Dec 19, 2013 | Advocacy, News
The ICJ is profoundly concerned at the judgment of 11 December 2013 of the Supreme Court of India, which effectively recriminalizes consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults in private.
The decision by India’s highest court in Suresh Kumar Koushal and another v NAZ Foundation and others overturned the 2009 decision of the Delhi High Court.
That earlier judgment had held section 377 of the Indian Penal Code to be unconstitutional to the extent that it violated the rights to equality before the law, non-discrimination, life and personal liberty guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.
Section 377 criminalized certain consensual sexual acts in private between adults that are particularly associated with same-sex conduct.
The 2009 High Court’s ruling had the effect of decriminalizing such conduct between adults in private in India.
Its decision was based on an in-depth analysis of India’s obligations under international human rights law and standards, as well as international comparative law.
The High Court had examined the scope of the rights to equality, non-discrimination and personal liberty under the Indian Constitution and determined Section 377 to be unconstitutional.
Section 377, which was enacted in 1860, is a historical relic from colonial times bequeathed to India under the British empire; it made it an offence to voluntarily have “carnal intercourse against the order of nature” with any man, woman or animal.
Those convicted are liable to imprisonment for up to 10 years or for life and a fine.
The Supreme Court decision of 11 December reversed the High Court’s courageous and much celebrated decision.
Purporting to uphold the separation of powers, the judgment of the Supreme Court overturned the High Court by ruling that it acted in excess of its judicial review jurisdiction by failing to exercise restraint and to accord the necessary deference to the Indian legislature in its review of the constitutionality of section 377.
The Court effectively holds that the provision is not inconsistent with human rights and India’s obligations under international human right law, and that it is up to the Indian Parliament to amend or repealed it.
The ICJ is deeply troubled by the reasoning of the Supreme Court judgment.
It would appear to constitute an abdication of the essential role of the judiciary in safeguarding human rights.
In this case, the Court failed to uphold and protect the rights to equality and non-discrimination; equality before the law and equal protection of the law; dignity; privacy; freedom of expression and association; family life; and the highest attainable standard of health.
The judgment is inconsistent with India’s obligations under international human rights law.
The judgment also disconcertingly dismisses without apparent reason the wealth of evidence before the court documenting how the criminalization of same-sex sexual conduct leads directly to human rights violations.
Sep 13, 2013 | News
The ICJ denounced the death sentences handed down in the Delhi gang rape and murder case and urged the Indian Government to take steps to abolish the death penalty in law and practice.
A special fast-track court today sentenced to death four men convicted for the gang rape and murder of a 23-year-old student on 16 December 2012.
The fifth accused, who was a minor at the time he committed the crime, was convicted and sentenced to three years in a reform home by a juvenile court on 31 August 2013.
“Women’s rights groups in India have taken a firm stance against the death penalty and strongly believe that the death penalty is counterproductive in every way to preventing and curtailing sexual violence against women,” said Vrinda Grover, leading human rights lawyer and ICJ’s South Asia advocate.
The ICJ considers the death penalty to constitute a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.
“Those who commit acts of violence against women must be prosecuted and brought to justice,” said Sheila Varadan, ICJ’s South Asia Legal Advisor. “But the sentence and the administration of the death penalty constitutes a perversion of justice.”
“Instead of giving in to the vengeful demand for killing the perpetrators of this horrific crime, the Indian Government must take concrete steps to prevent, investigate and punish acts of violence against women,” Varadan added.
A high level commission constituted to reform Indian law on violence against women, led by the late Chief Justice of the Indian Supreme Court Justice J.S. Verma, recommended that the death penalty should not be used in rape cases.
“In demanding and securing the death penalty, Indian authorities have created a spectacle that distracts from their responsibility for systemic change in the legal system which alone will create deterrence in law,” said Vrinda Grover.
The ICJ calls on India to join the great majority of States around the world in rejecting the use of the death penalty.
To that end, India should impose a moratorium on the practice and take steps towards its abolition, as prescribed by repeated United Nations General Assembly Resolutions, the ICJ says.
Contacts:
Sheila Varadan (Bangkok), ICJ South Asia Legal Advisor, t: +66 857 200 723 (mobile); email: sheila.varadan(a)icj.org
Ben Schonveld (Kathmandu), ICJ South Asia Director, t: +977 980 459 6661 (mobile); email: ben.schonveld(a)icj.org
Additional Information
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.
Currently, 150 countries worldwide, including 30 states in Asia and the Pacific region, have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice.
Rape and other forms of sexual violence against women are pervasive in India. According to the National Crime Records Bureau, 24,923 rape cases were registered in India in 2012. Experts believe that the actual number is much higher, as rape is vastly under-reported. In most cases, however, victims and survivors get no justice from a criminal justice system that has been widely characterized as gender-insensitive, under-resourced and corrupt.
