Death penalty around the world - Data Summary

Data summary

Death penalty around the world

Click heading to sort. Download this data

Country	Executions, 2011	Death sentences 2011	Executions, 2012	Death sentences 2012	TOTAL EXECUTED, 2007-2012	TOTAL SENTENCED TO DEATH, 2007-2012
AFGHANISTAN	2		14		34	364
ALGERIA		51		153	0	752
BAHAMAS					0	8
BAHRAIN		5		1	2	8
BANGLADESH	5	49	1	45	28	423
BARBADOS				2	0	1
BELARUS	2	2	3		9	12
BENIN					0	6
BOTSWANA		1	2	5	4	7
BRUNEI DARUSSALAM		3			0	3
BURKINA FASO					0	8
BURUNDI					0	1
CAMEROON					0	0
CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC					0	14
CHAD				2	0	13
CHINA	THOUSANDS	THOUSANDS	THOUSANDS	THOUSANDS	THOUSANDS	THOUSANDS
CONGO (Democratic Republic)				11	0	74
EGYPT	1	123		91	12	704
EQUATORIAL GUINEA				1	7	4
ETHIOPIA					1	55
GAMBIA		13	9	5	0	31
GHANA		4		27	0	31
GUATEMALA					0	1
GUINEA		16		2	0	19
GUYANA		3		5	0	7
INDIA		110	1	78	0	435
INDONESIA		6		12	11	35
IRAN	360	156	314	79	1,663	156
IRAQ	68	291	129	81	256	1,420
JAMAICA					0	7
JAPAN		10	7	3	33	108
JORDAN		15		16	0	67
KENYA		11		21	0	16
KOREA (NORTH)	30		6		105	0
KOREA (SOUTH)				2	0	13
KUWAIT		17		9	1	31
LAOS					0	6
LEBANON		8		9	0	24
LIBERIA		1		4	0	15
LIBYA				5	39	0
MADAGASCAR					0	14
MALAWI		2			0	4
MALAYSIA		108		60	2	324
MALDIVES				2	0	1
MALI		2		10	0	41
MAURITANIA		8		6	0	33
MONGOLIA					1	45
MOROCCO		5		7	0	27
MYANMAR		33		17	0	37
NIGER					0	1
NIGERIA		72		56	0	341
OMAN					4	7
PAKISTAN		313	1	242	171	1,497
PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY	3	5	6	6	8	33
PAPUA NEW GUINEA		5			0	8
QATAR		3		1	0	6
SAINT KITTS & NEVIS					1	1
SAINT VINCENT AND & THE GRENADINES					0	1
SAINT LUCIA		1			0	1
SAUDI ARABIA	82	9	79	10	423	54
SIERRA LEONE		2			0	7
SINGAPORE		5		2	4	26
SOMALIA	10	37	6	76	23	57
SRI LANKA				7	0	120
SUDAN	7	13	19	199	30	166
SUDAN (SOUTH)	5	1	5		5	1
SWAZILAND				1
SYRIA					33	34
TAIWAN	5	16	6	7	9	45
TANZANIA				3	0	5
THAILAND		40		106	2	56
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO		2		5	0	12
TUNISIA				9	0	27
UGANDA		5			0	134
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES	1	31	1	21	2	64
UNITED STATES	43	78	43	77	220	504
VIETNAM	5	23		86	58	258
YEMEN	41	29	28	7	152	109
ZAMBIA		48		7	0	91
ZIMBABWE		1		11	0	17
TOTALS (exc China)	670	1,792	680	1,722	6,221	24,172

Source: The Guardian

Executioners - and abolitionists

Number of countries

Executing countries

Abolitionist

stack percentages

20

40

60

80

100

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Abolitionist - light blue, and retentionist dark blue

Changing attitudes to the death penalty in Southeast Asia

Comment: Changing attitudes to the death penalty in Southeast Asia

24 Jul 2013, 3:50 pm   -   Source: Brigid Delaney

There is growing opposition to capital punishment in southeast Asia.

It’s our own backyard – but how much do we know about how the death penalty operates in Southeast Asia, asks Brigid Delaney.

It’s our own backyard – but how much do we know about how the death penalty operates in Southeast Asia?

By Brigid Delaney

The issue only gets media traction here when an Australian such as Van Nyugen is executed or members of the so-called Bali 9, Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran receive the death penalty.

Yet there are hundreds of men and women on death row in southeast Asia. The lawyers and groups supporting death row prisoners are often stretched and under-resourced.

