Singapore, stop the execution of the 21 year old Malaysian

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC STATEMENT

 

4^th December 2009

 

Amnesty International urges the President of Singapore S. R. Nathan to reconsider Yong Vui Kong’s clemency petition and commute his mandatory death sentence immediately. Yong Vui Kong, a 21 year old, is scheduled to be hanged on 11 December 2009.

 

The death penalty is prescribed in Singapore for a wide range of offences. However in recent years, it is only known to have been imposed for drug trafficking, murder and firearms offences, all of which carry a mandatory death sentence.

 

A mandatory death sentence imposes the ultimate cruel, inhumane and degrading punishment without any possibility of taking into account the circumstances of the person charged, or the circumstances around the particular offence.  The court is not given discretion to sentence the person convicted to an alternative punishment. 

 

Yong Vui Kong, a Malaysian citizen, was arrested in June 2007 by officers from the Central Narcotics Bureau. He was charged with trafficking 42.27 grams of heroin and, as provided by the Misuse of Drugs Act, automatically received a mandatory death sentence in January 2009.

 

International human rights standards prohibit mandatory death sentencing even for the most serious crimes on the grounds that it constitutes an arbitrary deprivation of life and a violation of the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. Article 9(1) of the Singaporean Constitution states that “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law”.

 

A constitutional appeal challenging the mandatory imposition of a death sentence on Yong Vui Kong, as provided for in the Misuse of Drugs Act, is due to be considered on 8 December by the Court of Appeals. As such, his case would be referred back to the trial judge for reconsideration. On 1 December the President of Singapore rejected Yong Vui Kong’s petition for clemency. The Court of Appeals has already rejected an earlier appeal against his death sentence in November. Yong Vui Kong received a stay of execution from the Singapore Court of Appeals on 3 December.

 

Amnesty International calls on the President of Singapore S.R. Nathan to commute all death sentences which have been imposed, and immediately introduce a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty.

 

Click HERE to access Amnesty Int's Urgent Appeal on Yong's Latest Appeal for Clemency

Yong Vui Kong received a stay of execution on 3 December, but is now scheduled for execution on 11 December. His appeal will be heard by the Court of Appeals on 8 December.

Yong Vui Kong's lawyer has appealed on the grounds that the mandatory death sentence for drug-trafficking, which is set out in the Misuse of Drugs Act, is unconstitutional, and therefore his case should be referred back to the trial judge for "reconsideration."

The appeal was due to be heard by a three-judge panel at the Court of Appeals on 2 December, but only one judge was present, so the court had to grant a stay of execution. The court, which rejected an earlier appeal against Yong Vui Kong's death sentence, is now due to hear his latest appeal on 8 December.

The President of Singapore rejected Yong Vui Kong's petition for clemency on 1 December.

PLEASE WRITE IMMEDIATELY in English, Mandarin or your own language:

• Urging the president to reconsider Yong Vui Kong's clemency petition and commute his death sentence;
  
• Expressing concern that because the death penalty is mandatory for drug-trafficking offences, the court that sentenced Yong Vui Kong to death had no discretion to sentence him to an alternative punishment;
  
• Calling on the president to introduce a moratorium on executions, with a view to complete abolition of the death penalty.
  

PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 11 DECEMBER 2009 TO:

 

President

His Excellency SR Nathan
Office of the President
Istana, Orchard Road
Singapore 0922

Fax: +65 6735 3135
Email: s_r_nathan@istana.gov.sg

Salutation: Your Excellency

And copies to:

Newspaper

Editor-in-Chief
The Straits Times
1000 Toa Payoh North
News Centre,
Singapore 318994

Fax: +65 6319 8282
Email: : stonline@sph.com.sg

Or

H.E. T Jasudasen High Commissioner
HIGH COMMISSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE
209, Jalan Tun Razak 50400 Kuala Lumpur
E- mail : singhc_kul@sgmfa.gov.my
Fax : 603-2161 6343/2163 4875

Additional Information

The authorities in Singapore do not release any information about the use of the death penalty in the country. At least one person is known to have been hanged so far in 2009, and at least three sentenced to death; in 2008, at least one person was hanged and five sentenced to death. The true figures are likely to be higher. The government has always maintained that the death penalty is not a human rights issue, and consistently lobbied other nations against the abolition of the death penalty.

All capital cases are tried by the High Court; convicted prisoners can appeal, and if they are unsuccessful they can apply to the president for clemency. President Nathan, who has been in power since 1999, is not known to have granted clemency to any condemned prisoner.

Lawyer: Natural life sentence a better deterrent - Abolish the Death Penalty

BANGI: A lawyer has suggested that the death penalty be abolished, as it does not seem to be an effective deterrent.

M.M. Athimulan said a better deterrent would be natural life imprisonment.

He said crimes such as murder, drug trafficking and armed robbery were on the rise despite the law providing for death by hanging.

"In fact, traffickers are prepared to risk their lives and carry on with the clandestine activities to make a fast buck," he said in a paper entitled "Abolishment of Death Penalty" at a criminal law conference at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia here yesterday.

At present, judges can reduce murder and drug trafficking charges in the midst of a trial if they find there is insufficient evidence.

In such cases, the offender gets a jail term of up to 20 years, with one-third remission for good behaviour.

Athimulan said the natural life sentence -- serving time in prison until death -- would better deter would-be criminals.

He said from his experience, those charged with offences that carried the natural life sentence were more fearful because they would have to languish in prison indefinitely.

Athimulan, however, admitted that this could be expensive as the government would have to keep and feed them.

A participant, Mohammad Rafique Rashid Ali, suggested that the death penalty be maintained but that the guilty be executed in public.

