SUN: Govt's faith in death penalty defies facts

Govt's faith in death penalty defies facts
By: (Fri, 14 Jul 2006)

Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet) is disappointed by the statement made by Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk M. Kayveas who told Parliament last month that the death penalty deters serious crimes. This statement, reported by Bernama on June 28, cannot be justified by any facts or statistical proof.

On the other hand, studies conducted throughout the world over the past 70 years using various different methodological approaches 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 20 years, states with the death penalty in general have had a higher homicide rate than states without the death penalty.

The deputy minister also went on to say that there will be no abolition of the death penalty as it "safeguards public interest". Surely sending someone to death,

especially when there is the real possibility that an innocent man can be killed is against the public interest.

He is further reported to have said that, "There are enough safeguards in the country's judicial system to ensure that death sentences are not meted out easily."

What safeguards are the honourable deputy minister speaking of? In Malaysia there is no immediate access to a lawyer upon arrest, immediate right to a phone call and no

right to full pre-trial disclosure.

Evidence, reports, statements and witnesses obtained during police investigations that may support the accused's story or bring to light possible defences to the accused could be suppressed if prosecution officers are overly interested in prosecuting. Mostjurisdictions in the Commonwealth and elsewhere have made it mandatory for

immediate full disclosure to the accused person.

It must be reiterated that even in jurisdictions where all these safeguards exist, the number of persons wrongfully

condemned to death have been frighteningly high. Human justice is dangerously fallible, and the only acceptable choice for any civilised nation is to abolish the death penalty.

The fact that a person has the right to appeal to the Court of Appeal and then the Federal Court, and thereafter to the Pardons Board for clemency is grossly insufficient to justify the keeping of the death penalty in our law books. It is laughable that the deputy minister even suggested, at this day and time in Malaysia, that thorough investigations carried out by an experienced and effective police force is yet another safeguard to prevent miscarriage of justice.

Last month, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed a law abolishing the death penalty in the Philippines. The number of countries that have done away with the death penalty now stands at 123. The worldwide trend has been towards abolition of the death penalty.

A recent television poll done by RTM2 during the Hello on Two programme on May 7 showed that 64% of Malaysians are for the abolition of the death penalty in Malaysia. Ê

Further, the Malaysian Bar, which comprises about 12,000 lawyers, is also calling for the abolition of the death penalty.

Madpet calls for an immediate moratorium on all executions pending abolition, and the abolition of the death penalty in Malaysia.

N. Surendran
and Charles Hector
for Malaysians Against Death
Penalty and Torture

Seremban dog-shooting incident: Reports lodged against council

Seremban dog-shooting incident: Reports lodged against council
19 Jul 2006
By Devinder Singh


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KUALA LUMPUR: Three police reports were lodged against the Seremban Municipal Council yesterday over the shooting of 13 dogs on June 29.

The reports — from the owner, his sister and animal lovers — urged police to investigate the council’s enforcement officers for their alleged cruelty to the animals.

The owner of the dogs, Ng Her Sun, said the barbaric way in which his dogs were killed had no place in a civilised country like Malaysia.

"We are civilised people and we should act civilised," he said outside the Brickfields police station where the reports were lodged.

"My dogs hid under the bed, they were frightened. The officers were cruel."

Ng, 57, and his sister, Choon Mong, 56, lodged separate reports.

Lawyer N. Surendran also lodged a report on behalf of the Coalition Against Dog Shooting and Other Inhumane Methods (CASIM), urging police to investigate all cases of cruelty to animals by enforcement authorities.

Surendran said shooting of dogs was illegal and the proper way to put the animals down was by injection.

"Not only did they shoot the dogs, they also trespassed on private property and discharged firearms in a residential area," he said.

"To shoot the animals in that manner amounts to cruelty."

Surendran said action could be taken against the enforcement officers and the director of enforcement under Section 44 of the Animals Act 1953 and Section 428 of the Penal Code.

"We expect the enforcement officers to prevent cruelty to animals but here the opposite happened," he said.