But increasingly, laws and attitudes regarding the death penalty in our region are changing.

SINGAPORE                                                              
 
Just seven years ago Singapore executed Australian man Van Nyugen under the country’s harsh drug laws. Ten years ago Singapore had enjoyed the dubious distinction of carrying out the most executions per capita of any country in the world. But things are changing. Late last year, the law changed to allow discretion for judges to impose a life sentence. Previously, a guilty verdict, barring a granting of clemency by the president, meant the death penalty was the only sentencing option.

Last week, it was reported that a Malaysian prisoner in Singapore with a murder conviction escaped the death penalty, having his sentence commuted to life imprisonment, following a relaxation of sentencing laws in Parliament.
Fabian Adiu Edwin, 23, had his low IQ and youth taken into account by Singapore’s High Court.
 
The news was welcomed by death penalty abolitionists and human rights lawyers.
 
Julian McMahon, part of the legal team who represented Van Nyugen in his capital trial, praised moves by Singapore away from a hardline approach. He wrote on ABC’s The Drum, “Singapore, which prides itself on being both conservative and modern, has perhaps been embarrassed by the rigidity of its criminal law regime, parts of which belong to a long bygone era.
 
“Allowing judges to actually judge and sentence serious drug cases on a case by case basis is a necessary and long overdue step, but most welcomed by the international community.”
 
MALAYSIA

As Australian man Dominic Bird faces a Malaysian court on July 24, on drug charges that attract the death penalty, there are some signs that Malaysians are moving away from support for current laws.
 
Last week it was reported that a survey of 1,535 Malaysians showed little support for the mandatory implementation of the death penalty – particularly for drugs offences.
 
Instead there was support for discretionary use of the death penalty.

Members of the Malaysian Bar have been strongly outspoken in their opposition to the death penalty, and leading advocates take on death penalty cases pro bono.

A human rights’ activist in Malaysia last year told me: “The Malaysian Bar Council in 2011 carried a unanimous motion against the death penalty.”

But convincing the public is a more difficult proposition. “There is a big drug problem in Malaysia and very little rehabilitation centres,” she said. The death penalty works as a powerful deterrent, goes the accepted thinking.

But she thought the government might be swayed “to get rid of the death penalty if the public want it abolished.”

 
INDONESIA
 
Indonesia is a powerful “key domino” in the region when it comes to influencing the death penalty abolition of its neighbours, Dr Dave McCrae of the Lowy Institute wrote last year.
 
In an analysis published in March 2012 McCrae wrote that “Indonesia remains at a crossroads concerning capital punishment, with competing forces advocating for greater use of the death penalty and for its abolition.”
 
“Whether or not Indonesia abolishes the death penalty matters to Australia for principled and practical reasons.”
 
Last year Indonesia, which has more than a hundred people on death row, made what many Indonesia watchers saw as positive moves towards abolition.
 
When a 54-year-old Indonesian maid working in Saudi Arabia was beheaded after being convicted of killing her employer, the Indonesian public and government were outraged. The execution provoked a diplomatic incident. Indonesia recalled its consular staff, and the issue was hotly debated in the nation’s media.
 
In the aftermath, Indonesia reached out to its citizens on death row around the world, providing legal assistance and establishing a taskforce to protect the approximately 200 Indonesians facing the death penalty overseas.
 
Meanwhile, in Indonesia, clemency was granted to four prisoners on death row, convicted of drug offences. But a public backlash by some Indonesians against this softening led, this year, to a return to executions after a four-year moratorium.
 
In March 2013, Adami Wilson, a Malawi national convicted of drug smuggling, was executed by firing squad. The execution of three others followed.
 
The Indonesian government announced there is a list of around 10 people that they plan to execute this year. It is not known if Australian’s Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran are on that list. They face a nervous wait in Kerobokan prison for news of their clemency application, which has been lodged with Indonesian president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

THAILAND                                                                  

Thailand does not have a mandatory death sentence for any offence, but capital sentences are imposed frequently with 706 people on death row in Thailand as of late May 2013. Around half of these are for drug offences.

Reprieve Australia sent a research team to Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand in 2012 to report on capital punishment regimes in those countries and on resources and public appetite for abolition.

They found in Thailand that “currently, men condemned to death are permanently shackled by what is politically described as ‘instruments of restraint’.

“These shackles are welded on to the ankles and are not removed, even during illness.”