Lawyer Gurbachan Singh, who delivered a paper titled "Constructing Defence On Drug Charges in Court", said that there was uncertainty in this area of the law due to inconsistencies.

Gurbachan said recent judicial pronouncements on trafficking and possession cases appeared to have been wrongly decided.

"In the past we had eminent judges who upheld the law and were never affected by the facts of a case."

Another lawyer, Hisyam Teh Poh Teik, who delivered a paper on "Criminal Advocacy" advised newcomers to the Bar to be innovative and break new grounds in criminal jurisprudence.

He said lawyers must rise to the defence of their clients at the prosecution stage when conducting cross-examination of witnesses.

"Trial judges are unlikely to accept the accused's version during defence as it will be construed as a concoction or as an afterthought," Hisyam Teh said. - New Straits Times, 15/11/2009, Lawyer: Natural life sentence a better deterrent

Police Shooting - SUARAM: Weak Procedures and Lack of Accountability in Police Shootings: Government Must Act Immediately to End Impunity

Press Statement: 24 November 2009

Weak Procedures and Lack of Accountability in Police Shootings:

Government Must Act Immediately to End Impunity

SUARAM strongly condemns the Royal Malaysian Police on the shooting of the five men in Klang on 8 November 2009 that resulted in their deaths. There are high numbers of death by police shooting and the police should stop maintaining the same reason of self-defence for shooting suspects to death and take measures to avoid such events from recurring.

SUARAM questions how it was possible that all the five suspects were shot dead simultaneously while they were in a moving vehicle as reported in the media. We also question the inconsistencies of the police accounts of the events surrounding the incident. Initial news reports by New Straits Times[1] and Bernama[2] described that police officers stopped the suspects’ vehicle and the suspects tried to run the vehicle into the police officers. The suspects opened fire at the police officers and the police returned fire, causing all five suspects to die on the spot. However, when denying allegations that the police had a “shoot-to-kill” approach, The Star reported that the Federal CID Director Comm Datuk Seri Bakri Zinin stated, “There was a high-speed car chase where the robbers tried to force the pursuing police vehicle off the road while firing shots indiscriminately at them. Police had no choice but to return fire.”[3]

Due to the poor track record of the police and inconsistencies in accounts of incidences such as the one that occurred on 8 November, there is a perception that there is an attempt by the police to cover up actual events. While we recognise the police officer’s right to self-defence, SUARAM is of the view that even if the suspect is first to open fire as alleged to have occurred in the incident that occurred on 8 November, the police must use other procedures to apprehend the suspects that are proportionate to the actions of the suspects and ultimately, lethal use of firearms must be the last resort and not the first.

Death by police shooting is not an uncommon practice in the police force. According to our documentation and monitoring, in 2008, there were 44 cases of death by police shootings with possibly more cases unreported. The perception that the police “shoot-to-kill” has developed because in many of the police shooting cases, circumstances indicated that the police did not try to apprehend suspects but rather, resort to the use of firearms at first instance of attack by suspects. In virtually every case, the police claimed that the suspects were armed and dangerous, and that returning fire was necessary but a closer examination would reveal that in a large number of the shooting cases, the suspects were only armed with weapons such as knives or parangs. These cases are clearly in contravention of the principles of restraint and proportionality in the international standards on the use of firearms by law enforcement officers.

International law clearly stipulates the basic criteria for the use of arms. In the United Nations Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials it is stated, “Law enforcement officials may use force only when strictly necessary and to the extent required for the performance of their duty”.

Whereas Article 9 of the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials states, “In any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life…” and Article 10 states “…law enforcement officials shall identify themselves as such and give a clear warning of their intent to use firearms, with sufficient time for the warning to be observed, unless to do so would unduly place the law enforcement officials at risk or would create a risk of death or serious harm to other persons, or would be clearly inappropriate or pointless in the circumstances of the incident”. (All emphases added)

In addition, Section 15(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Act 593) states that in the event of an arrest, it is unlawful for police officers to cause the death of a person during an arrest before they have been accused of an offence severe enough to be sentenced to death or life imprisonment.

While much attention has been given to the recent deaths of ethnic Indian Malaysians in police shootings, SUARAM’s documentation shows that these cases are not merely confined to a single ethnic group. In 2008, 25 of the 44 deaths by police shootings documented by SUARAM that year were foreigners. It is therefore an issue of the failure of the government to discipline a police force which is today operating with critically weak procedures, lack of accountability and impunity.

 

The low public confidence in the police force today is largely due to its lack of accountability. This has been made worse by the recent police shooting cases and the attempts by the police in defending itself without proper and transparent investigation procedures.

 

In light of the recent police shooting cases, there is an urgent need to end impunity by immediately:-

 

1.      declaring and reviewing of the current procedures of the use of firearms on criminal suspects to ensure that police officers comply with international standards; and

2.      establishing accountability procedures after police shootings occur to ensure that police officers are accountable for their actions.

SUARAM also strongly calls upon the Government to immediately act on the recommendation by the Royal Commission on Police for an inquest to be conducted for every death within a month of the incident. This should include all deaths by police shootings. The recommendation states that the Magistrates and Government Medical Officers must be informed about each death and that the bodies must not be moved prior to that. Upon being informed, a Magistrate and a Government Medical Officer must immediately inspect the body at the site of the incident.

 

In the longer term, the Government must establish a Coroner’s Court as recommended by the Parliamentary Select Committee on the Criminal Procedure Code and the Penal Code – to carry out investigation on all deaths by police shootings as well as those in police custody.