CASIM is a coalition made up of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the Malaysian Association for Responsible Pet Ownership, Bivai Special Dogs Selangor, Malaysian Animal-Assisted Therapy for the Disabled and Elderly Association, Malaysia Against Death Penalty and Torture, and Paws.

On June 29, a team of MPS enforcement officers entered Ng’s house and shot 13 of his dogs.

Ng, an odd-job worker, lived with his sister and 26 dogs in the house.

The council had said that they had issued Ng numerous warnings to remove the dogs but they were ignored.

The council had also claimed that the dogs attacked several enforcement officers who went to the house to have them removed.

Shooting of 13 dogs: Reports lodged against council

Thursday, July 20 2006

Shooting of 13 dogs: Reports lodged against council
-by NUR AZWA IBRAHIM -
THREE police reports were lodged against the Seremban Municipal Council (MPS) yesterday, for shooting 13 dogs in Taman Desa Rasah, Seremban, on June 29.

The reports were lodged at Brickfields police station, led by the dog owner, Ng Her Sun, and his sister, Ng Choon Mong.

The other report was lodged by the Coalition Against Shooting and other Inhumane Methods (Casim).

Casim, made up of of six non-governmental organisations, was led by lawyer N. Surendran, 39.

They claimed the council had committed unlawful acts by breaking into Ng’s house and shooting the dogs inside the compound.

Her Sun, 57, said: “I wanted to give shelter and food to the dogs. What the officers did was cruel. I had to leave with some of the dogs because I feared the officers would kill them all.”

Her sister, Choon Mong, 56, claimed she was dragged out by female enforcement officers against her will.

“I begged them not to shoot my dogs but they ignored me. I heard the dogs howling and they looked frightened. They were not aggressive and were hiding under the beds when the officers shot them,” she said.

Surendran called for reforms to regulations on stray animals and asked for a more humane approach to combat the problem of animal over-population.

“There are other methods, including shooting and using wire loops to catch dogs, which are cruel, inhumane and cause a lot of pain and distress to the animals.

“We want police to investigate and act against the offenders,” he said.

Negri Sembilan PAS commissioner, Dr Rosli Yaakop, who was outside the station, said he supported the decision to lodge reports against the council.

MM says: All dogs go to heaven

SUN: TO KILL OR NOT TO KILL

To kill or not to kill?
Umran Kadir

It came as quite a surprise to me that jury trials in Malaysia were abandoned in 1995 due to cost and difficulties in finding qualified jurors.

It was thus a pleasant turn of events to read about the Attorney-General's recent suggestion of reintroducing juries. As we all know, the Attorney-General's bright idea was promptly extinguished by Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul Aziz. In his justification Nazri bluntly accused Malaysians of being racist and amenable to bribery.

Given the furore raised when Reader's Digest recently labelled KL the third rudest city in the world, I immediately wondered what studies or data Nazri had in his possession to back an even more slanderous allegation. And how could the government place a price tag on democracy? Would the powers-that-be next claim that elections are costly and unnecessary as the outcome is already certain?

Arising from the above events I intended to write today about why jury trials are in many ways the epitome of the democratic process. Having a jury as opposed to a single judge decide on the facts of a case also provides more surety, as with a jury of seven a minimum five-two majority is required for a firm verdict. The accusation that Malaysian jurors are not legally trained is irrelevant as judges normally guide juries on points of law.

In researching the history of jury trials in Malaysia I came across a point which forced me to step back and examine the larger picture. Jury trials were introduced to Malaysia subsequent to independence and they have only ever been an option for capital cases - cases in which the accused face the death penalty.

In my view, the argument over whether we reintroduce jury trials for capital offences misses the point. Whether it is a judge or jury which sentences a person to death, blood remains on the collective hands of our society. Hence the title of this piece: "To kill or not to kill?", for that is the real question we should be asking ourselves.

