Oct 10, 2013 | News
On the 11th World Day against the Death Penalty, the ICJ calls on South Asian States to stop the resurgence of executions in the region.
The ICJ considers the death penalty in all cases to constitute a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.
“In the past year, we’ve seen an alarming increase in the number of executions in South Asia,” said Sheila Varadan, International Legal Advisor for the South Asia Programme.
“Capital punishment is State-sanctioned vengeance. The deliberate and premeditated act of taking a human life in State custody can never constitute a form of justice. It is is an irreversible form of punishment that, as we have seen time and again, cannot be administered without some degree of subjectivity and arbitrariness,” she added.
India ended its eight-year moratorium on the death penalty with the executions of Ajmal Amir Kasab in November 2012 and Afzal Guru in February 2013.
Although the current policy on a moratorium is unclear, Pakistan appears to be leaning towards resuming executions. In November 2012, Pakistan carried out its first execution in five years when it hanged solider Muhammad Hussain.
In July 2013, the newly-elected Government signaled its intention to recommence civilian executions after it failed to renew the five-year moratorium. Over 8000 people have been sentenced to death in Pakistan.
Bangladesh also continues to exercise the death penalty. It has over 1000 individuals on death row.
Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal has handed down the death penalty in six of the seven cases completed, despite growing international criticism over the independence and impartiality of the proceedings.
South Asia’s increasing resort to the use of the death penalty goes against a 15-year worldwide trend towards abolition. More than 150 of 192 United Nations member States have now either abolished the death penalty or do not practice it, including 30 States from the Asia-Pacific region.
The United Nations General Assembly has adopted a number of resolutions calling for a worldwide abolition of the death penalty. In its most recent resolution in 2012, an overwhelming majority of UN member States voted in favor of a worldwide moratorium on executions as a step towards the abolition of the death penalty.
“India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are part of a dwindling number of States who still retain this cruel and inhumane form of punishment,” Varadan said.
The ICJ urges India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh to immediately impose a moratorium on the death penalty, with a view to abolishing it and accede to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on the abolition of the death penalty.
CONTACT:
Sheila Varadan, ICJ Legal Advisor, South Asia Programme, t: +66 857200723; email: sheila.varadan(a)icj.org
NOTE:
- The United Nations has adopted various instruments in support of the call for the worldwide abolition of the death penalty. In 2007, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution emphasizing that ‘that the use of the death penalty undermines human dignity’ and calling for the establishment of a moratorium on the use of the death penalty ‘with a view to abolishing the death penalty.’ The resolution was reaffirmed in 2008, 2010, and most recently in December 2012, when a large majority of UN Member States voted in favor of a worldwide moratorium on executions as a step towards the death penalty’s abolition.
Oct 4, 2013 | News
The ICJ is calling on the Indonesian authorities to ensure that the proceedings against Justice Akil Mochtar fully comply with international law and standards on fair trial and the independence and impartiality of the judiciary.
Justice Mochtar, Chief Justice of Indonesia’s Constitutional Court (photo), is accused of taking a bribe to issue a favourable verdict in an election dispute.
Justice Mochtar was arrested on 2 October 2013 and remains in custody. According to a spokesperson for the Corruption Eradication Commission, he is alleged to have received a bribe, through several intermediaries, from Hambit Binti, a district chief whose re-election was contested.
The Constitutional Court has sole jurisdiction over disputes contesting the conduct or results of elections.
The ICJ calls for a prompt, thorough and impartial investigation of these serious allegations.
The impartiality of the judiciary is an essential condition for respect for the rule of law, and is undermined when judicial decisions are made on the basis of financial inducements rather than solely according to evidence and the law.
Integrity is vital to the proper discharge of judicial office, and any judge must ensure that his or her conduct is above reproach, maintaining and enhancing the confidence of the public in the impartiality of both the individual judge and the judiciary as a whole.
According to the Beijing Statement of Principles on Independence of the Judiciary in the LAWASIA Region, signed by 32 judicial heads of Asia Pacific States, including the Chief Justice of Indonesia, “Judges shall uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary by avoiding impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all their activities.”