 

Released by,

 

Lucas Yap Heng Lung

SUARAM Coordinator

016-4114147

lucasheng19@gmail.com

 

---

[1] The New Straits Times (2009) ‘PCO Boy gang killed in shoot-out’, 9 November, at http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/articles/21deads/Article/index_html, accessed 23 November 2009 .

[2] Bernama (2009) ‘Five Criminals Shot Dead By Police’, 8 November, at http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=453530, accessed 23 November 2009 .

[3] The Star (2009) ‘We don’t have shoot-to-kill approach, say police’, 11 November, at http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/11/11/nation/5086466&sec=nation, accessed 23 November 2009 .

Another 'shoot to kill' incident - 5 dead.

Another 'shoot to kill' incident - 5 dead.

Apparently they were on the way to commit a robbery - I seriously wonder how the police knew that...

'PCO Boy" had 13 Criminal Record - I believe that it is very wrong to 'defame' the dead and make all kinds of allegations against people that you killed. Is this an attempt to justify your actions?

There must be an independent inquiry into this incident:-

- Was the action of 'shooting' that resulted in all 5 ending up dead justified?

- Was there any intention to arrest these 'suspects' , or were the police out with a mission to shoot them all dead?

- Did the police have information about the identity of these persons before the incident, and were attempts made to secure their arrests?

-......

-......

 

The report says that the 5 had only one gun - 'a Remington pistol with three bullets in its magazine.' - so one person shot at the police...mmm

 'Police believe they have solved 10 armed robberies with the death of the five men. ' - They do not even know the identity of the deceased, and how can they say this so soon after the killing incident...

Post-Mortem is not enough - we need a complete investigation of what happened. Are the police telling the truth? This investigation must be done by an independent body of persons.

KLANG: Police shot dead five men in an early morning shoot-out in Lorong Sungai Keramat, Taman Klang Utama here, yesterday.

A team of D9 officers from the Klang district station was patrolling the area about 12.30am when they spotted a vehicle, with five men inside acting suspiciously.

Police stopped the car and asked them to step out for an inspection.

However, the driver immediately reversed the car and tried to run over the officers.

At the same time, they opened fire at the officers.

In self-defence, the officers returned fire, killing all five in the car.

Klang district police chief Assistant Commissioner Mohamad Mat Yusop said the group was believed to be on their way to commit a robbery and had been active for the past year.

"During the shoot-out, the vehicle rammed into a ditch barrier nearby and all the suspects were already dead when the police got to the car.

"We believe the driver was shot before he lost control of the car," Mohamad said

The identities of the five have yet to be ascertained.

However, police identified one of them as "PCO Boy" who is believed to be the leader of the gang and had 13 criminal records.

He is also wanted for nine robbery cases.

Mohamad said the five were believed to be part of a bigger gang and police were hunting for the remaining members.

Meanwhile, Selangor Criminal Investigation Department chief Datuk Hasnan Hassan said the gang was noted for committing robberies while armed with samurai swords.

"Initial investigations revealed that the leader of the gang (PCO Boy) has been wanted by the police for the past few months as he was believed to be involved in gangsterism and several robbery cases," he said at the scene yesterday.

The car driven by the gang was reported stolen in Kajang on Nov 2 and fake registration number plates were used. 

Also found in the car was a Remington pistol with three bullets in its magazine, six parang and swords.

Police believe they have solved 10 armed robberies with the death of the five men.

The bodies have been sent to Tengku Ampuan Rahimah Hospital for a post-mortem.- New Straits Times, 9/11/2009, PCO Boy gang killed in shoot-out

ENCOD's letter to PM & SUHAKAM - Death Sentence & Drugs

MALAYSIA EXECUTES DRUG OFFENDERS

published Friday 9 October 2009 11:18, by encod .

In the past months, four young men have been sentenced to death for relatively modest charges on cannabis in Malaysia.

ENCOD has sent the following letter to Prime Minister Najib Razak of Malaysia and the Chair of the Malaysian Human Rights Commission.

Please copy this letter, sign it in your name and send it to Malaysian authorities. Check the list of embassies.

PRIME MINISTER Najib Razak,

Prime Minister’s Department, Prime Minister’s Office,
 Main Block, Perdana Putra Building,
 Federal Government Administrative Centre,
 62502 Putrajaya, MALAYSIA

CHAIR HUMAN RIGHT COMMISSION

Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman, Suruhanjaya Hak
 Asasi Manusia Malaysia, 29th Floor, Menara Tun Razak, Jalan Raja Laut,
 50350 Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA

Antwerpen, 9 October 2009

Dear Prime Minister,

Dear Chair Human Rights Commission,

As a European coalition of NGO’s and individuals concerned with the global drug issue, we would like to inform you herewith of our deepest concerns about the confirmation of several death sentences in your country recently.

On August 27, Khairul Idzham was sentenced to death for trafficking 4,3 kilos of cannabis five years ago.

On September 2, Lim Kok Yong, 35 years old, was sentenced to be hanged until death after finding him guilty of trafficking 625.7 grammes of cannabis, five years ago.

On September 4, Khalil Anuar Sukirman, 25 years old, was sentenced to death after he was found guilty of trafficking over 1kg of cannabis three years ago.

On September 30, Indonesian Nasir Ibrahim, 31 years old, was given the death sentence after he was found guilty of trafficking 868gm cannabis more than five years ago.

The use of the death penalty as such runs counter to the universal protection of human rights and is at odds with the international trend away from the use of this measure. Very few countries currently carry out executions: provisional figures compiled by Amnesty International indicate that only 20 of the United Nation’s 193 member states carried out state killings in 2006. In countries such as South Korea and Taiwan, authorities are considering to abolish this measure. We hope that this will soon be the case in Malaysia as well.