On June 28, Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk M. Kayveas clarified that the government stance that the death penalty is here to stay as it reflected the government's seriousness in dealing with crime. This is an inexcusable position to take when international studies overwhelmingly support the notion that the death penalty is not an effective deterrent to crime. Shortly after Kavyeas made his statement, reports surfaced of death row inmates who have been languishing in Malaysian jails for more than 20 years; apparently some of the Pardons Boards meet very infrequently.

Is this the sign of a criminal justice system which is fair, just and humane?

Moreover, the ugly truth is that in dispensing justice mistakes can and do happen. Between 1976 and 2003, 112 death row inmates in the United States were released after the unearthing of new evidence led to the overturning of their convictions.

Civilisation has moved far beyond the time of Hammurabi when "an eye for an eye" was the basis of all laws. The death penalty creates a senseless and vicious cycle of violence. I firmly believe that we are in no position to take away that which God has bequeathed upon each of us.

Fortunately, Malaysians can rely on several voices of sanity in this debate. Organisations such as the Bar Council and Madpet (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) have consistently called for an end to capital punishment.

Indeed, the global trend is for countries to drop the death penalty from the repertoire of punishments. The latest country to do so was the Philippines which repealed capital punishment last month. To date 125 countries have so far abolished the death penalty. Malaysia is among a shrinking group of 71 countries that continue to cling on to an unmerciful and irreversible punishment.

It is high time we let compassion guide us on this issue.



The writer notes with sadness that from 1970 to the present, 359 people have been condemned to death by Malaysian courts while 159 are still on death row. Send comments to feedback@ thesundaily.com


Updated: 10:33AM Fri, 14 Jul 2006

DAILY EXPRESS : Jail term upped for rape; down for incest

DAILY EXPRESS NEWS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jail term upped for rape; down for incest

Kuala Lumpur: Rape will be punishable by up to 30 years jail and whipping compared to the present maximum 20 years plus whipping under an amendment to the Penal Code tabled in the Dewan Rakyat Wednesday.

Home Affairs Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Radzi Sheikh Ahmad, who moved the amendment Bill, said the most severe penalty would be applied in cases of a man committing gang rape or rape in the presence of others, rape resulting in injury to the victim or others and rape of a pregnant woman.

He said the maximum penalty would also be applied in the case of man who raped a woman below 16 years without her consent, raped a girl below 12 years with or without her consent or raped a woman by using his position of authority even with her consent.

"The penalty for all these categories of rape is a minimum jail term of five years to a maximum of 30 years and could include whipping," he said.

In other categories of rape, there is no minimum jail term and the maximum remains at 20 years plus whipping, he added.

The proposed changes to the Penal Code were recommended by a parliamentary select committee which conducted public hearings.

In the case of incest, Radzi said the present minimum 15 years jail would be reduced to eight years because it was felt the longer imprisonment discouraged the victim from reporting the crime.

He said the committee recommended that the death sentence for rape that caused the death of the victim be replaced with either the death sentence or a minimum 15 years jail to a maximum 30 years plus not less than 10 strokes of the cane.

"The change in the punishment is based on the consideration that the accused in some rape cases did not have the intention to cause the death of his victim," he said.

He said the Bill introduced a new section that provides for a maximum sentence of 20 years jail and whipping for a person having sex with another by inserting an object in the vagina or anus without the other person's consent.

On the issue of marital rape, Radzi said the committee did not agree that it be made an offence in Malaysia on the ground that it would be inconsistent with the syariah and the practices of other religions.

However, he said, the committee recommended the inclusion of a provision to punish a husband who injured his wife or placed her or others in fear of death or injury with the intention of having sex with her.

"The offence is punishable by a jail term not exceeding five years. This punishment does not conflict with the principles of any religion. In this context, the stress is on injury caused by a husband against his wife," he said.

Radzi said the Bill also proposed to reclassfify snatch theft as robbery that would be punishable by the higher imprisonment of up to 14 years plus whipping instead of seven years for theft.

Another change to the Penal Code is abolishing the distinction between an offence of criminal intrusion committed in daytime or night.

