Showing posts with label Death Penalty International. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Death Penalty International. Show all posts

January 13, 2020

We Could Learn From Pakistan: ExPresident Musharraf Sentenced To Death After Conviction

The above leader in royal performance has been impeached and will be tried in the Senate of the United States.
Most people believe that his pals in the Senate will not convict.

A court in Pakistan has overturned the death sentence handed down to former president Pervez Musharraf by declaring the legal process unconstitutional.
Gen Musharraf had challenged the formation of a special court that found him guilty of treason last December.
On Monday, the Lahore High Court sided with the exiled general, who seized power in a 1999 coup and was president from 2001 to 2008.
The decision meant Gen Musharraf was "a free man", one prosecutor said.
  • "The filing of the complaint, the constitution of the court, the selection of the prosecution team is illegal, declared to be illegal... And at the end of the day the full judgment has been set aside," the government prosecutor, Ishtiaq A. Khan, explained to news agency AFP.
He added there was "no judgment against him any longer". 
According to BBC Urdu, the long-running case - which relates to Gen Musharraf's suspension of the constitution in 2007, when he declared an emergency in a move intended to extend his tenure - could still be retried in another court.

Demonstrators carry pictures of former military ruler Pervez Musharraf, during a protest following a special court"s verdict, in Karachi on December 24, 2019.Image copyrightAFP
Image captionNews of the sentence in December sparked protests

The indictment in 2014 was a highly significant moment in a country where the military has held sway for much of its independent history, with no other military leader ever facing such legal consequences for their actions.
When the verdict finally came in December, it was strongly opposed by both the military and the current government.
But the penalty was unlikely to be carried out. Gen Musharraf, who has always denied any wrongdoing, was allowed to leave Pakistan in 2016 on medical grounds and is in Dubai where he is receiving medical treatment.
The ruling allowed for this, saying if Gen Musharraf died before he could be executed "his corpse (should) be dragged to D-Chowk, [outside parliament in] Islamabad, Pakistan, and be hanged for three days".
The directive sparked outrage, with the government seeking to disbar the panel's head judge, according to news agency Reuters.

What is the case about?

In November 2007, Gen Musharraf suspended the constitution and imposed emergency rule - a move which sparked protests. He resigned in 2008 to avoid the threat of impeachment. 
When Nawaz Sharif - an old rival whom he deposed in the 1999 coup - was elected prime minister in 2013, he initiated a treason trial against Gen Musharraf and in March 2014 the former general was charged for high treason. 
Gen Musharraf argued the case was politically motivated and that the actions he took in 2007 were agreed by the government and cabinet. But his arguments were turned down by the courts and he was accused of acting illegally. 

Video from All Pakistan Muslim League shows him in bedImagecopyright XML
Image captionIn a video, Gen Musharraf said he was not receiving a fair hearing

According to the Pakistani constitution, anyone convicted of high treason could face the death penalty. Gen Musharraf traveled to Dubai in 2016 after a travel ban was lifted and he has refused to appear before the court, despite multiple orders. 
The three-member bench had reserved its verdict in the long-running case last month but was stopped from announcing it by a petition filed by the federal government to the Islamabad High Court.

April 19, 2019

Brunei to Europe (Not US, They Know Trump Feelings) Not To Worry We Wont Stone Too Many Gays To Death

If a law described by the international community as "appalling" is passed but rarely enforced, is it still appalling?
Brunei, the Southeast Asian nation that recently implemented just such a law, is evidently hoping that the answer to that will somehow be no.
Earlier this month, gay sex and adultery became punishable by death by stoning in Brunei, a small but oil-rich state with a Muslim majority on the island of Borneo.
Homosexuality has been illegal in Brunei since it was a British colony, but the new laws made it - and extramarital affairs - punishable by gruesome death. 
This week, Brunei made the case to the European Union that it shouldn't worry about death by stoning because such punishments would be quite rare.
In a letter and memo sent ahead of a European Parliament meeting on human rights, the Brunei mission wrote:
"The penal sentences for hadd - stoning to death and amputation, imposed for offences of theft, robbery, adultery and sodomy have extremely high evidentiary threshold, requiring no less than two or four men of high moral standing and piety as witnesses - to the exclusion of every form of circumstantial evidence, coupled with very high standard of proof of 'no doubt at all,' which goes further than the common law standard of 'beyond reasonable doubt.' The standards of piety of the male witnesses is extremely high that it is extremely difficult to find one in this day and age, to the extent that convictions of hadd may solely rest on confessions of the offender."
Another mitigating factor presented by Brunei: The lesser punishment of whipping can be carried out only by people of the same gender.
The European Union is unlikely to be sympathetic. It has noted that such punishments - no matter who carries them out - violate the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which Brunei signed in 2015.
What's more, the EU isn't the only European institution that has expressed concern over Brunei's new laws. Today, Aberdeen University in Scotland revoked the Sultan's honorary degree over the measures. 
"The University of Aberdeen is proud of our foundational purpose of being open to all and dedicated to the pursuit of truth in the service of others. The introduction by the Sultan of the new Penal Code is contrary to our strong commitment to the value of diversity and inclusion," said university principal George Boyne.
A variety of companies, from a British TV awards show to the Financial Times, have also joined a boycott of hotels owned by Brunei, heeding a call from, among others, George Clooney. He said in late March, "Every single time we stay at, or take meetings at or dine at any of these nine hotels, we are putting money directly into the pockets of men who choose to stone and whip to death their own citizens for being gay or accused of adultery."