However, in these particular cases, we believe there is no valid argument whatsoever to carry out this punishment, and urge you to do whatever is possible to reverse the sentence.

We are aware of the argument of your government for maintaining the death penalty for drug traffickers, because drugs cause misery in Malaysian society. To this we would like to say that in spite of executions of drug traffickers in Malaysia, the country is not and will never be drug-free. Many people in Malaysia want to consume cannabis and other drugs, so it is obvious that other people will supply them. Taking the life of people will not change that situation.

Drugs trafficking is the core business of globally organised criminal organisations. The traffickers who are occasionally caught by authorities with relatively small amounts do not have major responsibilities in this business. Killing them will not scare the drugs gangs away. On the contrary, it is possible that thanks to these punishments, the drugs barons can continue to justify extraordinary high prices for their goods.

On the other hand, cannabis is a natural product, a non-lethal substance. Its consumption is widespread around the world, as it has been for thousands of years among many different cultures and people. In most European countries, cannabis possession for personal consumption is not even penalised anymore. In the coming years, we expect major law changes that will allow for the cultivation and distribution of cannabis to adults in several European countries.

ENCOD strongly believes that the drugs problem can only be reduced by effective social and health policies, not by legal sanctions. Innovative strategies for addressing the issue both globally and locally are needed, and the harsh implementation of drug prohibition is a major impediment to thee introduction of these strategies. The reinforcement of policies that have failed until now will increase the lack of credibility of authorities in the opinion of the general public.

We call upon your wisdom to apply principles of sound governance and reverse the death sentence for the people mentioned above. If you believe that Malaysia needs to execute drug traffickers to please the international community, this is a huge mistake. We offer you our co-operation in order to convince European governments to support Malaysia in the creation of structures which would allow for the reduction of harm that the production, trade and consumption of illicit drugs can cause.

Sincerely yours,

On behalf of ENCOD,

Marisa Felicissimo, Belgium
Fredrick Polak, The Netherlands
Jorge Roque, Portugal
Antonio Escobar, Spain

Source: European Coalition for Just and Effective Drug Policies (ENCOD)Website

Time to send death penalty to the gallows (Malaysiakini)

Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet) is pleased that there is some realisation from the government, in particular the Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister A Kohilan Pillay, about the fact that '…young Malaysian girls, some fresh graduates, were easily conned by men from the syndicates to travel abroad with a package…'

The media report concerned also stated that '…Malaysian lasses are an easy lot to charm. They are easily smitten by sweet words and gifts, making them an easy target for drug-trafficking syndicates looking for mules…'

The report also stated that 'there were currently 1,565 Malaysians jailed abroad and 60% of the cases were drug mules… "Six in China have been sentenced to death. Since 2007, about 30 Malaysians are in death row,"…'

Similarly, in Malaysia too, many on Death Row have been similarly conned into being drug mules, whereby many were not even aware that they were in possession of drugs.

The Malaysian Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, in particular section 39B provides that any person involved in the trafficking of drugs shall be guilty of an offence against this Act and shall be punished on conviction with death. The judges and courts, by reason of the mandatory sentence, are deprived of the option of imposing a lesser sentence, and Madpet believes that this is very wrong.

What makes it worse is that there are presumptions in the Act, amongst others, that one '…shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, to be trafficking in the said drug...' if one is found in the possession of certain amounts of certain drugs. The onus of proving one's innocence then shifts to the accused. This is contrary to the normal rule where the onus of proving one guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is with the prosecution.

The reality is that those really involved in the business of trafficking of drugs are seldom caught and prosecuted, and it is usually the mules, who many a time are not even aware that they are transporting or keeping drugs, who end up being arrested, charged, tried, convicted and sentenced to death. This is very wrong and unjust.

The official report to the UN on the death penalty states also states as follows, "…the low rates of effectiveness of law enforcement, the relative immunity from the law of those who profit most from the trade in drugs and the higher risk of violence and death they most probably run from others engaged in the drug racket, all make it seem implausible that the death penalty in itself will have a marginally stronger deterrent effect than long terms of imprisonment..."

The imposition of mandatory sentences also is wrong as by doing so, the legislative branch of government ousts the powers of the judiciary and that is the power of courts and judges to impose fair and just sentences depending on the circumstances and the facts of the case. A person who has been conned into keeping and/or carrying drugs, especially those who are unaware of the fact, should never be sentenced to death. A prison term would suffice.

One of the reasons used often by governments, including the Malaysian government, to justify the mandatory death penalty is that deters serious crimes. This was what M. Kayveas, a deputy minister in the Prime Minister's Department told Parliament once. This is baseless and cannot be justified by any fact or statistical proof.

On the other hand, there have been studies conducted throughout the world over the past seventy years using various different methodological approaches that have failed to find convincing evidence that capital punishment is a more effective deterrent of crime than long-term imprisonment.

Studies conducted in Australia show that abolition of the death penalty had no effect on the homicide rate and in Canada there was, in fact, was a sharp decline in the homicide rate after the abolition.

In the US over the past twenty years, states with the death penalty in general have had a higher homicide rate than states without the death penalty.

The UN itself noted in 1988, 1996, and 2002, that '...research has failed to provide scientific proof that executions have a greater deterrent effect than life imprisonment. Such proof is unlikely to be forthcoming. The evidence as a whole gives no positive support to the deterrent hypothesis'.

Noting also that on Dec 18, 2007, the UN General Assembly endorsed a resolution calling for a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty by an overwhelming majority (Resolution 62/149), and on Dec 18, 2008, the UN General Assembly adopted with a bigger majority a second similar resolution calling for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty.

Madpet calls for the repeal of all provisions in law that provide for the mandatory death penalty.