In a move welcomed by human rights activists, in May this year leg irons were deemed ‘unnecessarily cruel’ by the Thai Corrections Department, and their use was banned.

Apart from overturning practices relating to shackling, legal reform in Thailand has been slow.

At a seminar late last year in Thailand, human rights activists and experts said the country was “falling behind its neighbours” in southeast Asia when it came to the abolition of the death penalty.

The Philippines abolished the death penalty in 2006 and Cambodia has no death penalty under its constitution.

Pol Colonel Aeknarat Sawettanand, director-general of the Department of Rights and Liberty Protection told the seminar that “many Thais are still in the mindset of revenge and retribution, which poses a hurdle in trying to convince them that it is against human rights standards to retain the death penalty.”

Roseann Rife, deputy director of Amnesty International's Asia Pacific program, said Thailand needs to "move swiftly and decisively" to end the death penalty. She said “public opinion was rarely in favour of abolishing the death penalty until abolition is passed into law. So, it was necessary for activists and the government to take the lead.”

Aeknarat called on the Thai Parliament to show leadership in implementing reforms and abolishing the death penalty.

VIETNAM
 
Last month Vietnam announced it would begin to kill death row prisoners by lethal injection.

Previously prisoners were executed by firing squad due to the unavailability of poisons in Vietnam needed to make the mixture for lethal injection. The EU had refused to export chemicals to Vietnam that would be used in executions.

This has led to a backlog of prisoners awaiting execution as the use of firing squads had been phased out. However once Vietnam started manufacturing its own poisons, the Minister of Public Security Tran Dai Quang had announced that the implementation of the death penalty by lethal injection would start from June 27.

There are more than 560 prisoners under death penalty and 170 people are eligible for lethal injection.

The New York Times reported that Amnesty International activists working in Vietnam had hoped EU moratorium on manufacturing the drugs would lead to abolition of the death penalty. Yet sentences of death for mostly drug and murder offences continued. In 2012, Amnesty International reported that at least 86 people were sentenced to death.
 
One of those facing the death penalty is an American citizen who was caught last month allegedly attempting to smuggle more than a kilogram of heroin to Sydney, via Vietnam.
 
Local media reported this week that despite Vietnam starting to manufacture its own lethal injection drugs, and rights’ groups anticipating a ‘mass killing’, no prisoners have been executed yet.
 
Cao Ngoc Oanh, director of the central police department in charge of managing nationwide prisons, told the media on June 26 that “we are not ready to carry out with lethal injections.” Any further information was “classified.”
 
According to reports in the Vietnamese media, death row prisoners are suffering considerable mental anguish due to uncertainty about their fate.
 
‘“Many prisoners have been waiting to be executed for five to six years,” said lawmaker Nguyen Van Hien, adding that many prisoners have been begging to be executed.’
 
Brigid Delaney is a freelance journalist. She has worked as a lawyer and currently volunteers for Reprieve. She is also the co-founder of the Mercy Campaign, which is campaigning for clemency in the cases of Australians on death row - Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan. - World News Australia, 24/7/2013, Changing attitudes to the death penalty in Southeast Asia

Malaysia: 964 on death row (July 2013)

Kluang MP: High time to end mandatory death penalty

11:42AM Jul 9, 2013

 

DAP political education director and MP for Kluang Liew Chin Tong has urged the government to hold a moratorium to review mandatory death penalty laws, calling it an “archaic form of punishment”.

In a press statement today, Liew said, “It is high time for Malaysia to review the death penalty as it is an archaic form of punishment that is inconsistent with international norms.

“I urge the government to at least review laws that allow the mandatory death sentence and to return discretion to the judges. “

Liew (left) quoted figures supplied to him from the Home Ministry, which stated there are currently 964 inmates on death-row for various offences.

“The death sentence is a punishment that is both inhumane and irreversible. The impossibility of eliminating human error and the ineffectiveness of the sentence as a deterrent also raises many issues.

“There should be amendments to empower judges to replace the death sentence with jail time for drug mules,” said Liew

Poll: Folk against mandatory death for some crimes

This comes after a UK-based NGO, ‘The Death Penalty Project’, yesterday released its findings of a door-to-door survey of around 1,500 Malaysians, conducted between November and December last year to look into public opinion on mandatory death penalty.

The survey found that while more than 75 percent of people supported the death penalty for murder, drug trafficking and firearms; support for the mandatory death penalty was much lower.