August 5, 2016

Iran Hangs Teenager Over Anal Sex

[The following report was published on Amnesty International on Aug. 2, 2016]

Amnesty International has revealed that a teenager was executed in Iran after being convicted of the rape of another boy, the first confirmed execution of a juvenile offender in the country this year.

The organization, which has been carrying out extensive research into the situation of juvenile offenders on death row in Iran, found that Hassan Afshar, 19, was hanged in Arak’s Prison in Markazi Province on 18 July, after being convicted of “lavat-e be onf” (forced male to male anal intercourse) in early 2015. The execution went ahead even though the Office of the Head of the Judiciary had promised his family that they would review the case on 15 September 2016.

Iran has proved that its sickening enthusiasm for putting juveniles to death, in contravention of international law, knows no bounds 

“Iran has proved that its sickening enthusiasm for putting juveniles to death, in contravention of international law, knows no bounds. Hassan Afshar was a 17-year-old high school student when he was arrested. He had no access to a lawyer and the judiciary rushed through the investigation and prosecution, convicting and sentencing him to death within two months of his arrest as though they could not execute him quickly enough,” said Magdalena Mughrabi, Deputy Middle East and North Africa Programme Director at Amnesty International

“In a cruel stroke of irony, officials did not inform Hassan Afshar of his death sentence for around seven months while he was held in a juvenile detention facility because they did not want to cause him distress – and yet astonishingly were still prepared to execute him. With this execution, Iranian authorities have demonstrated once again their callous disregard for human rights.”

Just days after Hassan Afshar was executed, the authorities scheduled Alireza Tajiki, another youth who was under 18 at the time of his alleged offence, for execution. The implementation of his death sentence, which had been scheduled to take place on 3 August was, however, postponed yesterday following public pressure.

“While we welcome the stay of execution for Alireza Tajiki, his life has been saved for the moment because of public pressure and not because the Iranian authorities are seriously considering stopping the horrendous practice of executing juveniles. This is illustrated by the fact that just two weeks ago Hassan Afshar was hanged in anonymity – publicity should not make the difference between life and death,” said Magdalena Mughrabi.

For the 160 individuals who remain on death row in prisons across Iran for crimes allegedly committed when they were under 18, the news of yet another juvenile execution will come as a terrifying blow.

“Any one of these youths could be next in line for execution. The torment that Iran’s flawed juvenile justice system has inflicted on them will not end until the Iranian authorities commute their death sentences and amend Iran’s Penal Code to abolish the use of death penalty for all crimes committed under 18 years of age, as immediate first steps towards full abolition of this punishment,” said Magdalena Mughrabi.

Hassan Afshar was arrested in December 2014 after the authorities received a complaint accusing him and two other youths of forcing a teenage boy to have sexual intercourse with them. Hassan Afshar maintained that the sexual acts were consensual and that the complainant’s son had willingly engaged in same-sex sexual activities before.

While authorities must always investigate allegations of rape and, where sufficient admissible evidence is found, prosecute those responsible in fair trials, rape does not fall into the category of offences for which the death penalty can be imposed under international law. Furthermore, the existence of laws in Iran that criminalize consensual male to male sexual intercourse with the death penalty means that if the intercourse in this case had been deemed consensual, the teenager who accused Hassan Afshar of rape would himself have been sentenced to death. The criminalization of same-sex sexual activity between consenting adults violates international human rights law.

The Supreme Court initially overturned the sentence due to incomplete investigations but ultimately upheld it in March 2016.


Male individuals who engage in same-sex anal intercourse face different punishments under Iranian criminal law depending on whether they are the “active” or “passive” partners and whether their conduct is characterized as consensual or non-consensual. If the conduct is deemed consensual, the “passive” partner of same-sex anal conduct shall be sentenced to the death penalty. The “active” partner, however, is sentenced to death only if he is married, or if he is not a Muslim and the “passive” partner is a Muslim.