Madpet also reiterates its call for an immediate moratorium on all executions pending abolition, and for the abolition of the death penalty in Malaysia.

The writer represents Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet). - Malaysiakini, 6/11/2009, Time to send death penalty to the gallows

MADPET:- MANDATORY DEATH PENALTY PROVISIONS IN LAW SHOULD BE REPEALED Unjust For Conned Drug Mules To Be Sentenced To Death for Drug Trafficking

MEDIA STATEMENT – 3/11/2009

MANDATORY DEATH PENALTY PROVISIONS IN LAW

SHOULD BE REPEALED

Unjust For Conned Drug Mules To Be Sentenced To Death for Drug Trafficking

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is pleased that there is some realization from the government, in particular the Deputy Foreign Minister A. Kohilan Pillay, about the fact that ‘…young Malaysian girls, some fresh graduates, were easily conned by men from the syndicates to travel abroad with a package…’ The report also stated that ‘…Malaysian lasses are an easy lot to charm. They are easily smitten by sweet words and gifts, making them an easy target for drug-trafficking syndicates looking for mules…’ (Star, 1/11/2009, Malaysian girls easily duped)

The report also stated that ‘there were currently 1,565 Malaysians jailed abroad and 60% of the cases were drug mules… “Six in China have been sentenced to death. Since 2007, about 30 Malaysians are in death row,”…’

Similarly, in Malaysia too, many in death row have been similarly conned to be drug mules, whereby many were not even aware that they were in possession drugs.

The Malaysian Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, in particular section 39B provides that any person involved in trafficking of drugs shall be guilty of an offence against this Act and shall be punished on conviction with death. The judges and courts, by reason of the mandatory sentence, are deprived of the option of imposing a lesser sentence, and MADPET believes that this is very wrong.

What makes it worse, is that there are presumptions in the Act, amongst others, that one ‘…shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, to be trafficking in the said drug...’ if one is found in the possession of certain amounts of certain drugs. The onus of proving one’s innocence then shifts to the accused. This is contrary to the normal rule where the onus of proving one guilty beyond reasonable doubt is with the prosecution.

The reality is that those really involved in business of trafficking of drugs are seldom caught and prosecuted, and it is usually the mules, who many a time are not even aware that they are transporting or keeping drugs, who end up being arrested, charged, tried, convicted and sentenced to death. This is very wrong and unjust.

The official report to the United Nations on the death penalty states also states as follows, “…the low rates of effectiveness of law enforcement, the relative immunity from the law of those who profit most from the trade in drugs and the higher risk of violence and death they most probably run from others engaged in the drug racket, all make it seem implausible that the death penalty in itself will have a marginally stronger deterrent effect than long terms of imprisonment...”

The imposition of mandatory sentences also is wrong as by doing so, the legislative branch of government oust powers of the Judiciary that is the power of courts and judges to impose fair and just sentences depending on the circumstances and the facts of the case. A person who has been conned into keeping and/or carrying drugs, especially those who were unaware of the fact, should never be sentenced to death. A prison term would suffice.

One of the reasons used often by governments, including the Malaysian government, to justify the mandatory death penalty is that deters serious crimes. This was what Datuk M. Kayveas, a Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department told Parliament. (Bernama, 28/6/2006) This is baseless and cannot be justified by any facts or statistical proof.

On the other hand, there are studies conducted throughout the world over the past seventy years using various different methodological approaches that have failed to find convincing evidence that capital punishment is a more effective deterrent of crime than long-term imprisonment.

Studies conducted in Australia show that abolition of the death penalty had no effect on the homicide rate and in Canada there in fact was a sharp decline in the homicide rate after abolition;

In the United States over the past twenty years, states with the death penalty in general have had a higher homicide rate than states without the death penalty;

The United Nations itself noted in 1988, 1996, and 2002, "research has failed to provide scientific proof that executions have a greater deterrent effect than life imprisonment. Such proof is unlikely to be forthcoming. The evidence as a whole gives no positive support to the deterrent hypothesis."

Noting also that on 18 December 2007, the UN General Assembly endorsed a resolution calling for a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty" by an overwhelming majority (Resolution 62/149), and on 18 December 2008, the United Nations General Assembly adopted with a bigger majority a second similar resolution calling for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty.

MADPET calls for the repeal of all provisions in law that provide for the mandatory death penalty.

MADPET reiterates its call for an immediate moratorium on all executions pending abolition, and for the abolition of the death penalty in Malaysia .

Charles Hector

for Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET)

3^rd November 2009

Getting Away with Murder in Malaysia (Asia Sentinel) - Honesty and efficient investigation needed to find the truth and justice

Deaths in Custody - After years of fighting, we manage to at least get the government to take a stance that there will be inquests for deaths in police custody. Now, after the death of Teoh Beng Hock, this 'policy' need to be extended to deaths in custody of the MACC and other branches of government.

There have been several deaths also in Immigration Detention Centres, and there must also be inquests to investigate into these deaths..

Inquests or Inquiry into deaths must of course be truthful. But alas, it has been shown that many will lie or 'adjust' their investigation results so that government, police and public servants end up being blameless. Evidence also may have been hidden. Investigations not thorough, etc. All these make a mockery of inquests and inquiries into deaths in custody.

Just be honest - and be diligent in finding out the truth. Do not subvert justice.

It's best to be connected to the ruling national coalition

On July 16, according to the testimony of a Thai pathologist, Teoh Beng Hock, a 29-year-old aide to an opposition politician, was probably beaten during a marathon questioning session, sodomized, strangled unconscious, dragged to a window of the Malaysia Anti-Corruption Commission in Kuala Lumpur and thrown to his death.