At the same time, the ICJ stresses that any eventual criminal or disciplinary proceedings, should those be warranted, must respect the independence of the judiciary and Justice Mochtar’s right to a fair trial.
Judges charged with a criminal offence, like all other persons, have the right to a fair trial by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.
The right to a fair trial in criminal cases as recognized in Indonesia and under international law and standards, including Article 14(3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, comprises a series of procedural and substantive safeguards that must be respected during the pre-trial and trial phases.
Contact
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, Bangkok, tel. no. +66 8078 19002 or sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Laurens Hueting, ICJ Associate Legal Adviser (International Law and Protection Programme), Geneva, tel. no. +41 22 979 3848 or laurens.hueting(a)icj.org
Oct 3, 2013 | News
Following Pakistan’s reinstation of its moratorium on the death penalty, the ICJ calls on the Government to make the moratorium permanent and to move to abolish the death penalty in national law.
“This is a step forward for human rights in Pakistan,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia-Pacific Director. “It brings Pakistan closer to the regional and worldwide trend towards abolishment of the death penalty.”
Pakistan has had a moratorium on the death penalty in place since June 2008, with only the exception of Muhammad Hussain’s execution in November 2012 following a court martial.
The newly elected Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) Government decided not to renew the moratorium when it expired in June 2013.
The ICJ and other human rights groups denounced the move and urged Pakistan to immediately adopt a moratorium on the death penalty, prompting the Government to reconsider its decision.
According to the Interior Ministry spokesperson, today’s decision was taken to meet Pakistan’s international human rights obligations.
Pakistani Taliban also warned the Government that they would launch retaliatory attacks if any of their members were executed.
“This brave move by the government should be the first step toward reestablishing the rule of law and providing accountability in Pakistan,” Zarifi added. “The Government should now ensure that members of armed groups like the Taliban who have carried out serious human rights abuses like extrajudicial executions and attacks on civilians are held to account.”
The ICJ considers the death penalty in all cases to constitute a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.
Contact:
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, (Bangkok), t:+66 807819002; email: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Oct 2, 2013 | News
The ICJ said the conviction today of Le Quoc Quan, a lawyer and human rights defender in Vietnam, violated international standards governing the right to a fair trial.
Judge Le Thi Hop of the People’s Court of Hanoi convicted and sentenced Le Quoc Quan to 30 months imprisonment with time served since late December 2012 to be taken into account.
His company was ordered to pay the unpaid tax amount of 645 million VND (approximately USD 30,000) and fine of 1.3 billion VND (approximately USD 60,000) for the offence of tax evasion under section 161 of the Vietnamese Penal Code.
One of Le Quoc Quan’s accountants, Phuong, was sentenced to eight months imprisonment.
Edmund Bon, a prominent Malaysian attorney and the ICJ’s appointed trial observer, was denied entry into court.
Police barricaded the courthouse to keep out hundreds of demonstrators protesting the perceived harassment of Le Quoc Quan.
“The court did not dispel the widespread belief that this case is political in nature and intended to silence a government critic,” Edmund Bon said. “The verdict was delivered after a 30-minute deliberation and the judge took about an hour to read the written grounds of judgment.”
The hearing was originally scheduled for 9 July 2013, but was postponed at the very last minute due to the judge’s illness.
On 17 September 2013, the court issued a notification informing that the trial had been rescheduled to 2 October 2013 and that the trial would be a public one.
Nevertheless, on the day of trial, only a handful of foreign diplomats who had obtained an invitation and pass from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs were allowed to enter a room to observe the proceedings through a television screen.
Le Quoc Quan’s wife was the only family member who was permitted to observe the trial.
No independent journalists were allowed to enter the courtroom except for a reporter with the police and government media personnel.
The trial before a judge and two jurors started at 8.00am and ended at 2.30pm with a 15-minute recess in between. Six witnesses gave evidence. Counsel for the prosecution and defence took approximately one hour to make legal submissions.