Radzi said the distinction was no longer practical and effective.

Mkini: 'Doggycide': Bar Council's bureau ready to bite

'Doggycide': Bar Council's bureau ready to bite


Fauwaz Abdul Aziz
Jul 7, 06 2:03pm

The Bar Council's legal aid bureau is prepared to take on the Seremban municipal council (MPS) for the killing of 13 dogs in a house recently.

Lawyer N Surendran said the violence with which MPS officers carried out their tasks - including having allegedly broken into Eng Her Sun’s house to shoot the terrified canines - was ‘totally illegal’.

This contravened provisions of the Animal Ordinance Act 1953 against prohibiting unnecessary pain or suffering to animals, he added.

"All the individuals (who committed or abetted in the incident) should be charged for the offence," he told a press conference held in Kuala Lumpur yesterday with the six-member Coalition Against Dog Shooting and Other Inhumane Methods (Casim).

Casim and other animal welfare groups have been up in arms over the incident last Friday in which MPS enforcement officers had allegedly sawed their way into Eng's house in Taman Desa Rasah before shooting 13 of the 26 stray dogs that he had adopted and given shelter.

Court order

MPS president Abdul Halim Abdul Latif was reported to have said his officers were acting on a court order following complaints from neighbors of the foul stench and disturbance caused by the dogs.

Abdul Halim also claimed Eng, 57 and his dogs had turned aggressive, an allegation that Surendran dismissed.

"That is a total lie.. Some of the dogs were found having squeezed between two cupboards, others were shot while hiding under a mattress," he said.

"The only ones acting aggressive that day were the council officers," he added.

Surendren also said he could only assume that they had gone into Eng’s house on the pretext of a local government by-law pertaining to the control of dogs.

“They said they were acting on a court order following a notice issued six months earlier, but they never showed Eng that court order,” he said.

Surendran's statements were met by murmurs of agreement from the crowd of animal lovers and animal welfare groups that had gathered in the compound of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), a member of Casim.

'Animal terrorism'

"I have only one word to describe MPS' actions that day: Terrorism! It was an act of pure animal terrorism!" cried one dog-owner to a resounding applause.

Eng, who was also present at the press conference, accused MPS of high-handedness and excessive violence.

"I'm not the one who is mental. MPS officers are the mental ones!" he said

A veterinarian from Seremban was also present to confirm that Eng (right) had properly cared for his dogs by ensuring their cleanliness, vaccination, spaying, and sterilisation.

Surendran also questioned the legality of MPS officers, who were accompanied by four Veterinary Services Department officials and two police officers, having discharged their firearms in a house within a residential area.

On this point, Casim member Malaysian Association for Responsible Pet Ownership's (Marpo) pro-tem president Dr Jon S Satyamoorthy said the Animal Ordinance Act providing for local officials to ‘put down’ on sight dogs was in the context of a by-gone problem.

The law pertains to the problem many decades ago of rabid dogs which had to be shot immediately when identified because of the dangers that they posed to the public, he noted.

"But this problem is no more relevant in 2006 as rabies has since been wiped out," he said.

Humane methods

Casim, meanwhile, called for an immediate ban to shooting and other inhumane methods used in dog-catching, including the use of wires and nylon ropes whereby dogs are almost strangled to death while suffering from the deep cuts inflicted on their necks and bodies.

"The whole shooting massacre, which looked like a bloody crime scene, was a horrendous, cruel and violent act and the Seremban municipal council should have never taken this merciless route," said SPCA chairperson Christine Chin.

Dog catchers should be trained to use humane methods, like nets and tranquillisers while the only acceptable and humane method of putting dogs to sleep is the administration of lethal injection by a veterinarian or other qualified person authorised by the former, she added.

"In times of resistance, a mediator should be sought to diffuse the situation in a humane, effective and considerate manner. SPCA and the other participants of this coalition can assist in this area," she pointed out.

