video app over their position in a 2018 jail riot wherein 5 members of Indonesia’s counterterror squad had been killed.

“Virtual hearings degrade the rights of defendants facing death sentences – it’s about someone’s life and death,” mentioned Amnesty International Indonesia director, Usman Hamid.

“The death penalty has always been a cruel punishment. But this online trend adds to the injustice and inhumanity.”

‘Clear disadvantage’

Indonesia has pressed on with the digital hearings even because the variety of executions and demise sentences dropped globally final 12 months, with COVID-19 disrupting many legal proceedings, Amnesty mentioned in its annual capital punishment report this week.

Virtual hearings depart defendants unable to completely take part in circumstances which can be typically interrupted in international locations with poor web connections, together with Indonesia, critics say.

“Virtual platforms … can expose the defendant to significant violations of their fair trial rights and impinge on the quality of the defence,” NGO Harm Reduction International mentioned in a latest report on the demise penalty for drug offences.

Lawyers have complained about being unable to seek the advice of with purchasers attributable to virus restrictions. And households of the accused have typically been barred from accessing hearings that will usually be open to the general public.

“These virtual hearings present a clear disadvantage for defendants,” mentioned Indonesian lawyer Dedi Setiadi.

Setiadi, who defended a number of males sentenced to demise within the methamphetamine case this month, mentioned he would attraction their case on the grounds that digital hearings had been unfair.

Relatives of the defendants weren’t given full entry, the lawyer mentioned.

Death penalty sentences are sometimes commuted to lengthy jail phrases in Indonesia and an in-person trial may need caused a much less extreme verdict, in line with Setiadi, who described his purchasers as low-level gamers within the smuggling ring.

“The verdict could have been different if the judges had talked directly with the defendants and seen their expressions,” he mentioned. “A Zoom hearing is less personal.”

Indonesia’s Supreme Court, which ordered on-line hearings in the course of the pandemic, didn’t reply to requests for remark.

But the nation’s judicial fee instructed AFP news company that it has requested the highest courtroom to think about returning to in-person trials for severe offences, together with circumstances with capital punishment.

There are almost 500 folks, together with many foreigners, awaiting execution in Indonesia, the place condemned prisoners are marched to a jungle clearing, tied to a stake and shot.

Drug Smugglers Are Being Sentenced to Death via Zoom

Source: Vice (7 April 2021)

https://www.vice.com/en/article/xgzejk/drug-smugglers-are-being-sentenced-to-death-via-zoom

Courts in Indonesia and Singapore are using video calls to sentence to death people convicted of drug trafficking, according to drug harm reduction experts.

Harm Reduction International (HRI), which published its annual report into global drug war death penalties on Wednesday, told VICE World News that 19 drug offenders were sentenced to death in Indonesia during virtual hearings held on video apps such as Zoom and WhatsApp between March 2020 and March this year. Two people convicted of drug trafficking were handed death sentences over Zoom calls in Singapore last year.

The report said use of video calls for trial hearings and to administer death sentences introduced due to COVID-19 constituted a “significant violation of their fair trial rights”.

Lawyers for defendants said the video conference calls, which featured defendants speaking from prison, were often prone to interruption and “freezing” due to bad internet connections. Indonesia has some of the lowest internet speeds in the world.

In addition, they said the online format meant they could not properly consult with defendants, and that proceedings were not always be witnessed by the general public, including family members. A number of those sentenced to death were foreign nationals, some of whom who had no access to court interpreters. Lawyers also said Zoom calls were lacking in terms of security and confidentiality.

“We cannot record the process, nor take screenshots or photos unless we get the judges’ permission. Virtual hearings mean the whole process is not open for the public because the link is distributed limitedly,” lawyers who defended some of the traffickers told HRI.

The virtual death sentences in Indonesia include the case of three Malaysians, Kumar Atchababoo, Rajandran Ramasamy, and Sanggat Ramasamy, who were sentenced to death via an online video call in November after being convicted of attempting to smuggle 28.6kg of methamphetamine into Indonesia last January. A defence lawyer said he would be appealing the decision as the online trial meant he could not communicate with his client. In February a Pakistani national and a Yemeni national were handed death sentences for methamphetamine smuggling after an online Zoom trial and sentencing.

In Singapore last May, Punithan Genasan, a 37-year old from Malaysia, was sentenced to death by hanging via a sentencing hearing held on Zoom. Genasan, who had denied the charges, was sentenced after being found guilty of a heroin smuggling charge dating back to 2011.

“The use of virtual platforms to conduct criminal proceedings, especially those which result in a death sentence, can expose the defendant to significant violations of their fair trial rights and impinge on the quality of the defence,” said the report.

As of October 2020, according to the report, there were 355 people on death row in Indonesia, of which 214 were convicted for drug offences – a 29 percent increase from 2019. Indonesia has a reputation for harsh treatment of its addicted drug users, and has seen a clampdown on its tourists drug scene since 2019.

The report found that despite the COVID pandemic there was a rise in death sentences handed out for drug offences. In 2020, courts sentenced 213 people to death for drug offences, an increase of 16 percent from the previous year, with Vietnam (78) and Indonesia (77) representing three quarters of all death sentences given for drugs. In June five people, including a mother and her daughter, were sentenced to death for their role in smuggling 26.4kg of heroin into Vietnam from Laos.

However, the number of executions for drug offences tumbled last year by 75 percent, due to the pandemic and also a near moratorium on drug crime executions in Saudi Arabia, one of the world’s top executioners for drug offences for the past decade. There were 30 confirmed executions for drug offences in 2020, down from 116 in 2019. All of the executions took place in 3 countries, China, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

One case involved an Egyptian truck driver who was arrested with a stash of amphetamine hidden in a truck he was driving transporting in Saudi Arabia in 2017. Human rights groups said he was tortured so badly he missed two court hearings and was denied legal representation. His family wasn’t informed of his arrest, conviction and execution, in January last year, which they found out about from fellow prisoners and a newspaper article.

Data on the death penalty for drug offences is “grossly insufficient” according to HRI, partly due to a lack of information on executions in China and Vietnam, with both nations reported to routinely execute people for drug offences. Vietnam considers the death penalty a matter of state secrecy.

The report said 35 countries still retain the death penalty for drug offences. There are at least 3,000 people currently on death row for drug offences worldwide.

“The fact that countries continued to sentence people to death for drug offences amidst a global pandemic is abhorrent and emblematic of an overly punitive approach to drug control. Too many countries remain reluctant to move away from capital punishment and their false belief that the death penalty deters drug offences,” said Naomi Burke-Shyne, executive director at HRI.

“While the record low number of executions for drug offences is certainly welcome, executions are only the tip of the iceberg. Executions are the most visible part of a hugely problematic system, characterised by human rights violations.”

There were no drug offence executions in the US in 2020. Although in February last year former President Donald Trump praised countries, including China, which impose the death penalty for drug offences, saying, erroneously, that “states with a very powerful death penalty on drug dealers don’t have a drug problem.” Incumbent President Joe Biden has pledged to eliminate the death penalty at the federal level. In December 2020, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted its eighth resolution calling for a moratorium of the death penalty, with record-breaking support from 123 countries.