“Le Quoc Quan’s trial and verdict raise serious questions regarding Vietnam’s commitment to ensure fair criminal trials that are to be open to public scrutiny, as it required to do as a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,” said Edmund Bon.
The ICJ also notes that the court had breached Le Quoc Quan’s right to a speedy trial.
Section 194 of the Vietnamese Criminal Procedure Code specifically provides that, upon a postponement, courts that hear first-instance trials have to set a new hearing date within 30 days.
Here, the court took almost two months to do so.
“The court’s failure to reschedule the case within a timely manner is a clear violation of Le Quoc Quan’s rights to be tried within a reasonable time and without undue delay, as stipulated under articles 9 and 14 of the ICCPR respectively,” Bon added.
Since his arrest on 27 December last year, Le Quoc Quan has already spent a total of more than nine months in prison, awaiting trial.
“Le Quoc Quan should have instead been granted bail when his wife had filed an application for his release as there was no reason to believe that he would have had absconded the country,” said Edmund Bon.
The lawyers of Le Quoc Quan are expected to appeal the court’s decision within 15 days.
Contact
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, Bangkok, tel. no. +66 8078 19002 or sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Oct 1, 2013 | News
The ICJ denounces the death penalty handed down today by the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) to Salauddin Quader Chowdhury, a member of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, the main opposition party.
If carried out, the sentence would violate Bangladesh’s international law obligations to protect the right to life and freedom from cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment, the ICJ states.
The International Crimes Tribunal convicted Chowdhury (photo) on nine of 23 charges, including murder and genocide, and sentenced him to death.
“The Bangladesh Tribunal is one of very few transitional justice mechanisms that have imposed the death penalty,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia-Pacific Director. “It is unfortunate that Bangladesh seeks to punish human rights violations by committing rights violations itself.”
The ICJ considers the death penalty in all cases to constitute a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.
This is the seventh verdict delivered by the International Crimes Tribunal. Death sentences have been handed out in all but one case.
”Bangladeshi law as well as international human rights standards require that death penalty cases receive a fair and thorough review, so it is crucial that appellate review of these cases proceed properly, without undue political pressure or a timeline established by impending elections in or before January 2014,” Zarifi said.
“Those responsible for the horrific war crimes and crimes against humanity during Bangladesh’s war of liberation in 1971 should be brought to justice in processes that are fair, and seen to be fair, instead of being subjected to vengeance,” he added.
Contact
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, (Bangkok), t:+66 807819002; email: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Sep 25, 2013 | News
The ICJ continues to be disappointed over the continued arbitrary detention and refusal of bail of Secretary of human rights organization, Odhikar, and Supreme Court Advocate Adilur Rahman Khan.
The ICJ urged the Bangladeshi authorities to drop their opposition to Adilur Rahman Khan’s bail application.
On 25 September 2013, a cyber crimes tribunal in Dhaka refused Adilur Rahman Khan’s bail application. He had earlier been denied bail on 11 August 2013 and 9 September 2013.
“Adilur Rahman Khan is being arbitrarily detained for his lawful exercise of the right to freedom of expression and his legitimate work as a human rights defender,” said Ben Schonveld, ICJ’s South Asia Director. “What we are seeing is a Government crackdown on voices of dissent.”
Under international law, all persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Under Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Bangladesh is a party, there is a presumption of pre-trial release.
A person can only be denied pre-trial release where it is reasonable and necessary in all of the circumstances to prevent absconding, interference with evidence or recidivism.
“The Government cannot show that Adilur Rahman Khan poses a flight risk,” Schonveld added. “In fact, he faces a serious threat of torture and ill-treatment during detention, as documented by Odhikar and other human rights organizations.”
The ICJ reiterates its call on Bangladesh to immediately and unconditionally drop all charges against Adilur Rahman Khan and Nasiruddin Elan, ensure Adilur Rahman Khan is treated in accordance with international law in custody, and cease its harassment of Odhikar.
Contact
Ben Schonveld, ICJ South Asia Director (Kathmandu), t: +977 14432651; email: ben.schonveld(a)icj.org