Photo: PTI
Aug 22, 2013 | News
The ICJ called upon the Indian Government to halt the imminent execution of Professor Devinderpal Singh Bhullar.
In August 2001, Professor Bhullar was sentenced to death under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act following his conviction on charges related to the bombing of the All Indian Youth Congress in New Delhi in 1993.
“Those who commit acts of terrorism should be prosecuted before competent, independent and impartial courts that meet international due process standards”, said Ben Schonveld, ICJ’s South Asia Director.
“However, while those responsible for such acts must be held to account, the ICJ opposes the death penalty in all circumstances, without exception as it is an inherently cruel and irreversible punishment that violates the right to life.”
“Furthermore, there are serious questions about whether Professor Bhullar’s trial was in accordance with the requirements of international law”, Schonveld added. “His conviction and death sentence are based solely upon an alleged confession he made in police custody, which he later retracted, claiming it was extracted under torture.”
The ICJ says that the execution of an individual in these circumstances would violate India’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to respect the right to life, the right to a fair trial and the absolute prohibition of torture.
In May 2011, President Pranab Mukherjee rejected Professor Bhullar’s petition for clemency. The Supreme Court rejected his earlier plea on 12 April 2013 to commute the sentence to life imprisonment, and upheld its decision on 14 August 2013.
India ended an eight-year moratorium on the death penalty with the executions of Ajmal Kasab on 21 November 2012 and Mohammad Afzal Guru on 9 February 2013.
“The resumption of the death penalty by India is contrary to the global and regional movement towards the abolition of the death penalty”, said Schonveld.
The ICJ reminds that 150 countries worldwide, including 30 states in the Asia-Pacific region, have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice.
The ICJ urges the Indian Government to immediately reinstate the moratorium on the death penalty, with a view to abolishing the death penalty permanently and acceding to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on the abolition of the death penalty.
Over the years, the member states of the United Nations have 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 and overwhelming majority of 110 UN Member States voted in favor of a worldwide moratorium on executions as a step towards abolition of the death penalty.
Contact:
Ben Schonveld, ICJ South Asia Director, (Kathmandu); t: +977 9804596661; email: ben.schonveld(a)icj.org
Nov 21, 2012 | News
The ICJ condemned today the execution of Ajmal Amir Kasab and called on India to immediately reinstate a moratorium on the death penalty.
“This is the second execution in South Asia in less than a week, marking a resurgence of capital punishment in the region,” said Sam Zarifi, Asia Director for the ICJ.
The ICJ condemned Pakistan’s execution of soldier Muhammad Hussain on Wednesday 15 November 2012.
Ajmal Kasab was executed by hanging in the early hours on Wednesday morning amid great secrecy.
The execution comes just a day after India voted against a United Nations General Assembly (GA) draft resolution, adopted by the GA’s Third Committee, calling for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty.
Over one hundred United Nations member States supported the draft resolution, an increase from previous United Nations General Assembly Resolutions passed in 2007, 2008 and 2010. The resolution will be taken up by the GA in December.
“India is one of a dwindling number of States voting against the resolution and still retaining the death penalty,” Zarifi added. “The death penalty violates the right to life and the inherent dignity of the person.”
More than 150 of 192 United Nations member States have either abolished the death penalty or do not practice it.
“There is no doubt that Kasab’s crimes were heinous, causing immeasurable suffering, but putting him to death is a significant step backwards for India, ending its eight-year hiatus on executions,” Zarifi said.
CONTACT:
Sheila Varadan, ICJ Legal Advisor, South Asia Programme, t: +66 857200723; email: sheila.varadan(at)icj.org
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, t: +66 26198477; email: sam.zarifi(at)icj.org
Background:
Ajmal Kasab, a 25-year old Pakistani national, was sentenced to the death for his role in the Mumbai terrorist attack in 2008. The Supreme Court confirmed Ajmal Kasab’s death sentence on 29 August 2012, upholding the judgment of the Bombay High Court on 21 February 2011 and the sentence handed down by a lower court in May 2010.
On 18 September 2012, Kasab sent a four-line handwritten mercy plea to the President of India. The Maharashtra Home Ministry recommended rejecting the mercy plea on 24 September 2012 and Governor of Maharashtra, K Sankaranarayan, advised the same on 29 September 2012. The Union Government rejected the mercy plea on 23 October 2012. The President rejected the mercy plea in early November 2012.
Nov 20, 2012 | News
Indian authorities must immediately drop all charges against two women for their post on Facebook, says the ICJ.