The country's law enforcement establishment maintains that Teoh committed suicide by leaping from the MACC building after the inquiry was concluded into irregularities in his boss's accounts. But it is far from the first "suicide" in custody and what happened to Teoh happens all too frequently when the luckless collide with the powerful in Malaysia. His real killers are unlikely ever to be identified. As many as 350 people have died in custody since 1990. The privileged are rarely brought to trial.

The most infamous recent case before Teoh's is that of Altantuya Shaariibuu, a 28 year-old Mongolian translator who was murdered in 2006 by two bodyguards of then-Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak. Altantuya had been jilted by Najib's best friend, Abdul Razak Baginda, and was demanding money from him.

Although numerous witnesses and evidence connected Najib to the affair, he was never questioned or put on the witness stand, nor was his chief of staff, Musa Safri, who Baginda said in a cautioned statement he approached about getting Altantuya from ceasing her harrassment. His two bodyguards were convicted of the murder although one, in his confession, said the two men were to be paid RM100,000 to kill her. The court never asked who would pay the money. The confession wasn't allowed in court. Baginda was acquitted without having to put on a defense and promptly left the country and Najib was eventually named Prime Minister.

Such questionable cases go back to at least the early 1980s when Sultan Mahmud Iskandar of Johor was dubbed the "killer king" by the British tabloids after he shot a trespasser to death on his property. He also reportedly assaulted and killed a golf caddy who was said to have laughed when the sultan missed a golf stroke and he maimed the caddy's brother. He later was alleged to have assaulted and injured a hockey coach, kicking off a constitutional crisis that led to former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad's removal of legal immunity from prosecution for all of Malaysia's nine sultans, although Iskandar was never either arrested or jailed.

There are plenty more. In 1988 an attractive young woman named Mustakizah Jaafar, who owned a video rental business in Malacca, was found hacked to death by unknown assailants. Mustakizah reportedly was pregnant at the time of her death. She was believed to be having an affair with Megat Junid Megat Ayob, the onetime UMNO deputy home affairs minister, who died in January 2008 of cancer.

No one was ever charged with Mutakizah's murder. The widespread gossip about Megat Junid's connection with Mustakizah didn't do his political career any harm. He was ultimately named Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister in 1997 although he lost his parliamentary seat two years later and retired from politics.

In 2002 the decomposed body of Haslezah Ishak, the attractive young second wife of Raja Jaafar Raja Muda Musa, second in line to the throne of Perak, whom he had met in a karaoke lounge, was found under a bridge, clad in a bra and jeans. Four men, including a palace aide, a bomoh or witch doctor, a fisherman and a carpenter were arrested and jailed for the murder. No one was ever arrested or questioned for hiring them to kill her although suspicion fell on the prince's wife, Rajah Mahani, who had been publicly consulting witch doctors over her suspicion that Haslezah had put a spell on her husband.

In 2003, another attractive young woman, Norita Shamsudin, was found murdered in an apartment in a Kuala Lumpur suburb. A night club guest relations officer, Norita had been rumored to be having an affair with Shahidan Kassim, then chief minister of the state of Perlis. Although another individual was arrested and charged with the murder, he was later declared not guilty and no one else was ever charged. According to local news reports, the inspector general of police, Mohd Bakri Omar, classified the case under Malaysia's Official Secrets Act and no details were ever released.

Earlier this year, authorities finally completed an inquest into the 2007 death of beautiful ethnic Indian actress Sujatha Krishnan, who also worked part-time as a secretary to S.Vell Paari, chief executive officer of Maika Holdings and the son of S. Samy Vellu, the head of the Malaysian Indian Congress, a component of the ruling national coalition. Sujatha died in a hospital in a Kuala Lumpur suburb of Klang three days after she had been rushed in for treatment. Her body was cremated almost immediately after her death. The coroner ruled she had died after poisoning herself by drinking poison. The family vainly requested an investigation into her death.

For those at the bottom end of Malaysia's power spectrum, life can be considerably tougher if suspicion falls on them. According to the reform organization Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET), a distressing number of suspects have died in custody. "Relying merely on data provided by the government, it has been disclosed that there have been 150 deaths from 1990 until 2004 (10.7 per year), 108 deaths between 2000 and 2006 (18 per year), and, 85 deaths between 2003 and 2007 (21.25 per year)," the organization said.

According to a 2003 report by the Asian Human Rights Commission – the same year Norita was killed ‑ statistics released in Malaysia's parliament in October of that year by the Home Ministry, showed 23 people died in police custody between 2002 and July 2003. Of those, 16 died in 2002 although according to the report, other figures indicated that 18 had died in custody in the first nine months of 2002 alone. Parliament was told in October 2002 that a total of 34 persons had died in police custody since 2000 ‑ six in 2000, 10 in 2001 and 18 from January to September 2002.

According to the report, then-Deputy Home Minister Chor Chee Heung denied that methods of torture used to obtain information from suspects led to their deaths. He claimed that the majority of deaths were the result of attempts to escape from police custody. Typical seemed to be the case of Hasrizal Hamzah, who had been detained on suspicion of murder in October of 2003. According to a senior assistant police commissioner, Harizal confessed to the murder and then, as he was being moved to a new location, supposedly shoved the accompanying policeman aside despite being handcuffed, and leapt over a balcony to his death.