Report finds concerns with access to fair trials in Malaysian death penalty cases

Source: Mirage News (28 May 2020)

https://www.miragenews.com/report-finds-concerns-with-access-to-fair-trials-in-malaysian-death-penalty-cases/

A new report launched by Monash University, in partnership with Harm Reduction International (HRI) and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN), has questioned the fair trial standards afforded to more than 1,000 people currently sentenced to the death penalty in Malaysia.

Key findings

Monash University’s research shows that the death penalty in Malaysia has been imposed following proceedings that did not meet fair trial standards either in accordance with international, domestic or cognate common law standards.

There are 1,280 people awaiting the death penalty in Malaysia, who have not experienced fair trial standards either in accordance with international, domestic or cognate common law standards.

In certain drug trafficking trials, the presumption of innocence is undermined because as a result of the double presumptions an accused is presumed to be guilty.

Many of those accused face socio- economic, nationality and language barriers that prohibit their access to the requisite level of legal assistance.

The report, titled ‘Ensuring a Fair Trial: Fair Trial Guarantees & the Death Penalty in Malaysia’, was today launched by Malaysia’s former Chief Justice, Judge Tan Sri Richard Malanjum.

Written by Monash University and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) with support from Harm Reduction International, the report also makes a number of recommendations, including that the Malaysian Government ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Second Optional Protocol.

“Our case analysis in the Report revealed that the death penalty in Malaysia has been imposed following proceedings that did not meet fair trial standards either in accordance with international, domestic or cognate common law standards,” said report co-author Dr Natalia Antolak-Saper, from the Monash University Faculty of Law.

“Evident throughout this report is that a significant population of those sentenced to death in Malaysia is comprised of individuals convicted of drug offending, many of whom face socio- economic, nationality and language barriers that prohibit their access to the requisite level of legal assistance needed to properly test the prosecution case,” said co-author Ms Sara Kowal, Monash University Capital Punishment Impact Initiative Manager (Partnerships & Clinics).

As at December 2019, 1,280 people were on death row in Malaysia, 89 per cent of these people weremale and more than two-thirds of all persons on death row had been convicted of drug trafficking offences, according to figures from Amnesty International.

“Our research draws on interviews with lawyers who identify some common fair trial challenges including the lack of sufficient funding for legal representation at all stages of the death penalty trial, appeals and clemency stages,” Dr Antolak-Saper said.

“Our analysis of the Malaysian drug trafficking legislation identifies four key challenges to fair trial rights, one of which is that the presumption of innocence is undermined because as a result of the double presumptions an accused is presumed to be guilty.”

Ms Kowal said they found the clemency process to appear at times arbitrary.

“The lack of a legal framework means the process lacks transparency and review, both essential to fair trial rights. Given the stakes are so high in death penalty matters this is particularly problematic,” she said..

Malaysia is one of 35 countries in the world that imposes the death penalty for drug offences and in 2019, was one of 13 countries to actually sentence the accused to death for drug trafficking.

“Capital punishment ends lives, destroys families, and operates in discriminatory and arbitrary ways throughout the world. It has no proven deterrence value or other demonstrated public benefits,” said Ms Kowal.

Indonesia: Report reveals endemic judicial flaws in death penalty cases

Source: Amnesty International (15 October 2015)

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/10/indonesia-report-reveals-endemic-judicial-flaws-in-death-penalty-cases/

Death row prisoners in Indonesia are routinely denied access to lawyers and are coerced into “confessions” through severe beatings, while foreign nationals facing the death penalty had to deal with a judicial system they hardly understand, Amnesty International said in a new report today.

Flawed Justice exposes how the government under President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo has made a mockery of international law by carrying out 14 executions since taking office, while the lives of scores more prisoners now on death row could be at risk.

“Indonesia’s callous U-turn on executions has already led to the death of 14 people, despite clear evidence of flagrant fair trial violations. The government might claim to be following international law to the letter, but our investigation shows the reality on the ground is very different with endemic flaws in the justice system,” said Josef Benedict, Amnesty International’s South East Asia Campaigns Director.

“The death penalty is always a human rights violation, but the numerous and serious issues with regards to how it is being applied in Indonesia makes its use all the more tragic. Authorities must end this senseless killing once and for all and immediately review all death penalty cases with a view to their commutation.”

Despite strong signs that Indonesia had moved away from the death penalty in recent years, the government of President Widodo - which took office in October 2014 - has scaled up executions significantly.

Of the 14 people who have been sent before the firing squad in 2015, 12 were foreigners and all were convicted on drugs charges. The government has vowed to use the death penalty to tackle a national “drugs emergency”, despite there being no evidence that the threat of execution can work as more of a deterrent to crime than a prison sentence. President Widodo has also said he will reject all clemency petitions of death row prisoners on drug charges.

Amnesty International’s investigation into 12 individual death row cases reveals emblematic flaws in the Indonesian justice system, which raises serious questions about the country’s use of the death penalty.

Forced confession

In half of the cases, death row prisoners claimed that they had been coerced into “confessing” to their crimes, including through severe beatings at the hands of police officers in detention. Many claim to have been tortured or ill-treated, yet Indonesian authorities have never followed up to investigate these allegations.

A Pakistani national, Zulfiqar Ali. claims that police kept him in a house for three days after his arrest, where he was kicked, punched and threatened with death until he eventually signed a “confession”. The beating left him in such a bad state that he had to go through kidney and stomach surgery.

Despite Zulfiqar Ali detailing the torture he had endured during his trial, the judge allowed his “confession” to be used as evidence and there was no independent investigation conducted into his allegations.

The findings in Flawed Justice echo those of other national and international human rights organizations, who have found evidence of systematic and widespread torture or other ill-treatment by the Indonesian police with impunity.

Denied access to lawyer

Indonesian death row prisoners are routinely denied access to lawyers, despite this right being guaranteed in both Indonesian and international law.

Many of the prisoners mentioned in the report and charged with capital crimes are forced to wait several weeks or even months before seeing a lawyer, seriously undermining their ability to make their case in court.

There are also serious doubts about the quality of legal representation afforded to those facing drugs charges. In one recent case, the only advice a defendant received from his lawyer was to answer “Yes” to any questions from the investigator. In another case a death sentence was handed down due to a request by defendant’s own lawyer to the judges.

In none of the 12 cases examined in Flawed Justice were prisoners brought before a judge immediately after arrest as required by international law and standards – most had to wait several months before this happened.

Foreign nationals

Twelve out of the 14 people executed in Indonesian in 2015 were foreign nationals, and at least 35 other foreigners are currently on death row in the country.

But Amnesty International’s findings show that in numerous instances Indonesia violates the rights of foreign death row prisoners by denying them interpretation during or before trial, making them sign documents in a language they don’t understand, or refusing access to consular services.

Additionally in 2015, Indonesia put to death one man suffering from a severe mental disability in violation of international law. Brazilian Rodrigo Gularte had been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia.

Recommendations

Given the serious flaws in Indonesia’s justice system, Amnesty International urges authorities to immediately establish an independent body to review all cases where people have been sentenced to death, with a view to commuting the death sentences.

Indonesia must also reform its Criminal Code to match international standards and ensure that all prisoners’ right to a fair trial is respected.

“President Joko Widodo has promised to improve human rights in Indonesia, but putting more than a dozen people before a firing squad shows how hollow these commitments are,” said Josef Benedict.