While 56 percent said they were in favor of mandatory death penalty for murder, only 45 percent supported a mandatory death sentence for firearms offences, and between 25 and 44 percent for drug trafficking.

The group also provided participants with 12 individual ‘scenario cases’ in which the death penalty was a mandatory sentence, and found that only 1.2 percent of respondents thought that the death penalty was appropriate.

In March last year, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Nazri Abdul Aziz said that the government would look at amending the laws only if it had the support of the public.

Survey reveals Malaysians against mandatory death penalty ..in fact are for abolition of death penalty

DPP launches Report on the Public Opinion Survey on the Mandatory Death Penalty in Malaysia

8 July 2013

In association with the Bar Council Malaysia, the DPP today launched a report of the findings of a public opinion survey on the mandatory death penalty. The event, held at the Bar Council Malaysia was attended by over 100 guests including the Chief Justice of Malaya, senior members of the judiciary, lawyers, members of the diplomatic community, academics and NGOs.

In October 2012, the DPP commissioned Professor Roger Hood, Professor Emeritus of Criminology at the University of Oxford, to design and analyse the findings of a public opinion survey on the mandatory death penalty in Malaysia. The survey of a representative sample of 1,535 Malaysian citizens from all over the country, was carried out by Ipsos Malaysia, a leading market research company.

The research was designed to elicit views on the mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking, murder and offences under the Firearms Act. By using a series of scenarios it shows the extent to which members of the public support the mandatory death penalty when faced with the reality of having to judge whether the crime merits the death penalty.

Saul Lehrfreund and Parvais Jabbar, Executive Directors of The Death Penalty Project, said: “This study, for the first time, provides unique data from a large scale and detailed analysis of the views of the general public on the mandatory death penalty in Malaysia. The findings suggest that there would be little public opposition to abolition of the mandatory death penalty, in particular for drug trafficking, murder and firearms offences. We hope that this evidence will urge the Malaysian Government to consider legislative reform – in line with both public sentiment and international human rights standards.”

Summary of findings

In Malaysia, the death penalty is the mandatory and, thus, the only punishment available to the courts for persons convicted of murder; for trafficking in narcotics in various amounts; and for discharging a firearm during the commission of various crimes, even if no-one is hurt. There is a growing political and public debate. Should the mandatory death penalty be abolished and replaced by a discretionary system where capital punishment is used only in exceptional circumstances, or abolished altogether? This study reports the findings of a major public opinion survey of the views of a representative sample of 1,535 Malaysian citizens on this issue. A large majority said they were in favour of the death penalty, whether mandatory or discretionary: 91% for murder, 74 to 80% for drug trafficking depending on the drug concerned, and 83% for firearms offences. Concerning the mandatory death penalty, a majority of 56% said they were in favour of it for murder, but only between 25% and 44% for drug trafficking and 45% for firearms offences.

When asked to say what sentences they would themselves impose on a series of ‘scenario’ cases, all of which were subject to a mandatory death sentence, a large gap was found between the level of support ‘in theory’ and the level of support when faced with the ‘reality’:

•  For none of four scenario drug trafficking cases did more than 30% choose the death penalty, even when one case involved smuggling 25 kg of heroin. Only 8% chose death for all the scenario cases they judged

• Regarding 6 murder scenarios, a majority chose death for only 3 of the cases, the highest proportion being 65% for a recidivist robber

• Of the 56% who said they favoured the mandatory death penalty for murder whatever the circumstances, only 14% of them actually chose the death penalty for all the scenario cases they judged. This was only 8% of the total number of respondents

• When judging two scenarios where a firearm had been discharged during a burglary, only 20% chose death in the most serious case where the person fired at had been wounded

• Only 1.2 persons in 100 thought that the death penalty was the appropriate punishment for all 12 scenario cases of murder, drug trafficking and firearms offences that were judged- showing decisively that the vast majority favoured a discretionary use of the death penalty

• The main reason why people chose the death penalty was retribution and when against it they said it would be a disproportionate punishment. Deterrence was mentioned by no more than 15%

• When interviewees were asked whether they would support the death penalty if it were proven that innocent persons had been executed, the proportion in favour for murder fell to 33%, for drug trafficking to 26%, and to 23% for firearms offences

• ‘Greater number of executions’ was ranked as the least-effective policy for reducing very violent crimes leading to death and for reducing the amount of trafficking in illegal drugs

• These findings suggest that there would be little public opposition to abolition of the mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking, murder, and firearms offences. Public support for the death penalty for murder is also lower than is perhaps assumed, so may not be regarded as a definite barrier to complete abolition

Source: The Death Penalty Project

231 cases of death in custody from 2000 until May 2013 - 97 Malays, 49 Chinese, 51 Indians.