If the intercourse is deemed non-consensual, the “active” partner receives the death penalty but the “passive” partner is exempted from punishment and treated as a victim. This legal framework risks creating a situation where willing “recipients” of anal intercourse may feel compelled, when targeted by the authorities, to characterize their consensual sexual activity as rape in order to avoid the death penalty.

International law, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child to which Iran is a state party, absolutely prohibits the use of death penalty for crimes committed when the defendant was below 18 years of age.

International law restricts the application of the death penalty to the “most serious crimes”, which refers to intentional killing.

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty unconditionally, for all cases and under any circumstances.

March 31, 2014

American Missionaries Partly Responsible for Africa’s “Jail and Death” Laws

“I wonder when people put money on the plate in church and make donations to missionaries they are jailing and hanging, stoning to death gay men and some women in certain parts in Africa.” adamfoxie

What is the goal of the new laws?
To criminalize homosexuality and "cleanse" these two countries' societies of gay people. In January, Nigerian President Good luck Jonathan signed a new anti-gay law that mandates 14-year prison terms for anyone in a same-sex union and 10 years for anyone who “promotes" homosexuality, including HIV/AIDS workers. In February, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni signed an even more draconian anti-gay law that provides for 14 years in jail for first-time offenders; those who commit "aggravated homosexuality" — repeated gay sex or gay sex involving a minor or someone with HIV — can get life in prison. The Ugandan law also pressures people to inform on their gay neighbors, because it is now a crime for anyone who is aware of homosexual activity to fail to report it. In signing the law, Museveni said he was defending the country from "arrogant and careless Western groups that are fond of coming into our schools and recruiting young children into homosexuality."
What prompted the new laws?
Under legal systems set up by European colonizers in the 19th and 20th centuries, 38 of Africa's 55 nations have had anti-sodomy laws on the books. But those laws were rarely enforced until recently, and in many African cultures, casual homosexuality has been fairly commonplace. In the last two decades, the continent has undergone a resurgence of evangelical Christianity, propelled largely by American missionaries. Uganda has been a particular focus for Scott Lively, an American evangelical pastor who preaches that gay Nazis were behind the Holocaust and that gay men try to recruit children. In a 2009 presentation to Ugandan lawmakers in Kampala, Lively warned that Westerners wanted to undermine the Ugandan family and recruit children by spreading "the disease" of homosexuality. "They're looking for other people to be able to prey upon," Lively said. Ugandan rights advocates say the anti-gay movement owes everything to Lively's lobbying. "The bill is essentially his creation," said Frank Mugisha of Sexual Minorities Uganda.
Why did Lively's campaign succeed?
The theory that decadent Westerners are trying to pervert Africans meshed perfectly with the broader anti-colonial themes championed by many African politicians. Uganda's Museveni opposed the law at first, but with a re-election bid coming up, he changed his tune. The West, he said, was engaging in "social imperialism" by trying to force Uganda and other African countries to recognize gay rights through U.N. human rights treaties. This rhetoric echoes across many other African countries (but not all: See below). Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe says homosexuality is a Western invention intended to "disturb the African moral fabric." Gambian President Yahya Jammeh called homosexuals "satanic." Even Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, a Harvard-educated Nobel laureate, has defended her country's anti-sodomy laws as "traditional values."
What effect do the laws have?
Gays are being arrested and being beaten by mobs. In February in Abuja, the Nigerian capital, a mob attacked and brutally beat and kicked a dozen gay men, nearly killing one man. They dragged four of the injured victims to the police station to be arrested for homosexuality, and there the police joined in the beating. Activists say Nigerian police have arrested gay men and tortured them into revealing the names of others. In Uganda, as soon as the law passed, one tabloid ran the cover story "Exposed! Uganda's 200 Top Homos Named," including photos; among those named were a hip-hop star and a Catholic priest. Many gay Nigerians and Ugandans are now trying to find asylum abroad. "Our clients here are terrified," said Jocelyn Dyer of Human Rights First, a Washington, D.C.-based group that represents asylum seekers. "These laws are emboldening mobs, and the long prison sentences are making it harder to flee and get protection."
What is the public health impact?
By driving homosexuality deep into the closet, the laws may interfere with the fight against HIV/AIDS. Uganda was once an AIDS success story, but that is now changing. The portion of the population that identifies as gay is tiny, but there are many more men in Uganda — and across Africa — who have sex with other men but do not identify as gay or bisexual. These men, many of them married, are now less likely to be honest with health-care providers and less likely to get the education, free condoms, and HIV testing they need. They are also more likely to contract the virus and spread it to their female and male partners. In Senegal, after several HIV prevention workers were imprisoned in 2008, the number of men seeking sexual health services in that area dropped sharply.
How has the West reacted?President Obama called the Ugandan law "a step backwards for all Ugandans" and said the U.S. was considering revoking aid. Three European countries have already cut aid to Uganda, while the European Parliament has recommended targeted sanctions, including travel and visa bans, against "the key individuals responsible for drafting and adopting" the laws in both Nigeria and Uganda. But in Africa, Western criticism only feeds into the belief that rejection of homosexuality is an African nationalist cause. "The West can keep their 'aid' to Uganda over homos," said Ugandan government spokesman Ofwono Opondo. "We shall still develop without it."
Africa's tolerant exceptions 
Not all African countries prosecute homosexuals. Consensual same-sex relationships are legal across most of Francophone Africa, including in Mali, Burkina Faso, Togo, Ivory Coast, the Central African Republic, both Congos, Gabon, and Chad. But the country with the greatest protection of gay rights is South Africa, where the post-apartheid constitution prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation. Based on that clause, South Africa legalized same-sex marriage in 2006, becoming just the fifth country to do so. Gays serve openly in the armed forces, and may adopt children. Still, while the laws ensure equal treatment, South African society is not wholly welcoming. A 2008 survey found that 84 percent of South Africans said homosexual behavior is “always wrong."