“Indonesia should set an example on human rights regionally. It is time to take this responsibility seriously - a first step must be to impose a moratorium on executions.”

Background

Twenty-seven people were executed between 1999 and 2014, under Indonesia's first four democratic-era presidents. No executions were carried out between 2009 and 2012.

According to figures obtained from the Law and Human Rights Ministry on 30 April 2015, there were at least 121 people death row. These include 54 people convicted of drug-related crimes, two convicted on terrorism charges and 65 convicted of murder.

As of today, 140 countries are abolitionist in law or practice. Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases and under any circumstances, regardless of the nature of the crime, the characteristics of the offender, or the method used by the state to carry out the execution. The organization considers the death penalty a violation of the right to life as recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.

Death row inmates treated cruelly: AI

Source: The Jakarta Post (16 October 2015)

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2015/10/16/death-row-inmates-treated-cruelly-ai.html

Prior to being executed, death row inmates in Indonesia often receive inhumane treatment as they are routinely denied access to lawyers and are coerced into "confessions" through severe beatings, a new report by Amnesty International has found. 

The report, launched on Thursday in Jakarta, painted a disturbing picture of what death row convicts go through before being executed as the government has scaled up executions significantly.

"It is not a report we wanted to issue but developments in Indonesia this year forced our hand. President Joko ["Jokowi"] Widodo took office on the back of promises to prioritize human rights. But what we have seen is the government taking a hugely regressive step back on the death penalty," said Amnesty International Southeast Asia campaigns director Josef Benedict.

Benedict said the Indonesian government had made a mockery of international law by carrying out 14 executions since Jokowi took office.

"The death penalty is always a human rights violation, but the numerous and serious issues with regard to how it is being applied in Indonesia makes its use all the more tragic," Benedict said. 

The report looked into 12 individual death-row cases (out of a total of 131 as of December 2014).

"In half of the cases, prisoners claimed that they had been, in some form or another, forced into signing so-called confessions by the authorities while in detention. These often involve violence and claims of torture," said Benedict. 

However, the Indonesian authorities have never followed up or investigated these allegations, according to him. "For example, a Pakistani national, who was highlighted in the report, claimed he was badly beaten by police for three days straight, until he was forced to confess. He had to go through stomach and kidney surgery after the beating," he said. 

Despite this his confession was used in court and his claims of torture were never investigated. 

"In some cases, prisoners have been denied access to lawyers, some for a few days, others for several months. Even when provided with lawyers, there is serious doubt about the quality [of the lawyers provided]. In one extreme case, one defense lawyer even argued for the death penalty to be imposed on his client, even though the prosecution was calling for life imprisonment," said Benedict. 

He was referring to the case of Yusman Telaumbanua from Riau, who was arrested together with another man in 2012 for the murder of three men. Based on their lawyers' request, the North Nias district court in North Sumatra eventually sentenced them to death.

Yusman did not appeal the sentence as he was not told by his lawyer that he had the right to do so. 

Many of the prisoners mentioned in the report and charged with capital crimes have also been forced to wait several weeks or even months before seeing a lawyer, seriously undermining their ability to make their case in court.

Amnesty International's findings show that in numerous instances Indonesia has violated the rights of foreign death-row prisoners by denying them access to interpreters during or before trial, leading to them sign documents in a language they did not understand, or being refused access to consular services.

"For instance there is Brazilian Rodrigo Gularte. When he was arrested in 2005, he could only speak limited English. He only speaks Portuguese. Therefore, his interpreter was not capable of making Rodrigo understand the questions asked of him," Gularte's lawyer, Putri Kanesia, said on Thursday. 

Furthermore, the court decided to ignore the fact that Rodrigo had been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, which under international law should have spared him from the death penalty. Rodrigo, along with seven other convicts, was executed by a firing squad on Nusakambangan prison island near Cilacap in Central Java in April this year. 

Despite more than 100 people still on death row, the Attorney General's Office (AGO), in charge of putting people to death, has shown no signs of preparing for a new round of executions. 

"We hope that there is some rethinking going on in the government," Benedict said. 

Deciding Death: How Chinese Judges Review Capital Punishment Cases

Source: Dui Hua (18 November 2014)

http://www.duihuahrjournal.org/2014/11/deciding-death-how-chinese-judges.html

In the eastern part of Beijing, not far from the city’s main railway station, sits an unmarked, multi-storey office building whose importance can only be discerned by the presence of armed police guards posted at its entrance. This is where the five criminal divisions of China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) are located, the place where the fates of the country’s death-row defendants are ultimately determined.

A recent feature article in Guangzhou’s Southern Weekly newspaper has shed new light on how the more than 300 court personnel who work in this building handle the thousands of capital punishment cases sent for final review each year. Below, we summarize the article’s descriptions of the process in order to enable even more people to understand the way that these life-and-death decisions are made.

After the appeals process has run its course and a decision involving the death penalty takes effect, the case file is sent to the SPC for mandatory review. The case is first assigned a case number, and then all of the relevant case files are delivered to one of the court’s five divisions according to the geographic origin of the case or, in some cases, the type of crime involved. 

Unlike the other four divisions, which are larger and handle many more cases, the court’s second criminal division is dedicated to handling review of some of the most sensitive cases: those involving crimes by government or party officials; cases involving foreigners or defendants from Hong Kong, Macau, or Taiwan; crimes under the category of “endangering state security”; and cases involving defendants from Xinjiang.

Division	Region	Specialization
First	Shaanxi, Gansu, Qinghai, Ningxia, Shandong, Zhejiang, Anhui, Fujian	Crimes against the rights of women and children, the environment, intellectual property
Second	Nationwide, Xinjiang	Crimes involving people from Hong Kong, Taiwan, Macau, and foreign countries; occupational crimes; crimes involving members of the armed forces; cases involving crimes of endangering state security and politically sensitive cases; all Xinjiang cases
Third	Yunnan, Guizhou, Sichuan, Chongqing, Tibet, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Jiangxi	Organized crime
Fourth	Heilongjiang, Jilin, Hebei, Guangdong, Guangxi, Hainan	Major accident liability crimes
Fifth	Beijing, Tianjian, Liaoning, Shandong, Inner Mongolia, Henan, Hubei, Hunan	Drug crime

Source: Dui Hua, Southern Weekly

Within each division, cases are assigned first to quasi-administrative units divided either by geography or case type. These units then assign each case to a panel of three judges, one of whom is designated as the principal case manager. This judge will take responsibility for reviewing the case files and liaising with lower courts or law-enforcement agencies over any questions that might arise.

Sometimes, review of the case files uncovers very basic errors that could have an impact either on conviction or sentencing. In many instances, additional details or investigation will be required, and sometimes the SPC judge handling the case will have to go personally to the provinces to conduct investigations. According to one SPC official, additional investigation was required in 39 percent of the cases sent to the SPC for review in 2013.

Under new provisions introduced into the Criminal Procedure Law in 2012, judges are also required to interview defendants before deciding whether or not to confirm a death sentence. If the case is relatively straightforward, these interviews may be conducted remotely via video feed. However, if more problems are uncovered in the case file, then the judge handling the case will typically go to conduct the interview in person. One judge told Southern Weekly that, in the interest of reducing the burden on local courts, SPC judges try to minimize travel to the provinces and attempt to handle multiple cases on a single trip as much as possible.