For the long-term, Chin said local municipalities should adopt more a effective and humane mindset and attitude to solve the problem of dog and cat over-population.

Among the concrete steps that can be taken is the establishment of 'humane shelters and pounds' where animals can be kept and re-homed, she suggested.

"This gives the residents a chance to bring in strays and abandoned animals instead of taking them into their own homes and thus creating neighborhood problems," she said.

Chin also urged the establishment of high volume, low-cost neutering clinics where dogs and cats are spayed at reduced rates.

She also called for local governments to emulate the pro-active measures taken by Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL)in cooperating with the SPCA to establish the Kembiri Clinic, which has over the past three years successfully prevented 2.7 million dog and cat births in the city.

"The coalition is willing to embark on a working committee together with a number of municipalities to provide a wealth of knowledge, experience and expertise in solving this man-made problem," she said.

Star- Humane way to catch strays sought

Humane way to catch strays sought

KUALA LUMPUR: A new coalition vowing to fight for a humane way to catch dogs and cats has been formed following the recent shooting of 13 dogs by the Seremban Municipal Council.

The Coalition Against Dog Shooting and Other Inhumane Methods (Casim) is endorsed by the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), Malaysian Association for Responsible Pet Ownership (Marpo) and Bivai Special Dogs Selangor.

Other organisations include Malaysian Animal-Assisted Therapy for the Disabled and Elderly Association, Malaysian Interfaith Network, Pure Life Society, Malaysia Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpat) and PAWS.

Marpo pro tem president Dr Jon Satyamoorthy told a press conference that the coalition wanted all municipalities to adopt a more effective and humane mindset to solve the overpopulation of dogs and cats.

Mkini: Death penalty debate needs to go beyond emotions

Death penalty debate needs to go beyond emotions
Sad Malaysian
Jul 6, 06 4:21pm

I refer to your report It’s the gallows for abolish death penalty call.

The death penalty has always been a controversial subject. There are many arguments used by both the proponents and opponents of the death penalty. The usual arguments that you would receive from the proponents would be is one, the death penalty is a preventive measure and two, our judicial system is well equipped to deal with this issue.

In Malaysia, the death penalty is reserved for what is deemed ‘the most heinous of crimes’ which include murder, treason, trafficking of drugs and being in possession of firearms. And the most famous of all arguments, ‘If someone you loved was brutally raped and murdered, wouldn’t you want the murderer to die?’ Make the victim a child, and you have a winning argument to sway almost anyone into in saying we need the death penalty.

So then, why are there people who keep saying the death penalty is a form of cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment? That the death penalty goes against one of the holiest tenets of all religions, which is the sanctity of life? Why do these people persist in saying that there is no concrete evidence to say that the death penalty works as a preventive measure?

Let us take a look at the Malaysian scenario and all the necessary actors in the death penalty drama.

We will start with the police. How many of us are of the firm belief that the Royal Malaysian Police Force is one of the best in the world? Are corruption and abuse of power not rampant within the police force? No, you say, our police are decent and incorruptible. How about the cases where people died in police custody and the reports made about police abuse by countless Malaysians? Hearsay, hearsay!

Now let us look at our judiciary. Have there been any allegations of corruption and judicial misconduct? No, never. Our ‘house of Denmark’ smells of roses! Our judges have always exemplified the highest standards of professionalism, even when they go on holidays with lawyers that they have cases with. All right then, so we have the best judiciary in the world. All appeal cases are heard in record time since there is no backlog in our courts.

Let us not forget, that the poor and marginalised (who seem to constitute a large number of those on death row) always get the best defence lawyers pro-bono. We have a state-run institution that provides for the best lawyers to defend someone’s life right? I am sure we do. Just check with the Legal Aid Centres on the numbers of lawyers lining up to do their part in ensuring everyone gets the best defence possible even if they cannot afford it.

And we have an excellent track record of the Pardons Board, who meets up on a frequent basis to discuss any clemency appeals by those who have exhausted all avenues with the courts. I mean the reports in the papers about them meeting up only in 10-15 years was just a lie, wasn’t it?