The government say that 196 of these deaths caused by illness and diseases - Let us look at the national statistics of people dying of  these same illness and diseases and compare with the statistics in the police lock-ups. If the numbers dying in the police lock-ups is higher, then something is very wrong.

29 hung themselves - what with the CCTV and other detainees in the cell, and of course the police personnel guarding the lock-ups. This is laughable.

2 slipped, fell and died - I wonder how many Malaysians in other places slipped, fell and died???

I certainly doubt the cause of deaths of these people in police custody...

Zahid: Only two custodial death caused by cops

Ram Anand 11:27AM Jun 26, 2013

PARLIAMENT Only two cases of custodial deaths were caused injuries inflicted by police personnel, Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi told the Dewan Rakyat today.

Responding to a question by Johari Abdul (PKR-Sungai Petani) during question time, the minister said there were 231 cases of custodial deaths from 2000 until May this year, but most were due to natural causes.

“One hundred and ninety six of these deaths were caused by diseases and illnesses. Twenty nine were because the individuals hung themselves. Two were because of fights among detainees. Another two slipped and fell in the lock-up. Only two resulted from injuries caused by police,” he said.

“One hundred and ninety six died from illnesses. Are you going to say that is police brutality, too?”

The minister added that there is a perception that one minority ethnic group are the most common death in custody victim, but this was not true and the perception must be corrected. 

He said that of the 231 people who died in polic custody, 97 were Malays, 49 were Chinese while 51 were Indians.

IPCMC overlaps with other laws

Meanwhile, the minister also stated that the government established the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) in 2009 in response to the proposal to establish the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC).

The IPCMC was mooted in 2005 by a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) in 2005 to improve the performance of the police force.

Zahid said that the IPCMC could not be established because of its “contradictions” with laws governing the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), the Extra Territorial Offences Act 1976 and also Section 127a of the Criminal Procedure Code.

“The EAIC was the answer to the RCI’s recommendations. Only that the EAIC has wider scope for all government agencies,” he said.

“The IPCMC also was supposed to investigate police misconduct which took place before the IPCMC was set up. That contravenes the constitution." - Malaysiakini, 26/6/2013, Zahid: Only two custodial death caused by cops

No room for violent conduct (The Sun Daily)

No room for violent conduct

Posted on 18 June 2013 - 08:25pm

R. Nadeswaran

THIS writer was one of the many who was in one way or another connected with the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) on the Royal Malaysian Police Force. 

Having written extensively on the forgery of the minutes of the Selangor Executive Council on matters related to the housing project in Taman Mentrai, inaction by the police compelled the residents to take the matter to the commission where, among others, I met three members who were personally known to me – Tun Hanif Omar, Datuk Kadir Jasin and Tunku Aziz Tunku Ibrahim.

I never participated or gave evidence because I was personally unhappy that the police were being singled out despite abuse and misuse of power by various other law enforcement agencies. 

The police, I had then reasoned, were being sought out because they enforced the Penal Code which meant that crime was their forte while those who enforce other enactments were not being included.

Instead of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC), I had proposed the setting up of an ombudsman to hear complaints against not only members of the police force, but also officers of the Customs Department, immigration officers, health officers and every other civil servant who was tasked with enforcement.

As usual, my proposal found its way into the wastepaper basket and so did the recommendations of the RCI that the IPCMC be set up. Then, I was also of the opinion that the IPCMC cannot prevent or reduce deaths in custody. And this stance has not changed since.

That was seven years ago and a lot of water has flown under the bridge. And so has the number of people dying in custody. The outcry for justice for the victims has reached consequential proportions and judging from what has been said and done, the voice of anger is getting louder and louder.

The government can no longer quell these voices which want the perpetrators of such heinous crimes to be brought to book. This is because deaths in custody are no longer isolated.

Human Rights lawyer Charles Hector says that merely on data provided by the government, there has been an increase in custodial deaths over the years. He says: "There have been 150 deaths from 1990 until 2004 (10.7 deaths a year), 108 deaths between 2000 and 2006 (18), and, 85 deaths between 2003 and 2007 (21.25), 153 deaths between 1999 and 2008 (17), and 147 deaths between 2000 and 2009 (16.3).