The principal judge will then write a detailed report covering the results of his or her review of the case, summarizing any problems with the evidence or other issues that could have an impact on conviction or sentencing. This report is then circulated along with the case file to the other two members of the judicial panel responsible for the case, each of whom conduct their own review and write their own report.

Then, after each of the three judges has reviewed the case independently, they meet to discuss the case as a group in the presence of a court clerk. After coming to a decision, the panel then reports to the responsible division head and SPC vice president. If the decision is to execute the death penalty, the case then goes to the SPC president for his signature.

If court officials identify a problem with the panel’s decision or the panel is unable to reach consensus on how to decide, the case might be sent to the division’s council of chief judges for additional discussion. If this does not lead to a decision, the case might be sent for discussion by the SPC adjudication committee or the special committee for criminal adjudication. The Southern Weekly article makes pains to note that these bodies play only an advisory role and that final decision-making power rests solely with the three-judge panel.

As they review death penalty cases, judges pay particular attention to issues of evidence and penal policy. In recent years, the SPC has introduced and refined measures for excluding evidence that has been obtained illegally, and the court’s stricter line on evidence is one of the reasons why China’s highest court rejects roughly 10 percent of death penalty cases each year.

The impact of penal policy is much more fluid and hard to predict. Over time, the court has settled on a number of general principles designed to reduce use of the death penalty. For example, in cases involving the death of a single victim the death penalty is typically waived if the defendant surrenders or if the case involves a dispute among family members or neighbors. But putting these more lenient policies into effect often requires overcoming resistance from a victim’s family members. In fact, one reason why the process of reviewing death penalties is often delayed is because efforts are underway to use court mediation to “work on” these family members and obtain their agreement for more lenient punishment.

For example, the article reveals that in the case of Li Yan (李彦), whose sentence to death for murdering her abusive husband caused a national sensation in 2013, the SPC’s adjudication committee decided relatively early on that the circumstances of the case did not require her immediate execution. The victim’s family initially refused to accept anything less that Li’s execution, even staging protests outside local court buildings. But rather than give in to such pressure, the court delayed its decision until emotions died down and the victim’s relatives were able to accept the decision.

As the Supreme People’s Court Monitor blog recently pointed out, one potentially groundbreaking reform being considered would ensure that all defendants in death penalty cases are represented by a lawyer during the death penalty review process. The Southern Weekly article reveals that the SPC is in the process of drafting provisions entitled “Regulations on Considering the Views of Defense Lawyers in Death Penalty Review Cases.” These follow on amendments to the Criminal Procedure Law in 2012 aimed at strengthening legal representation during the death penalty review process that have not yet fully translated into a right to legal defense for capital defendants. Ensuring that all defendants in cases involving capital punishment have legal representation throughout the criminal process, regardless of economic means, would be another important step toward strengthening rights protections in the criminal process in China.

China claims one tenth overturned

China: 10 percent of death sentences overturned
Fri, Nov 26, 2010
From: China Daily/Asia News Network

Beijing - China's top court has overturned, on average, 10 percent of all death sentences nationwide since 2007 when it took back the right of final review from lower courts, a senior court official said.

Hu Yunteng, head of the research department under the Supreme People's Court (SPC), said regaining the review "played an obvious role" in reducing the number of executions.

"It has ensured that the death penalty can only be applied for the most serious crimes," he told China Daily.

But Hu declined to specify the number of death sentences carried out each year.

In 1981, to tackle rising crime, the highest court granted provincial courts the authority to pass death sentences.

The practice, widely criticized following reports of miscarriages of justice, ended on Jan 1, 2007, when the SPC was again given the sole power to review and ratify death sentences.

Hu said death sentences were overturned mostly for lack of evidence, procedural flaws or for an inappropriate penalty.

"The SPC will not tolerate any mistakes regarding evidence or procedure and will thoroughly investigate" questionable judgments, he said, adding that the quality of local courts' handling of death penalty cases is improving.

"We must make sure the use of the death sentence is accurate and free of mistakes to respect and protect the convicts and their rights."

Earlier, Zhang Jun, SPC vice-president, told judicial departments to only impose a death penalty for the most heinous crimes.

The SPC also increased its criminal tribunals from two to five to better examine all death sentences passed, Hu said.

The SPC also ordered that all cases that carried a possible death penalty must be heard at a court session, with the defendant or defendants in attendance, he added.

The move "prevents unjust, false or invalid cases on the one hand and, on the other hand, respects the rights of defendants", he said.

About 90 percent of death sentences passed are for serious crimes ranging from intentional homicide, robbery, serious injury, rape, drug trafficking to kidnapping, according to Hu.

In August, the National People's Congress, the top legislature, dropped the death penalty for 13 economy related, non-violent crimes in the latest amendment to the country's Criminal Law.

Hu said the SPC "strongly supports" the move as it has sent "a positive signal for strictly controlling the imposition of a death penalty".

Despite these moves, he said, the final review still faces challenges, including the use of torture as well as poor standards among some rural judges.

In one of the country's most notorious forced-confession cases, Zhao Zuohai, after serving 11 years in prison, was released in early May after the man he was alleged to have murdered turned up alive.

The Henan farmer said the police tortured him into making a confession.

Zhao Bingzhi, head of the criminal law research committee under the China Law Society, said it's essential for the SPC to classify and summarize cases where the death penalty has been overturned and then release them to guide lower courts.

"What's more, the SPC should go beyond only examining evidence, and establish rules to better define serious crimes where the death penalty is applicable to ensure its appropriate use," he said.

-China Daily/Asia News Network

Bangladesh death penalty dangerous, corrupt

BANGLADESH: Death penalty continues despite a flawed criminal justice system
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 23, 2010
ALRC-CWS-15-02-2010

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Fifteenth session, Agenda Item 4, General Debate

A written statement submitted by the Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC), a non-governmental organisation with general consultative status

1. The Asian Legal Resource Centre welcomes the discussion by the Human Rights Council during its 15th session concerning the report of the Secretary General on the question of the death penalty. In light of this discussion, the ALRC is hereby submitting information pertaining to the death penalty in Bangladesh. Bangladesh acceded to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) on September 6, 2000, but has not yet ratified the Optional Protocols to the ICCPR and also does not comply with the international law aiming to the abolition of death penalty. The country has not only executed its citizens for decades, but officials, including Ministers, Parliamentarians and Judges also advocate publicly in favour of this practice, which denies people's right to life, often as the result of trials that do not meet the internationally recognized standards of fair trial.

2. The Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC) has learned from a reliable Home Ministry source, who requested anonymity, that there are around 407 convicts currently being detained in prisons across the country that face execution in the upcoming periods. Among the convicts, around 107 are being detained in Dhaka Central Jail, with the rest being detained in the country’s other main prisons. The high profile cases of execution to have taken place in Bangladesh include the death by hanging of five convicts on 28 January 2010 for the assassination of Bangladesh’s founder, President Sheikh Muzibur Rahman, who was killed by members of the Bangladesh Army along with almost all of his family members on 15 August 1975. In another case, six members of militant groups were hanged after being sentenced to death for the killing two judges in suicide bomb attacks in Jhalkathi district in 2005. Since its establishment in 1971 the Bangladeshi State has executed by hanging over 250 convicted criminals.