Well, since everything is in place that guarantees that only those who are guilty beyond a doubt get the death penalty, I guess the death penalty serves its purpose in getting rid of the scum of society. Therefore, Malaysians have nothing to fear. We live in a perfect society. Only the bad get punished.

But wait a minute... if the death penalty works and we have punished all those people who have committed heinous crimes by taking their lives, why is there an increase in the crime rate? Why are the crimes becoming more heinous by the day? Why isn’t the death penalty preventing all those who continue to commit heinous crimes? Why do people who have been on death row for decades still maintain their innocence, when we know for a fact that our perfect system of justice found them guilty?

In conclusion, the death penalty will always be a contentious issue simply because people delude themselves in thinking that the ‘eye for an eye’ argument make sense and it will provide them with security from the barbarians out there. No amount of data and facts will make them think otherwise.

It is my sincere hope that people educate themselves about the death penalty and evaluate the circumstances in which a person is killed, even if it is state-sanctioned. The death penalty deserves more than just an emotional response to the heinousness of a crime. It needs to go beyond emotions to justify going against the fundamental right of all people – the right to life.

COALITION AGAINST DOG SHOOTING AND OTHER INHUMANE METHODS (CASIM)

MEDIA STATEMENT

COALITION AGAINST DOG SHOOTING AND OTHER INHUMANE METHODS (CASIM)

Endorsed by
SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS (SPCA)
MALAYSIAN ASSOCIATION FOR RESPONSIBLE PET OWNERSHIP (MARPO)
BIVAI SPECIAL DOGS
MALAYSIAN ANIMAL-ASSISTED THERAPHY FOR THE DISABLED & ELDERLY ASSOCIATION (PETSPOSITIVE)
MALAYSIANS AGAINST DEATH PENALTY & TORTURE (MADPET)
PAWS

The Coalition believes that compliance with the city council’s by laws is paramount and that neighbours complaints should be taken into consideration. However we deplore the manner in which the operation was conducted . The tragic end to the 13 dogs lives, that were BRUTALLY shot in their homes, have angered many Malaysians and animal carers all over the world.

The whole shooting massacre, which looks like a bloody crime scene, is a HORRENDOUS, CRUEL and VIOLENT act and the Seremban Municipal should have never taken this merciless route. What if children, the disabled or the elderly were shot as they stepped in to protect the dogs and their property? Is this the way Malaysia wants to be portrayed? Are there no other more humane and non-violent solutions that the Seremban Municipal could have resorted to?

Kind and caring Malaysians have stepped forward to feed and give temporary shelter to many abandoned/stray dogs and cats in the hope of rehoming them. Cases like Mr Eng’s show that sometimes love can be misplaced and misguided.Most municipals lack the infrastructure and capacity to assist these animal carers and the problem is compounded. Municipalities should engage and assist the animal carers who regularly take these animals off their streets.

It is indeed an irony that this tragedy occurred in the Year of the Dog. We hope they did not die in vain as this sad and unfortunate incident has propelled the plight of the SILENT CRIES THAT GO LITTLE HEARD by the majority of Malaysians. Excess dogs are considered garbage and any way to clear them off the streets by any contractor that vouches to do that is employed usually with a price tag of RM 35-50 per dog head.

This coalition demands an END to this indifference and discrimination against dogs and the suffering the dogs endure and vigorously proposes the following reforms and humane options:-


A) AN IMMEDIATE BAN TO SHOOTING AND OTHER INHUMANE METHODS USED IN DOG-CATCHING

1. Other inhumane methods used are wires - where animals have been severely cut in their necks and bodies, ropes- where the dogs are almost strangled to death.

2. Dog Catchers be trained to use humane methods like nets and tranquilizers.

3. The only acceptable and humane method is lethal injection administered by a veterinarian or an authorized person supervised by him.

4. In times of resistance, a mediator be sought to diffuse the situation in a humane, effective and considerate manner. SPCA can assist in this area.