Earlier this year, the Indian community was enraged by the death of a 22-year-old named Kugan Ananthan who was detained on Jan. 15 on suspicion of stealing luxury cars. He reportedly collapsed during questioning and died on Jan. 20 from "acute pulmonary edema," or fluid in the lungs. However, after his body was released to his family, an autopsy found that he had suffered from internal bleeding in his heart, left lung, spleen, kidneys and scalp area. The soles of his feet had been beaten and the back of his neck and spine area were bleeding. His back was covered with contusions, beating marks and bruises. He had sustained more than 10 serious burn marks, probably as the result of being burned by a heated v-shaped iron bar. He had also been starved during the entire time he was being tortured, allegedly by as many as seven police officers, his family charged.

"There is a clear lack of supervision, medical care and concern for the general well-being and rights of suspects while under police remand," the Human Rights Commission said in its 2003 report. It does not appear that anything has changed. The odds are that the cases involving both Kugan and Teoh will end up the same way scores of others have. - Asia Sentinel, 26/10/2009, Getting Away with Murder in Malaysia

Another 'shoot to kill' incident? 4 suspects on the way to commit robbery shot dead .

Another 'shoot to kill' incident, and this time the 4 deceased were allegedly on the way to commit a robbery - but we will never know for the dead cannot rebutt this allegation. Not even one survived ...and that raises a lot of questions....

LUNAS – They were on their way to commit a robbery this morning without realizing that would be their last.

The four suspects were shot dead by police in Bukit Kalus here.

According to a Star report, a police patrol car tried to stop a vehicle whose driver and passengers, all in their 20s, were acting suspiciously, at about 11am, but the car sped off instead.

The policemen gave chase. One of the passengers then opened fire at the policemen who immediately returned fire, killing the suspects.

Several firearms and burglary tools were recovered from the vehicle.

The deceased are believed to have been involved in a spate of armed robberies and burglaries in several states. - The Malaysian Mirror,5/10/2009,

Four robbery suspects shot dead

Exposure to water contaminated by animal urine kills 6 Burmese Migrants in Detention in Malaysia

Joint Statement - 25/9/2009

LEPTOSPIROSIS CAUSES DEATH OF ANOTHER 6 BURMESE IN DETENTION IN MALAYSIA

DENIAL OF HEALTHCARE IS A VIOLATION OF RIGHT TO LIFE

We are shocked and disappointed to hear that another six Burmese migrants have died while in detention in Malaysia because of a suspected waterborne disease. Leptospirosis is caused by exposure to water contaminated by animal urine, like rat urine. (Straits Times, 25/9/2009, Migrants die in detention/ Associated Press, 24/9/2009).

From our investigation, the names of 3 of those who have died are So Thein [Prison Body number 0853, Block B1, Ethnicity: Burman, Age: 36], Min Khaing [Body number 5009, Ethnicity: Karen, Age: 23] and Min Nown [Ethnicity: Arkan, Age: 28]. The other 3 are of Chin ethnicity. It seems that the deaths happened in August.

This time the deaths seem to have occurred at the Detention Centre at the KL International Airport (KLIA) depot. The Straits Times report states that an official had informed them that ‘…the detainees likely contracted the disease in another centre. They were transferred together with some 700 others after a riot there...’. In an earlier report (Star, 24/7/2009), it was stated that ‘…some 700 Myanmar illegal immigrants involved in a ruckus at the Semenyih immigration depot early this month have been moved to the department’s KL International Airport (KLIA) depot…’

It must be noted that this is not the first case of death by reason of Leptospirosis. Sa La Hin, 26, and Thang Hoih Ping, 21, two Burmese migrants, died in the Malaysia’s Juru Immigration Detention Centre from Leptospirosis in May 2009. 127 civil society groups and organizations responded vide a joint statement entitled ‘Death Of 2 Burmese Indicative Of State Of Detention Places In Malaysia - Denial Of Healthcare Is A Violation Of Right To Life’.

Complaints were also lodged with the Malaysia’s Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM), Malaysian Prime Minister Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak,, Minister of Home Affairs Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein, and the Minister of Health Dato' Sri Liow Tiong Lai,

After that Leptospirosis outbreak in the Juru Detention Centre in Penang in May, the Immigration Director-General Abdul Rahman assured us that the cleanliness and hygiene at immigration depots nationwide will be stepped-up to ensure safety of staff and inmates there against contracting infectious diseases (Bernama, 19/5/2009).

SUHAKAM also vide letter dated 16/7/2009 had informed us that they had met with the Director General of Immigration on 4/6/2009, and amongst others, had recommended that ‘… as a measure to control contagious diseases to ensure that all immigration detention centres should have a doctor or medical officer in line with international requirements, and that cleanliness of detention centres should be taken care of.’

It must also be borne in mind that last year SUHAKAM identified medical care as an overriding reason why 1,300 detainees have died over the past six years, and had made recommendations to the government. At present the 22 centres throughout Malaysia do not have a permanent clinical dispensary manned by doctors or a medical assistant to help detainees. (ABC News, 28/5/2009)

In May 2009, it was reported that about 26 were admitted to hospital following a Leptospirosis outbreak in the Juru Detention Centre, and they survived, and this leads us to believe that prompt access to healthcare can avoid death. It is shocking that in this recent case, 6 have died. What is more disturbing is that there seem to have been no reported disclosure by the Malaysian authorities on this. We still do not know the number of detainees that have been affected this time.

This is a disease caused by exposure to water contaminated with the urine of infected animals, and is very rarely propagated through contact with affected persons. Question must be raised as to how detainees in an enclosed detention centre are contracting this disease. Are they being affected through the food and water supplied by the detention centres? Are the detention centres having a rat infestation problem?

After the recent deaths and outbreak in the Juru Detention Centre, one would have expected the Malaysian government to have taken immediate steps to ensure that there are no more cases of Leptospirosis outbreak and deaths. We wonder also whether the authorities took a lackadaisical attitude, and did not even conduct a thorough investigation to determine the source of the contamination that caused that outbreak. Results of such investigations will not only determine liability, but would also ensure that further deaths from Leptospirosis could be avoided.