3. The country's Penal Code-1860 has several provisions that allow for capital punishment: Section 121: waging war against Bangladesh; Section 132: abetment of mutiny, if mutiny is committed; Section 194: giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of capital offence; Section 302: murder; Section 305: abetment of suicide of child or insane person; Section 307: attempted murder by life-convicts; and Section 396: robbery with murder.

4. There are several other laws in Bangladesh that also provide for the death penalty. The draconian Special Powers Act-1974, provides the death penalty for the offences of sabotage under Section 15, counterfeiting currency notes and Government stamps under Section 25A, smuggling under 25B, and adulteration of, or sale of adulterated food, drink, drugs or cosmetics under Section 25C. It is evident from the above that the death penalty is awarded for crimes that do not meet Bangladesh’s obligations under the ICCPR's Article 6(2) to ensure that death sentences "may be imposed only for the most serious crimes."

5. The Nari o' Shishu Nirjaton Daman Ain-2000 [Women and Children Repression (Prevention) Act-2000] further provides for the death penalty to be awarded as punishment for offences or attacks committed using corrosive, combustible or poisonous substances that cause burns or physical damage leading to the death of the victim, under Section 4; for trafficking of women and children, as per Sections 5 and 6 respectively; for ransom, according to Section 8; for sexual assaults resulting in the death of any woman or child who dies consequently, as per Section 9(2); causing death for dowry, in Section 11; and maiming or mutilation of children for begging, under Section 12. The Acid Crime Control Act-2002’s Section 5 (KA) also includes the death penalty for acid attacks on women if the victim's eyes, ears, face, chest or sexual organs are fully or partially damaged.

6. The legislative authorities of Bangladesh argue that the death penalty is necessary for maintaining control over serious crimes in the country and to transmit a message to potential offenders that committing murder will ultimately incur the death penalty. Pro-death penalty advocates in the country claim that the death penalty helps the nation to establish peace and justice in its society as part of upholding the rule of law. This alleged deterrent is shown to not be working effectively, as incidents of serious crimes rise each year. For example, according to the statistic contained in the website of the Bangladesh Police, there were 3592 murders during 2005 and 4219 murders in 2009.

7. The ALRC opposes the death penalty under all circumstances as a cruel practice that is shown to be an ineffective deterrent and open to serious abuse. No legal system in the world functions well enough to guarantee that errors in awarding the death penalty can be totally avoided, and in countries with deeply flawed criminal justice systems such as Bangladesh and most others in the Asian region, the use of the death penalty gives rise to serious travesties of justice and arbitrary, unjust and irrevocable violations for the right to life.

8. Bangladesh's criminal justice system has manifold problems:

a. There is an absence of fairness and transparency in its complaint mechanism. The police arbitrarily control the complaint mechanisms, which are subverted by political interference and a chain of command dominated by corruption from the bottom to the top, resulting in abuses of power and injustices in determining who will be charged and for what crime. The fabrication of cases by the police officers for the purpose of extorting money from targeted persons and/or in order to set the real offender free is a common practice. The police deliberately distort facts related to crimes at the time of recording of complaints, which obstructs the already limited avenues available to the victims seeking justice and redress.

b. Criminal investigations are conducted by the police using primitive methods without acceptable levels of professionalism and efficiency. As a corrupt and political subservient entity, the police force is mostly used as hired gunmen of the ruling political and other authorities and elites.

c. The prosecutorial system is politicised, inefficient, disposable by nature, and incapable of assisting the judiciary to establish justice at the end of the trial. Every political party recruits their own activists cum lawyers as prosecutors, based on their loyalty to the ruling authorities rather than their knowledge of the law, jurisprudence and commitment to the rule of law.

d. The judiciary does not enjoy independence as far as the administration of justice is concerned in terms of logistics, manpower, integrity and the adjudication of the cases. Besides, there is a serious lack of judicial competence and commitment to upholding the rule of law among many judicial officers.

e. The country’s medico-legal system remains archaic and far off internationally acceptable standards and modern methods required to effectively assist the judicial process in determining rights or wrongs and forensic evidence accurately.

f. The legal profession is degraded and consists mainly of persons hunting cases to make the maximum money for their professional practices, rather than to assist the judicial procedures to ensure justice to both victims and the defendants in trials in the country’s courts.

g. The State's entrenched system designed to protect the perpetrators of gross human rights abuses through and extensive culture of impunity, creates serious grievances and a loss of faith in the justice institutions for victims of, for example, illegal arrests, arbitrary detention, custodial torture, extra-judicial killings and disappearances, as well as for their and the wider public who also live in a climate of fear.

h. The absence of interpersonal respect for each other and adequate cooperation among professionals, including the police that register the complaint, investigators, prosecutors, lawyers, medico-legal experts and supporting staff of the judiciary seriously hamper the effective and timely conduct of trials and administration of justice.

i. Inadequate remuneration and facilities for relevant professional experts as well as their supporting staff, poor infrastructure for maintaining material evidence, and the failure to recruit persons with the required educational, moral and ethical background, or to provide adequate training contributes to the further deterioration of the criminal justice system.

9. The reality regarding the criminal justice system must be understood to evaluate how dangerous the use of the death penalty can be in Bangladesh. Realistic policies followed by prompt actions must be in place in order to reduce the recurrence of crimes that are currently punished by the death penalty instead of continuing with this failed deterrent.

10. Bangladesh's constitution's Article 35 (5) prohibits "torture, cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment or treatment". There can hardly be any debate that the death penalty does not amount to cruel punishment, which is prohibited in the country's supreme law. In fact, such cruel punishment comprises a violation of the Constitution by undermining the natural dignity of human beings.

11. The Asian Legal Resource Centre urges the government of Bangladesh to abolish the death penalty immediately and to ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, and bring its domestic legislation and practices in line with obligations under this instrument. The Bangladeshi authorities should immediately initiate thorough reforms of the country’s criminal justice system, in order to establish the rule of law and the enjoyment of rights, justice and peace in its society.

About the ALRC: The Asian Legal Resource Centre is an independent regional non-governmental organisation holding general consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. It is the sister organisation of the Asian Human Rights Commission. The Hong Kong-based group seeks to strengthen and encourage positive action on legal and human rights issues at the local and national levels throughout Asia.

Posted on 2010-08-23

Singapore: Appeal against hanging of Yong Vui Kong

Amnesty International has issued the following Urgent Action appeal, calling for people to write to the Singapore government urging it not to execute Malaysian man Yong Vui Kong. Details of the latest appeal are above, with background on his case below.

URGENT ACTION
22-YEAR-OLD DUE TO BE HANGED IN SINGAPORE
14 May 2010

A Malaysian man is at immediate risk of execution in Singapore. On 14 May, the Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal against a mandatory death sentence, which violates fair-trial rights.

Yong Vui Kong was sentenced to death in January 2009 for trafficking 47 grams of diamorphine (heroin), a crime committed when he was 19 years old.