He says: "There has been an increase in the number of deaths in custody until 2007, and the numbers seem to be dropping but it certainly is still higher than the 1990-2007 period."

These are startling figures which ought to jolt the powers-that-be to move into gear to reverse this shocking state of affairs. Perhaps, policies of the past have allowed those involved to get away, at the most, with a slap on the wrist.

There must be zero-tolerance against violent conduct, not only by the police, but also all gazetted officers who are entrusted with enforcing the law.

Having said that, whoever is entrusted with this task should not just confine himself or herself to just death or physical harm but other shortcomings. 

It should encompass a host of other areas to include dereliction of duties, being biased, mistreating the public and even causing unnecessary delay in providing documents or information as provided in the law.

Let us not confine ourselves to looking at mere violence and ignore the other forms of inadequacies within the system which cause unnecessary problems for the rakyat.

People have not even got acknowledgements for their letters and requests, let alone decent replies. Would this not amount to indiscipline? In the private sector, they would have been censured for their inaction.

The list is endless but if we want our administrative system to be first class, then don't single out just one arm – the police – but include everyone who has dealings with the public.

R. Nadeswaran resumes his campaign for an ombudsman to look into the shortcomings of the administrative system. Comments: citizen-nades@thesundaily.com - the SunDaily, 18/6/2013, No room for violent conduct

MADPET was there in Madrid for the 5TH WORLD CONGRESS AGAINST THE DEATH PENALTY

Charles Hector represented MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) at the 5th World Congress Against the Death Penalty. Our shame was that Malaysia was still amongst the few retentionist countries. It is our home that come the next World Congress, Malaysia would have abolished the death penalty.

Over the past years, there have been positive indications that Malaysia may soon abolish the Death Penalty, especially with regard to drug offences. Malaysia should not follow Singapore, where the power has been vested in the Public Prosecutor to issue certificates of cooperation that would translate in persons not being sentenced to death. That power should really be vested with JUDGES not the prosecutors. Malaysia, I believe would do better and totally abolish the death penalty for drug traffickers...

A first step also would be needed to remove all MANDATORY Death Penalties in law, giving judges discretion in sentencing. A discretion that would be exercised looking at the circumstances of each and every case.

A second step, would be to remove the provisions that shift the burden to the accused - it should always be the duty of the prosecution to prove all elements of the alleged crime beyond reasonable doubt. 

A third thing that is needed in Malaysia are Acts setting out procedures for clemency hearings/applications - the absence is problematic. What is the procedure? What should be the considerations of the Pardon Board or the Sultan/King?

MADRID: 5TH WORLD CONGRESS AGAINST THE DEATH PENALTY

June 13, 2013: Hundreds of civil society, political figures and journalists from five continents gathered in Madrid to push for the universal abolition of the death penalty during the World 5th Congress against the Death Penalty.

In a message, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon hailed the growing momentum against capital punishment, while voicing concern that a small number of States continue to impose the death penalty, often in violation of international standards.

Mr. Ban noted that the full abolition of the death penalty has support in every region and across legal systems, traditions, customs and religious backgrounds.

Currently, more than 150 States have either abolished the death penalty or do not practice it. Last year, 174 United Nations Member States were “execution-free,” he said.

“Despite these positive trends, I am deeply concerned that a small number of States continue to impose the death penalty, and thousands of individuals are executed each year, often in violation of international standards,” said the Secretary-General.

“Some countries with a longstanding de facto moratorium have recently resumed executions,” he noted. 

Also, the death penalty is at times used for offences that do not meet the threshold of “most serious crimes,” such as drug crimes, and a few States impose capital punishment against juvenile offenders, in violation of international human rights law.

Mr. Ban also pointed out that information concerning the application of the death penalty is often cloaked in secrecy, and that the lack of data on the number of executions or the number of individuals on death row “seriously impedes” any informed national debate that may lead to abolition.

“The taking of life is too absolute and irreversible for one human being to inflict on another, even when backed by a legal process. Too often, multiple layers of judicial oversight still fail to reverse wrongful death penalty convictions for years and even decades,” he said.

This problem, he added, will be discussed at a UN panel in New York at the end of this month.

The UN General Assembly first voted on a moratorium in 2007, and again in December 2012, when it adopted a resolution calling for a progressive restriction on the use of capital punishment and eliminating it entirely for felons below the age of 18 and pregnant women.

Although not legally binding, the UN moratorium on executions carries moral and political weight.