B) THE MUNICIPALITIES ADOPT A MORE EFFECTIVE AND HUMANE ORIENTED MINDSET AND ATTITUDE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF DOG AND CAT OVERPOPULATION

1. Establish a Humane Shelter and Pound where animals can be kept and rehomed. This gives the residents a chance to bring in strays and abandoned animals instead of taking them into their own homes and thus creating neighbourhood problems. SPCA is able to assist in developing humane procedures and guidelines.

2. Establish a high-volume, low-cost spay neuter clinic like DBKL-SPCA Klinik Kembiri (KK) where dogs and cats are spayed at largely reduced rates of RM90 and RM50 respectively. This has been a huge success as the number of prevented dog and cat births in KL reached an unbelievable 2.7m in the 3 years since KK was established!!! (attached is the statistical evidence).This is the cheapest, smartest and most effective pro-active way to prevent over population of unwanted dogs and cats.

The Coalition is willing to embark on a working committee together with a sizable number of Municipalities to provide a wealth of knowledge, experience and expertise in solving this MAN MADE problem.

The Coalition urges all animal carers to be Responsible Pet Owners and spay and neuter their pets to prevent pet overpopulation and to be considerate neighbours as well.

6 July 2006

MADPET(4/7/2006): MALAYSIA BLINDLY ACCEPTS MYTHS PROPAGATED BY DEATH PENALTY RETENTIONISTS

MEDIA STATEMENT – 4/7/2006

MALAYSIA BLINDLY ACCEPTS MYTHS PROPAGATED BY DEATH PENALTY RETENTIONISTS

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is disappointed by the unsubstantiated and false statement made by Datuk M. Kayveas, a Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department when he told Parliament that the death penalty deters serious crimes. This statement, as was reported by Bernama on 28/6/2006, 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 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 Minister also went on to say that there will be no abolition of the death penalty as it “safeguards public interest”. Surely sending someone to death, especially when there is the real possibility that an innocent man can be killed is against the public interest.

He is further reported to have said that "There are enough safeguards in the country's judicial system to ensure that death sentences are not meted out easily,"

What safeguards is the Honourable Deputy Minister speaking of? In Malaysia there is no immediate access to a lawyer upon arrest, immediate right to a phone call and no right to full pre-trial disclosure.

Evidence, reports, statements and witnesses obtained during police investigations that may support the accused story or bring to light possible defences to the accused will most likely be suppressed as prosecution officers are only interested in prosecuting. Most jurisdictions in the Commonwealth and elsewhere have made it mandatory for immediate full disclosure to the accused person.

It must be reiterated that even in jurisdictions where all these safeguards exist, the number of persons wrongfully condemned to death have been frighteningly high. Human justice is dangerously fallible, and the only acceptable choice for any civilized nation is to abolish the death penalty.

The fact that a person has the right to appeal to the Court of Appeal and then the Federal Court, and thereafter to the Pardons Board for clemency is grossly insufficient to justify the keeping of the Death Penalty in our law books. It is laughable that the Deputy Minister even suggested, at this day and time in Malaysia, that thorough investigations carried out by an experienced and effective police force is yet another safeguard to prevent miscarriage of justice.

In June 2006 President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed a law abolishing the death penalty in the Philippines. The number of countries that have done away with the Death Penalty now stands at 123. The worldwide trend has been towards abolition of the death penalty.

The Malaysian government ought to have conducted a thorough study on the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the death penalty as a deterent to serious crime before having a Deputy Minister, who is a lawyer, stand up in Paliament and attempt to turn a myth into an empirical truth.

A recent television poll done by RTM 2 during the Hello on Two programme on 7/5/2006 showed that 64% of Malaysians are for the abolition of the death penalty in Malaysia.

Further, the Malaysian Bar, which comprises about 12,000 lawyers, is also calling for the abolition of the death penalty.

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

N. Surendran
Charles Hector

for Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET)

4th July 2006