Singapore's Misuse of Drugs Act makes the death penalty mandatory for trafficking more than 30 grams of heroin, leaving judges no discretion to consider issues such as mitigating circumstances or to hand down alternative sentences. The law presumes trafficking in all cases involving the possession of over 2 grams of heroin, which shifts the burden of proving that no trafficking was involved from the prosecution to the defendant. This violates the core human right to be presumed innocent of a crime until proven guilty.

The President of Singapore rejected Yong Vui Kong's petition for clemency on 1 December 2009. On 2 December 2009, the High Court postponed Yong Vui Kong’s execution (which had been set to take place on 4 December) to allow the Court of Appeal time to hear an application for a stay.

PLEASE WRITE IMMEDIATELY in English or your own language:
- Urging President Nathan to reconsider Yong Vui Kong's clemency petition and commute his death sentence;
- Calling on the president to introduce an immediate moratorium on all executions, with a view to complete abolition of the death penalty;
- Reminding Law Minister Shanmugam, that the Misuse of Drugs Act violates international human rights law and standards concerning fairness of prosecutions and trials;
- Urging the Law Minister to recommend that Parliament revoke the mandatory death penalty for drug-trafficking and all other offences.

PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 25 JUNE 2010 TO:

President
His Excellency SR Nathan
Office of the President
Orchard Road, Istana
Singapore 0922
Fax: +65 6735 3135
Email: s_r_nathan@istana.gov.sg
Salutation: Your Excellency

Minister for Law
The Honourable K Shanmugam
Ministry of Home Affairs
New Phoenix Park
28 Irrawaddy Road
Singapore 329560
Fax: +65 6258 0921
Email: k_shanmugam@mlaw.gov.sg
Salutation: Dear Mr Minister

And copies to:
Editor-in-Chief
The Straits Times
1000 Toa Payoh North
News Centre
Singapore 318994
Fax: +65 6319 8282
Email: stonline@sph.com.sg

Also please send copies to Singapore's diplomatic representatives in your country.

This is the third update of UA 296/09. Further information:
www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA36/004/2009/en
www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA36/005/2009/en
www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA36/007/2009/en

Background - from Amnesty International Urgent Action appeal 269/09, 3 November 2009
Index: ASA 36/004/2009 Singapore

URGENT ACTION
malaysian man facing execution in singapore
Yong Vui Kong was sentenced to death for drug trafficking in January 2009. He had exhausted his appeals by October, and can now escape execution only if the president grants clemency.

Yong Vui Kong was arrested in June 2007, when he was 19, by officers from the Central Narcotics Bureau. He was charged with trafficking 42.27 grams of heroin, and then sentenced to death in January 2009.

He had been working as a messenger for a man in Malaysia who often asked him to collect money from debtors or deliver packages as "gifts" to people in Singapore and Malaysia. At his trial, Yong Vui Kong said he had not known what was in the packages, and when he asked, he had simply been told not to open them. The judge, however, ruled that Yong must have been aware of their contents, saying in his written summation, "I found that the accused had failed to rebut the presumption against him. I am of the view that the prosecution had proved its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and I therefore found the accused guilty as charged and sentenced him to suffer death."

Yong was convicted under the Misuse of Drugs Act, which provides that anyone found guilty of illegally importing, exporting or trafficking more than 15 grams of heroin will automatically receive a mandatory death sentence.

Governments need to address crimes, including drug trafficking, but there is no clear evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other forms of punishment. The UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions stated in his 2005 report that the "mandatory death penalty, which precludes the possibility of a lesser sentence being imposed regardless of the circumstances, is inconsistent with the prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." To date, 139 countries have abolished death penalty in law or practice.

Japan: UK MP condemns death row tragedy

UK MP says 'world's longest-serving' death row prisoner is scar on Japan's conscience
From: Amnesty International UK
9 March 2010

The Lib Dem MP Alistair Carmichael has spoken out over the plight of a prisoner on death row in Japan, dubbing the case of Hakamada Iwao “a tragedy and a scar on the conscience of Japan”.

Mr Hakamada, a former professional boxer sentenced to death in 1968, is believed by Amnesty International to be the world’s longest-serving death row prisoner. In 1968 he was arrested and questioned for 20 days without a lawyer and later found guilty of murder based partly on confessions allegedly coerced from him by police interrogators.

Alistair Carmichael, MP for Orkney and Shetland, has taken up Hakamada’s case in his role as Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for the Abolition of the Death Penalty, and last year he visited Japan to lobby for his release. Tomorrow (Wednesday 10 March) Hakamada will be 74 and Mr Carmichael will accompany Amnesty delegates to the Japanese embassy in London to press for a retrial or full release of Hakamada.

There are longstanding doubts about the fairness of Hakamada’s trial and one of the original trial judges has himself said he firmly believes Hakamada is innocent. Meanwhile, Amnesty is stressing that conditions on death row in Japan are extremely harsh and, along with numerous other death row inmates, Hakamada now suffers from a mental illness, not least after spending 28 years in solitary confinement.

Alistair Carmichael said:

"No-one should be sentenced to death in this day and age and it's mind-boggling to think that Hakamada Iwao has been on death row since the time of the Beatles or the first moon landing.

"It's a personal tragedy for Mr Hakamada and a scar on the conscience of Japan.

"I campaigned for years on the Kenny Richey case so I'm well aware of just how appalling life on death row really is. But this case is in a category all of its own. It's truly shocking.

"Just going to the Japanese embassy in London isn’t going to get Hakamada Iwao off death row overnight, but it's part of a process to secure him a fair retrial or ensure he's released."

Amnesty International UK Director Kate Allen said:

"Most people's idea of Japan does not include the fact that the country even has the death penalty, still less the fact that a prisoner has been on death row there for over four decades.

"But the reality is actually worse still. Japan's condemned prisoners are kept in inhuman conditions for decades and then taken out of their cells and hanged without warning.

"With Mr Hakamada about to become 74 we desperately need to see movement on his case. The unfairness of Hakamada’s original trial and mounting concerns about his mental illness must mean that the Japanese authorities either grant him a retrial or release him as soon as possible."

Conditions on death row in Japan are extremely harsh. As Amnesty showed in a lengthy report last year, death row prisoners in Japan are largely confined to isolation cells. They are not allowed to move around in their cells, but must remain seated at all times. They are prohibited from talking to other inmates or even making eye contact with guards. Televisions are forbidden, visits are limited and often denied, and very little contact with the outside world is permitted. Amnesty’s research shows that numerous prisoners have been driven into mental illness, yet few safeguards exist to prevent them being executed.

Later this month Amnesty will publish a global survey on the use of the death penalty and this is expected to show that Japan is one of the world’s biggest users of the punishment.

China: Demand for clemency

Amnesty International has issued the following urgent action appeal for a man who could be executed within days. Tang Yanan was convicted of an economic crime, reportedly after he was tortured to confess and given an unfair trial.

DEMAND CLEMENCY FROM SUPREME COURT

The Anhui Provincial High People’s Court rejected Tang Yanan’s appeal against the death penalty on 12 August. China’s Supreme People's Court in Beijing, is reviewing his sentence. Tang Yanan could be executed within days if it upholds the sentence.