During the opening ceremony, Swiss Foreign Minister Didier Burkhalter said his country is at the forefront and is committed to the abolition of death penalty. In a plenary session Burkhalter said Switzerland seeks to have those countries which have not as yet abolished the death penalty at least place a moratorium on its use.

“It is a priority in Switzerland, we need to take a pragmatic approach and ensure a world without death penalty,” he said.

Burkhalter said capital punishment was incompatible with the values represented by Switzerland and had an impact on the country’s other obligations such as the prohibition of discrimination.

Together with Spain, France and Norway, Switzerland is patron of the 5th World Congress against the Death Penalty which is hosting around 1,500 delegates from over 90 states in Madrid until Saturday (June 15).

According to Norway which is represented at the Congress by the Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs Gry Larsen it will support multi stakeholder’s initiatives like the work of the International Commission on Death Penalty, International Bars Associations and Universities.

“It has taken the political leadership to abolish the death penalty and in almost all of the countries the public have been against when we have taken the decisions in our countries to the vote but what we have seen in our countries is that when we have used the political leadership the public have followed. We don’t wait for the people we have to lead,” she said.

Hands Off Cain was present at the conference with Senator Marco Perduca.

For further information : http://congres.abolition.fr/?lang=en

Proham: Caning as violation of human rights

Proham: Caning as violation of human rights

PROHAM is deeply concerned over a first group of syariah offenders which included twenty-two women among the 39 who received six strokes of the cane in closed quarters of the Kluang prison in Johor .

We are further alarmed that the  Johor Islamic Affairs Department (JAIJ) is actually debating for canning to be carried out in public or in mosques.

We respectfully understand that these punishments are in line with the Syariah Criminal Offences Enactment, however PROHAM is of the view that it is time for Malaysia to review these laws including the Criminal Penal Code that allow for corporal punishment.

We do not support corporal punishment for both men and women irrespective of their faith. Furthermore Muslim women suffer an added discrimination as women of other faiths do not have to suffer this form of cruel punishment.    

Although corporal punishments were common forms of punishment in medieval society regardless of their religious faiths, such punishments are now regarded as cruel, degrading and inhumane treatment. Canning a man or a woman for any offence is archaic and inconsistent with a compassionate and just society.

Malaysia as a member of to the Human Rights Council should be inspired to uphold universal human rights principles and Proham calls on the Malaysian Government to ratify the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

PROHAM also urges the Government to immediately review and abolish all forms of punishment involving caning and proceed to comply with international human rights norms and principles on punishment.

Issued on behalf of PROHAM by Ms Ivy Josiah (Proham member), Datuk Kuthbul Zaman (Proham Exco) and Datuk Dr Denison Jayasooria (Proham Secretary General)

June 17, 2013

Gabungan Bertindak Malaysia (GBM) Calls for Immediate Implementation of IPCMC

website: http://gbm.org.my

Media Statement For Immediate Release

 Gabungan Bertindak  Malaysia (GBM) Calls for Immediate Implementation of IPCMC

4 June, 2013

These days Malaysians go to bed with the shocking news of a custodial death only to wake the next morning to learn of another death in police custody. The custodians of law and order must take full responsibility for these custodial deaths.

From January 14 to June 1, 2013, eight custodial deaths have been reported. According to the chief of the police force these are apparently "unfortunate". Referring to the latest death in IPD Tampin, the IGP Khalid Abu Bakar had reportedly said in a text-message to The Malay Mail, “It's just unfortunate that he died in our lock-up."

In this connection, the Minister of Home Affairs had earlier said that he had to be careful about taking action against the police in order to ensure that it would not have any demoralising effect on the police force.

GBM regards both these statements as unbecoming of leaders who are duty bound to protect the people of this country and condemn them for being insensitive and indifferent towards the preservation of precious lives.

GBM notes with utter disgust that the wanton cruelty of the police personnel towards their victims has been so prominent all these years that a Royal Commission had to be set up in 2005 which among others concluded that deaths in the lock-ups are "a serious cause for concern".

The Royal Commission produced 125 recommendations to clean up the police force, the most important  being the setting up of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC).

Almost eight years have passed, but the government has not shown any inclination to establish the IPCMC, which, in the opinion of GBM, legitimises the police force to continue with its wayward ways.

GBM, an alliance of 25 NGOs, fervently believes that this state of affairs cannot be allowed to continue and calls upon the government to undertake the following actions without any further delays or excuses:

(1) To implement the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) as proposed by the Royal Commission of Inquiry immediately. There should be no overt or covert attempts to weaken the authority or terms of reference of the IPCMC.