We, the undersigned, call on the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM) to immediately commence a public inquiry into these deaths and detention places generally, and come up with concrete recommendations which could be implemented that will improve state of cleanliness, hygiene and healthcare of all detention places in Malaysia. It was sad that SUHAKAM decided not to carry out a public inquiry after the Juru deaths in May.

We are also call upon the Ministry of Health and the government of Malaysia to conduct a thorough investigation into the cause of this Leptospirosis outbreak, which is reported to have already resulted in 6 deaths.

We also call for the resignation of Immigration Director-General Abdul Rahman, considering that this is second reported case of deaths by reason of Leptospirosis at Immigration Detention Centres within the last 4 months.

The Malaysian government must take necessary action to ensure that proper steps be taken so that such disregard for life does not happen again.

With regard to those who have died, their family and/or dependents should be given adequate compensation by the persons responsible, the detaining authority and the Malaysian government.

Officers and persons responsible for the acts or omissions that resulted in death and suffering should be charged and prosecuted for these crimes. They should not be permitted to hide behind safeguards provided to public servants, which unfortunately only promotes culture of impunity with no sense of responsibility and respect for human life.

Charles Hector

Pranom Somwong

Tun Tun

For and on behalf of the 23 organizations/groups listed below:-

Asian Migrant Centre (AMC)

Burma Campaign, Malaysia

Clean Clothes Campaign -International Secretariat

Coordination of Action Research on AIDS & Mobility (CARAM -Asia)

FIDH - International Federation for Human Rights

Khmer Kampuchea Krom Human Rights Organization (Cambodia)

Legal Support for Children and Women (LSCW) Cambodia

MADPET (Malaysians against Death Penalty and Torture)

MAP Foundation, Thailand

Mekong Migration Network (MMN)

Mekong Ecumenical Partnership Program-MEPP

Migrant Forum in Asia (MFA)

National League for Democracy [NLD (LA)], Malaysia

Network of Action for Migrants in Malaysia (NAMM)

Nepal Institute of Development Studies (NIDS) Nepal

Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM)

Persatuan Kesedaran Komuniti Selangor

Persatuan Masyarakat Malaysia & Wilayah Persekutuan (PERMAS)

Pusat Komas

The Shan Refugee Organization (SRO) Malaysia

Thai Action Committees for Democracy in Burma (TACDB)

The Action Network for Migrants (ANM) Thailand

Workers Hub for Change (WH4C)

Home Minister sad about person shot dead by Indonesian police... what about when persons shot dead by Malaysian police?

I am amazed at how our Home Minister is so concerned about that 'shoot to kill' incident of a Malaysian in Indonesia. How he laments about what happened...stating that it could have been handled differently - i.e. that he could have been rehabilitated. (All this is according to the Star Report)

Is it not hypocritical that this same Minisiter, who is responsible for the Malaysian police, do not seem to have expressed similar sentiments when Malaysian police have killed so many in 'shoot to kill'. Surely, those alleged criminals shot dead by Malaysian police could also be rehabilitated...

Terrorist Noor­din Md Top, who was shot dead by Indonesian police, could have been rehabilitated.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Hisha­mmuddin Tun Hussein said he was sad to hear about the death.

“What he did was wrong. We don’t condone what he did. I am sad that we did not get to rehabilitate him, like we have done with many others, including Jemaah Islamiah militants.

“I am sad because a life is a life,” he told reporters after watching personnel from the police, Rela, Civil Defence Department and Rescue and Safety Department carry out Ops Sikap at the Jalan Duta toll here.

Noordin, a militant mastermind who eluded capture for nine years and terrorised Indonesia with a string of deadly bombings, was killed during a shoot-out in central Indonesia yesterday.

Hishammuddin said the Government would help Noordin’s family bring the body back after the authorities completed their investigations.

He said Noordin’s identity had been confirmed through a fingerprint check but a DNA test would be conducted to verify the result.

Hishammuddin said Malaysia had cooperated with all parties, including Indonesia, in cross-border crime, but added that Malaysia had no part in yesterday’s raid. - Star, 18/9/2009, Hisham: Noordin could have been rehabilitated

And, what rehabilitation is our Home Minister talking about? If he is talking about detaining them under the ISA or other detention without trial law...surely that is certainly not 'rehabilitation' - but torture...and a violation of human rights. Detaining persons without even giving them a chance to defend themselves in an open trial is very wrong.

If one is interested in rehabilitation, then you must first give the person a fair trial, and after he pleads guilty...or is found guilty after a trial ...then, you can start your process of rehabilitation, and that too if the said person want you to do so.

It is also very wrong to brand people as criminals or terrorists... for all is to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

The Star is wrong in using the term "Terrorist Noor­din Md Top" - and rightly should use the term 'suspected terrorist' or 'alleged terrorist'.

I hope our Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hisha­mmuddin Tun Hussein, will also have similar sentiments when persons are shot dead by Malaysian police. In fact, it would be good to hear the Minister publicly call upon the Malaysian police to try to arrest persons alive...

Some incidents of 'shoot to kill' reported in the media that I saw in August 2009...

24/8/2009 - Star, 24/8/2009, Four Indonesian robbers killed by police

21/8/2009 - Star, 21/8/2009, Two robbers shot dead in Klang

11/8/2009 - - Star, 11/8/2009, Four wanted Indonesians killed by police

See earlier post - Another 'shoot to kill' incident - 4 killed.Yahoo has this question now that need answers: Do you agree that Malaysian police tends to shoot to kill?