After what appears to have been an unfair trial the Bozhou City Intermediate People’s Court in Anhui province, convicted Tang Yanan on 11 December 2008, of "fraudulent raising of public funds". According to the Chinese press, he and approximately 20 other co-defendants illegally obtained 970 million Yuan in public funds (approximately US$142 million) between 2004 and 2007. The money was for a deer breeding centre to cull deer antlers which could be used in Chinese herbal medicines. They managed to attract nearly 50,000 investors from more than 110 districts and counties in seven provinces by offering investors high profit returns.

The Chinese press reported that Tang Yanan admitted his guilt. However, during the appeal hearing he withdrew his confession saying that he confessed under torture. Despite this, Anhui Provincial People’s High Court upheld the guilty verdict. At the same time, the appeal court reduced the sentence of several co-defendants who were sentenced to various terms from three years’ to 15 years’ imprisonment. It is unclear whether Tang Yanan has access to his family or legal representation of his own choice.

There are concerns with the consistency in the application of economic criminal charges in China. Earlier in 2009, Du Yimin, a businesswoman who was executed on 5 August, was also found guilty of "fraudulent raising of public funds." Both her defense and Tang Yanan’s argued that they should have been convicted of the lesser offence of "illegally collecting public deposits," which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years' imprisonment and a fine of 500,000 Yuan (US$73,000) because their intent had not been to commit fraud but to genuinely invest funds in legitimate enterprises.

PLEASE WRITE IMMEDIATELY in Mandarin or your own language:

• Urging the authorities not to execute Tang Yanan;
• calling on the authorities to ensure that Tang Yanan has access to his family and legal representation of his choosing and urging the authorities to guarantee that he is not subject to torture or other ill-treatment while in custody.
• urging the National People’s Congress to introduce a legal procedure for clemency;
• urging the authorities to establish an immediate moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty, as provided by UN General Assembly resolution 62/149, of 18 December 2007.

PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 08 October 2009 TO:

President of the Supreme People's Court
WANG Shengjun Yuanzhang
Zuigao Renmin Fayuan
27 Dongjiaomin Xiang
Beijingshi 100745
People's Republic of China
Fax: +86 10 65292345
Salutation: Dear President

Also send copies to diplomatic representatives accredited to your country. Please check with your section office if sending appeals after the above date.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The death penalty is applicable for 68 offences in China, including non-violent ones. China executes more people every year than any other country in the world. Amnesty International estimated that China carried out at least 1,718 executions and sentenced 7,003 people to death in 2008. These figures represent a minimum - real figures are undoubtedly much higher. A US-based NGO that is focused on advancing human rights in China, the Dui Hua Foundation, estimates that between 5,000 and 6,000 people were executed that year, based on figures obtained from local officials. The official statistics on death sentences and executions are classified as state secrets.

In January 2007, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) review for all death sentences, which had been scrapped in 1982, was restored. All death sentences are now reviewed by the SPC, which has the power to approve, revise or remand death sentences. Chinese authorities have reported a drop in executions since the SPC resumed this review. Nevertheless, the application of the death penalty remains shrouded in secrecy in China, and statistics on death sentences and executions are classified as state secrets. Without access to such information it is impossible to make a full and informed analysis of death penalty developments in China, or to say if there has been a reduction in its use.

No one who is sentenced to death in China receives a fair trial in accordance with international human rights standards. Many have had confessions accepted despite saying in court that these were extracted under torture; have had to prove themselves innocent, rather than be proven guilty; and have had limited access to legal counsel.

UA:226/09 Index: ASA 17/046/2009, Issue Date: 27 August 2009

Related stories:
China: Businesswoman shot after unfair trial -- 12 August 2009
DP improvements not for economic crimes: China -- 10 March 2009
China: Death over milk, but no official answers -- 29 January 2009
China: Executions to preserve order, control -- 12 December 2008
Judge backs harsh sentences: China -- 20 April 2008
Party claims economic penalty 'prudent' -- 4 August, 2007

China: Businesswoman shot after unfair trial

Amnesty International has issued this update to its appeal on behalf of Du Yimin, a businesswoman who was executed last week after being convicted of "fraudulent raising of public funds".

URGENT ACTION
BUSINESSWOMAN EXECUTED FOR FRAUD

Du Yimin, a businesswoman convicted of "fraudulent raising of public funds" was executed on 5 August after China's Supreme People's Court (SPC) approved her sentence.

Du Yimin was sentenced to death in March 2008. Her appeal was rejected on 13 January 2009. According to the verdict, she had illegally raised approximately 700 million yuan (US$102 million) from hundreds of people investing in her beauty parlours. According to the Chinese press, she had obtained the money between 2003 and 2006 by offering investors monthly returns of up to 10%.

Her lawyer has stated that Du Yimin should have been convicted for the lesser offence of "illegally collecting public deposits," which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years' imprisonment and a fine of 500,000 yuan (US$73,000). Du Yimin claimed that she had had no intention of keeping the money, but had intended to invest it in her companies, and that she had obtained it without using fraudulent means.

Du Yimin’s death sentence has caused a debate about the consistency in the application of the death penalty in the People's Republic of China. The day before she was sentenced to death, an official who used 15.8 billion yuan of public funds to cover his personal spending was sentenced to a fixed term of imprisonment.

Amnesty international believes Du Yimin did not receive a fair trial in line with international standards and condemns her execution.

Further information on UA: 42/09 Index: ASA 17/007/2009
People's Republic of China
Date: 07 August 2009

Amnesty International's original appeal, from 13 February 2009, is here.

Related stories:
DP improvements not for economic crimes: China -- 10 March 2009
China: Death over milk, but no official answers -- 29 January 2009
China: Executions to preserve order, control -- 12 December 2008
Judge backs harsh sentences: China -- 20 April 2008
Party claims economic penalty 'prudent' -- 4 August, 2007

India: "Abusive lottery must be abolished"

The most comprehensive study of India's death penalty system ever conducted has concluded that it is an abusive and inconsistent process, hanging people on the basis of shockingly inadequate evidence.

Describing the system as a "lethal lottery", at the launch of the report on 2 May 2008, the study's authors said "the only remedy is to abolish the death penalty [in India] completely".

The landmark 243-page report Lethal Lottery: The Death Penalty in India, A study of Supreme Court judgments in death penalty cases 1950-2006 was published by Amnesty International India and the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (Tamil Nadu & Puducherry).

Researchers analysed Supreme Court judgements handed down in more than 700 death penalty cases over a 56 year period.

Woefully few, too many
A summary of the study findings said the work was necessary "because of a vital gap that affected those campaigning against the death penalty: the absence of a comprehensive analysis of facts relating to the practice of capital punishment".

"There exist woefully few researched studies on the subject," it said.

Amnesty International reported at least 140 people were sentenced to death in 2006 and 2007. The most recent official figures, from 31 December 2005, showed at least 273 people were on death row, a figure which would certainly have increased.

"The fate of these death row prisoners is ultimately a lottery," the study's authors said.

This research was "the first to examine the essential unfairness of the death penalty system in India by analysing evidence found in Supreme Court judgments of abuse of law and procedure and of arbitrariness and inconsistency in the investigation, trial, sentencing and appeal stages in capital cases".

It found that the death penalty was not limited to "rarest of rare cases" as claimed by politicians and courts. But "on the contrary, there is ample evidence to show that the death penalty has been an arbitrary, imprecise and abusive means of dealing with defendants".