(2) To undertake speedily all the other recommendations made by the Royal Commission of Inquiry. A schedule of implementation of the recommendations should be prepared by the Government for adoption by Parliament. 

(3) To appoint the Inspector-General of Police (IGP)  as recommended by an independent Selection Board consisting of a representative from the Home Ministry, retired judges, retired senior police officers, SUHAKAM commissioners, representatives of the Bar Council and other civil society organizations. If the recommendation is not accepted by the Home Minister, it should be automatically referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs for hearing and decision making.

(4) To decentralize the Police Force from its present centralized authority, and to move the Federal Constitution provision relating to the police from the Federal List to the Concurrent List. At present, the police is exclusively emplaced within the Federal jurisdiction. This has led to the politicization of the police. The greatest benefit from decentralizing the police is that it allows local public feedback to be better incorporated into police work. This tie-up will ensure more effective crime prevention, and will definitely have a positive impact on police work.

(5) To take immediate action to arrest and charge all police personnel involved in the latest series of custodial deaths. Only through a swift and transparent judicial process will it enable the police force to clear its name!

Issued by the Executive Council of Gabungan Bertindak Malaysia

Note: GBM comprises of the following 25 civil society organisation members:

1)  Kuala Lumpur & Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH) 吉隆坡暨雪兰莪中华大会堂

2)  Aliran 国民醒觉运动

3)  Tamil Foundation 淡米尔基金会

4)  Pertubuhan IKRAM Malaysia (IKRAM) 马来西亚回教革新理事会

5)  Majlis Perundingan Malaysia Agama Buddha; Krisitian; Hindu; Sikh dan Tao (MPMA-BKHST) 马来西亚五大宗教理事会

6)  Negeri Sembilan Chinese Assembly Hall (NSCAH) 森美兰中华大会堂

7)  Penang Chinese Town Hall (PGCTH) 槟城华人大会堂

8)  The Federation of Chinese Associations Johore State (FCAJ) 柔佛中华总会

9)  Lim Lian Geok Cultural Development Centre (LLG) 林连玉基金

10) United Chinese School Alumni Associations of Malaysia (UCSAAM) 马来西亚华校校友会联合会总会

11) Muslim Professionals Forum (MPF) 穆斯林专业论坛

12) Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) 人民之声

13) Pusat Komunikasi Masyarakat (KOMAS) 社区传播中心

14) Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia (SABM) 马来西亚之子

15) Persatuan Masyarakat Selangor dan Wilayah Persekutuan (Permas) 雪隆社区协会

16) National Indian Rights Action Team (NIAT) 全国印裔权益行动组织

17) People’s Green Coalition (PGC) 马来西亚人民绿色联盟

18) Anak Muda Sarawak (AMS) 砂拉越青年之子

19) All Women’s Action Society (AWAM) 妇女行动协会

20) Partners in Community Organising (Pacos Trust) 沙巴社区伙伴信托组织

21) Persatuan Bekas Siswazah Universiti dan Kolej di China, Malaysia (Liu-Hua) 马来西亚留华同学会

22) Nanyang University Alumni Malaya (Nanda) 马来亚南大校友会

23) Japan Graduates Association, Malaysia (JAGAM) 马来西亚留日同学会

24) Gabungan Persatuan Alumni Universiti Taiwan Malaysia (GPAUTM) 马来西亚留台校友会联合总会

25) Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF) 回教复兴前线组织

                                      

--

Gabungan Bertindak Malaysia(GBM)
Plan of Action for Malaysia  (PoAM) 马来西亚行动方略联盟(行动方略联盟)
c/o The KL & Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH) GBM Secretariat

Phone: 03 2272 3594/012 320 6959    Fax:03 2272 4089

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Gabungan-Bertindak-Malaysia-GBM/163726347067478?fref=ts

Email: infogpoam@gmail.com

P Karuna Nithi(42) Death-in-custody - 1 June 2013(Saturday)

P Karuna Nithi, a 42-year-old former engineer, was the latest death-in-custody victim who died in a lock-up in Tampin on Saturday.

This follows the death of N Dhamendran, 32, who died at the Kuala Lumpur police headquarters on May 21, and the death of R Ramesh Jamesh, 40, who died at the Penang police headquarters on May 26.- Malaysiakini, 3/6/2013, Don't practise double standards, Waytha tells police