December 27, 2013

Non Believers in 13 countries Will get Death }Which Countries and method{

Atheists living in 13 countries risk being condemned to death, just for the beliefs (or non-belief) according to a new, comprehensive report from the International Humanist and Ethical Union out on Tuesday. All 13 countries identified by the study are Muslim majority.
The countries that impose these penalties are Afghanistan, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates and Yemen. With the exception of Pakistan, those countries all allow for capital punishment against apostasy, i.e., the renunciation of a particular religion. Pakistan, meanwhile, imposes the death penalty for blasphemy, which can obviously include disbelief in God. 
The study's interactive map gives a good, broad, overview of which countries punish apostasy and blasphemy by death (black), with prison time (red), or place legal restrictions on (non-)religious speech and thought (yellow):
The report is a more comprehensive version of a similar study released last year that identified just seven countries where atheists faced capital punishment, only half of this year's total. It also found much more widespread discrimination against atheists around the world. "Our results show that the overwhelming majority of countries fail to respect the rights of atheists and freethinkers," the study explains, noting that laws in some countries prevent atheists from marrying, attending public school, participating as a citizen, holding public office, or just existing at all. The authors, citing a Gallup study, estimate that about 13 percent of the world's population is atheist, while 23 percent identify as simply "not religious." 
Although not on the list of 13, Bangladesh receives some special attention in the report as a particular low-light. Several non-religious and atheist bloggers and journalists in the country have faced death threats and harassment this year in the wake of a series of government prosecutions for blasphemy. One blogger, Ahmed Rajib Haider, was murdered with a machete outside of his home. The report also incorporates assessment of general free speech protections in each country. Russia earned significant criticism in part because of its anti-LGBT "propaganda" laws. And North Korea, an aggressively secular state, received the report's lowest rating of "Grave Violations." 
Because of the U.S.'s strong constitutional free speech protections and lack of an official state religion, the country fared moderately well in the report, earning a "mostly satisfactory" rating. But the IHEU had some cautionary notes on how atheists are actually treated in the U.S., criticizing "a range of laws that limit the role of atheists in regards to public duties, or else entangle the government with religion to the degree that being religious is equated with being an American, and vice versa." Those laws include constitutional provisions still on the books in seven states (Arkansas, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas) barring atheists from holding public office. The authors add: 
While there is some legal remedy for clear religious discrimination by the government, it can often go unchallenged in situations where it is difficult, or personally disadvantageous or hazardous, to take a stand against authority, for example in prisons, the military, and even some administrative contexts.
So, which countries earned a somewhat elusive "free and equal" rating from the IHEU? The best-ranked countries included Jamaica, Uruguay, Japan, Taiwan, and Belgium.
  Source: The Wire


(Methods of Execution around the world)
iran hangings 242x260 iran hangings
 Teheran, Jan. 31 2013
Methods used in the last two years have included:
Lethal injection:
United States, China, Thailand
Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Sudan, Botswana, Japan, Singapore
China, Vietnam, Yemen, North Korea, United States
Saudi Arabia
United States
Biblical stoning also took place in other countries including Somalia and Afghanistan, but in areas not subject to government control.
Government Sources

Featured Posts

The Food Delivery/Ride Companies Wont Allow Drivers to be Employees But California is Changing That

                               Hamilton Nolan Senior Writer. After a monumental...