Poor evidence, poor defence
The main failings identified in the report were:

1. errors in consideration of evidence -- most death sentences handed down in India are based on circumstantial evidence alone. In a 1994 Supreme Court appeal, the Court noted the main witness's memory constantly improved from his statement a few days after the incident to the trial three years later

2. inadequate legal representation -- concerns include "lawyers ignoring key facts of mental incompetence, omitting to provide any arguments on sentencing, or failing to dispute claims that the accused was under 18 years of age at the time of the crime despite evidence to the contrary"
anti-terrorist legislation -- concerns include "the broad definition of 'terrorist acts', insufficient safeguards on arrest, and provisions allowing for confessions made to police to be admissible as evidence"

3. arbitrariness in sentencing -- "in the same month, different benches of the Supreme Court have treated similar cases differently, with mitigating factors taken into account or disregarded arbitrarily"

4. failure of the courts and state authorities to consistently apply the procedures supposed to limit the death penalty to the "rarest of rare" cases.

The report also condemned a range of failings in India's death penalty system, which were at odds with international standards on the use of the death penalty.

These included expansion in the scope of the death penalty, mandatory death sentences -- for example for drugs and firearms offences -- and a lack of safeguards to prevent execution of children and the mentally ill.

Doing without, for how long?
Amnesty International welcomed the "current hiatus" on executions in the past decade, and said this "illustrates that the people of India are willing to live without the death penalty".

The last execution in India was carried out in August 2004, when Dhananjoy Chatterjee was hanged for the 1990 rape and murder of a girl. He was the first person to be hanged in India for over six years, having spent more than 14 years in prison.

However this week the Times of India reported that on May 16 a Bettiah court issued a "black warrant" for the execution of Prajeet Kumar Singh.

The newspaper said authorities in Bhagalpur Central Jail were preparing for its first execution in 13 years, which by law must take place between 21 and 28 days from a warrant being issued.

It quoted prison superintendant Uma Kant Sharan as saying the gallows would have to be readied and a hangman recruited.

"A separate request will be made to manufacturers of the special noose rope in Buxar," he said.

Prajeet's family, however, has reportedly lodged a petition for mercy with the President.

Related stories:
India: The politics of hanging -- 16 January, 2007

Mirza Tahir Hussain: Safe, free and home

UK national Mirza Tahir Hussain has returned home from Pakistan following President Pervez Musharaff's decision to commute his death sentence.

Hussain had endured three trials, two death sentences, four stays of execution and eighteen years in prison.

President Musharaff commuted the sentence to life imprisonment on Wednesday 15 October. A life sentence in Pakistan usually means a minimum term of 14 years in prison, making him immediately eligible for release. He was freed on Friday and he flew out for the UK the same day.

Hussain was scheduled to hang after 31 December, when a fourth stay of execution was due to expire.

After his family received confirmation of the decision, his brother Amjad said: "I welcome the news and I'm grateful to President Musharraf that he has taken this decision on humanitarian grounds.

"We are near the finishing line. At last, this 18 years of nightmare appears to be coming to an end."

Amjad Hussain said his brother would need time to recover and adjust after his years of imprisonment.

"There will be help and there will be counselling, he will have the best he can get.

"He needs to catch up on all the news that he's missed, the world has moved on and he's been living a life of standstill for the last 18 years," he said.

The BBC News website quoted a statement read on Mirza Hussein's behalf after his release: "It has been a tremendous strain to be separated from my family and loved ones.

"Freedom is a great gift. I want to use this freedom to get to know my family again, to adjust back to living here and to come to terms with my ordeal.

"My thoughts remain with all the prisoners I have left behind."

Under the shadow
Hussain was convicted of murdering taxi driver Jamshed Khan who died in Punjab Province on 17 December 1988. He had always claimed he was physically and sexually assaulted at gunpoint by the taxi driver, and the gun went off in the struggle that followed.

He was first sentenced to death in 1989, later reduced to life, before being acquitted of all charges in 1996. His case was then referred to the religious Federal Shariat Court and in 1998 he was sentenced to death for robbery involving murder, despite the Court's acknowledgement that no robbery was involved.

One of the three judges in his sharia court trial found that police had "fabricated evidence in a shameless manner".

The taxi driver's family later rejected an offer of blood money under Islamic law and insisted that the death sentence be carried out.

Amnesty International (AI), along with other organisations, argued he was convicted after an unfair trial and said "under no circumstances" should the sentence be upheld.

President Musharaff rejected a mercy petition, and he said in October that he did not have the power to override the judgement of a sharia court. But campaigners pointed out that article 45 of the constitution gave him the power to commute "any sentence passed by any court".

Later reports suggested the president was looking for legal grounds to commute the sentence.

UK campaign
Amjad Hussain led a strong campaign for clemency across the UK, including Amnesty International UK, the Muslim Council of Britain and the Catholic Church. Amjad reportedly gave up his job as a computer scientist to lead the campaign for his brother's freedom.

UK Prime Minister Tony Blair intervened on Hussain's behalf, and Prince Charles made a direct appeal for mercy following an official meeting with President Musharaff in Islamabad on 30 October.

Related stories:
Pakistan: Fourth reprieve for Mirza Hussain -- 22 October, 2006
Call for abolition: Pakistan columnist -- 17 October, 2006
Pakistan: Thousands in "brutal" system – 12 October, 2006
Pakistan: Hanging delayed, but how long? -- 03 October, 2006
UK pressure over Pakistan hanging -- 01 October, 2006

Pakistan, Mirza Tahir Hussain, Amjad Hussain, death row

Pakistan: Fourth reprieve for Mirza Hussain

Mirza Tahir Hussain was given a fourth stay of execution on 19 October, apparently to prevent cancellation of a state visit to the country by Prince Charles.

The UK citizen was scheduled to be hanged on 1 November, three days after Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall arrive in Pakistan.

President Pervez Musharraf issued the stay of execution, which delays the hanging until at least 31 December.

According to UK newspaper The Independent, there were "unconfirmed reports from Pakistan that President Pervez Musharraf has appointed a legal counsel to re-examine the case and consider the possibility of a pardon for Hussain".

UK's The Times newspaper quoted a senior Pakistani official as saying: "We are considering the case on humanitarian grounds. Initially, a two-month stay order is being given for his execution. In the meantime the Government will try to find a permanent solution to this issue."

A Pakistani cabinet minister reportedly told the Associated Press that the President was consulting legal experts and Islamic scholars to find a way to "permanently settle this matter".

The minister told AP there was " a possibility that he [Hussain] would be pardoned. God willing, we will find some solution."

The latest reprieve comes after Prince Charles raised the case directly with President Musharraf.

"The Prince of Wales has been concerned about this case for some time and had raised it with the Prime Minister of Pakistan," said a spokesman quoted in UK newspaper The Telegraph.

According to another report, the Pakistan Government has angrily denied the reprieve was a result of pressure from the UK.

"It has nothing to do with what the British leadership has to say. There was no pressure and I have said earlier that we do not accept ultimatums from anybody," a spokesman said.

Related stories:
Call for abolition: Pakistan columnist -- 17 October, 2006
Pakistan: Thousands in "brutal" system – 12 October, 2006
Pakistan: Hanging delayed, but how long? -- 03 October, 2006
UK pressure over Pakistan hanging -- 01 October, 2006