Tuesday, April 23, 2019

Death Penalty Statistics; Update

Total prison population of Thailand: 382,895 (M 332,751: F 50,144)  2019 - 04 - 01

Condemned to death 558 (M 471: F 87)
- on drug charges 321 (M 241:  F 80)
- on other charges 228 (M 221:  F 7)
- on security issues 9 (M 9)

It is noteworthy that the majority of women are condemned to death for the opportunistic crime of drug dealing, very few for crimes of violence
For the first time, there is a category of death penalty for security issues. No explanation is provided.
In recent days there has been news of the dismantlement of a floating "seastead", located just outside the 12 mile sea limit of Thailand's territorial waters. The two owners, a male US national, and a Thai female, have fled and, to the astonishment of the world press an announcement by theThai navy claims that they are subject to a death penalty on a securiy issue.

Tuesday, March 19, 2019

"If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly" Macbeth

In a news item referring to the Lukman case on September 18 of last year, subject of an earlier posting on this website, Prime Minister Mahathir, obviously speaking fom the viewpoint of his earlier intention to totally abolish the death penalty, expressed a readiness to review the case. Words blowing in the wind, in the about turn recently reported and subject of the previous posting.
"Kuala Lumpur: Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir has indicated that the government should review the case of a man who had been sentenced to death for having medicinal cannabis oil.
Dr Mahathir said: " I think we should review that," when asked about the case of Muhammad Lukman, a 29-year-old father of one who was sentenced to death for possessing, processing and distributing medical marijuana (cannabis oil).
He was arrested in 2015 for the possession of 3.1 litres of cannabis oil, 279 grams of compressed cannabis and 1.4kg of substance containing tetrahydrocan nabininaol (THC). Muhammad Lukman was given the death sentence by the Shah Alam High Court on Aug 30preme light.” The Star/2018/09/18

However, Prime Minister Mahathir, while retaining Malaysia's attachment to the death penalty, you can invoke “General comment No. 36 (2018) on Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, on the right to life”. 
The document urges strict observance conditions in international law on imposing executions, emphasising that the "right to life" is the supreme right from which no derogation is permitted by situations of armed conflict or other public emergencies. The consequence is that in states which have not yet abolished the death penalty, "it must not be applied except for the most serious crimes, and then only in the most exceptional cases and under the strictest limits."

Voila! No need to go through a delay prone constitutional change Apply this criterion to the Lukman case, prohibiting his execution and ordering his release. Leave it to the dogs of war who have forced retention of the death penalty on you to invalidate the triple legal bond in the above quotation from the authoritative comment on your binding international UN ICCPR treaty.
 "But screw your courage to the sticking place, and we'll not fail"  Lady Macbeth

Monday, March 18, 2019

"The native hue of resolution is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought" Hamlet

"Malaysians against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet) is saddened by the alleged U-turn by Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad and his cabinet members who had decided earlier to abolish the death penalty, but now will apparently only abolish the mandatory death penalty.

On March 13, Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Mohamed Hanipa Maidin was reported as saying in Parliament that only the mandatory death penalty, which is the penalty for nine offences under the Penal Code and two under the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971, will be repealed.

It must be noted that the cabinet under Mahathir had, at a meeting in October 2018, decided to repeal not just the mandatory death penalty, but the death penalty for 33 offences under eight acts.

“The cabinet has decided to abolish the death penalty, and it will be tabled in the next Parliament sitting, which will begin on Oct 15, said Liew Vui Keong (Minister in charge of law in the Prime Minister’s Department)… ‘All death penalties will be abolished. Full stop.’”

This decision was applauded worldwide, and even celebrated at the recent 7th World Congress Against the Death Penalty in Brussels, which also highlighted the United Nations General Assembly’s seventh resolution for the moratorium on executions pending abolition that was adopted on Dec 17, 2018, with 121 countries in favour of it, including Malaysia for the very first time.

Abolition of the death penalty usually occurs as the end point of long process and depends on the firm decision of a leader endowed with strong conviction and courage. The ancient curse of vengence,  the "law of the talon" is deeply embedded in our conscience and cultures; the transit to abolitionis is always contended. We are not informed of the hidden opposition and failure of Malaysia's prime minister to carry through his promise. We must wait another day, another leader. A great opportunity has been lost. The Philippines dithers, Thailand threw away the opportunity in the final year of the observance of a declared moratorium which would have achieved de facto abolition.
One may salute Timor Leste which achieved independence in 17 years of struggle, and proudly declared rejection of the death penalty in its founding constitution.

Monday, February 11, 2019

The Death Penalty; do all opinions have equal right of respect?

“In some countries people say that the death penalty is a deterrent and it works. No, it doesn’t work because the death penalty is an act of violence and there is always the possibility of errors” Alex Mayer MEP

Are all opinions to be respected equally? It is a long held liberal and democratic principle that all opinions have equal right of repect. Countries that believe in the efficacy of the death penalty, such as Thailand, should be free to retain the death penalty, execute those condemned to death, and have the right to do so.

Now, it happens that the Council of Europe, with a membership of countries from the Atlantic Coast to the Pacific, imposes abolition of the death penalty on its member states, 47 in all, thus creating the largest group of abolitionist states in the world. What if a retentionist country approaches the Council of Europe for funding in a truly deserving cause, let us say for famine relief, or basic educational development? Can the Council of Europe impose as a condition of funding, complience with abolition of the death penalty to which it obligates all its own member states? Recalling the historical fact that the current poverty of African and South American countries is due to colonial exploitation and current prosperity of Council of Europe countries, does the latter have the moral right to impose human rights options on the former. In a world where advance in human rights valuation is slowly leading to advance in abolition over retentionist countries, the debate over values is likely to assume the form of might over right when a triumphant majority is faced with a recalcitrant minority who cling for whatever reason to a retentionist stance.

(At this stage in the argument we  invite our readers to contribute viewpoints)

Friday, February 01, 2019

Asia Bibi declared free by Pakistan's Supreme Court

30 Jan 2019 / international Print

Blasphemy acquittal upheld by Pakistan Supreme Court

Pakistan's Supreme Court has rejected a challenge to a Christian woman’s acquittal on blasphemy charges, according to a BBC report.
The Supreme Court has upheld its decision to overturn Asia Bibi's conviction and death sentence.
Asia Bibi was convicted in 2010 after an accusation that she insulted the Prophet Muhammad. Bibi spent eight years on death row. She has always maintained her innocence.
Last October, the Supreme Court's decision quashing her sentence led to protests by hardliners.
"Based on merit, this petition is dismissed," Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa said in court yesterday.
Asia Bibi could not leave Pakistan while an appeal request was pending.
Amnesty International said in a statement that Asia Bibi should be allowed reunite with her family and seek safety in a country of her choice.

Thursday, January 17, 2019

Outline of talk on Execution of Women, January 14th Bangkok

                                          Ginggaew Lorsoongnern, Executed, Thailand
                                       Mary Jane Veloso - sentenced to death in Indonesia
                                       Asia Bibi, Death sentence under review in Pakistan

14th January “Women, Imprisonment and the Death Penalty in Thailand”
  1. “Caminante, no hay camino, se hace camino al andar”

12 year journey, the way still unclear

  1. Assent of PUBLIC OPINION!
    UNGA 2018 123 countries 2016 117 countries
UCL campaigns over 12 yearss
a. Legal arguments
b. Religious arguments
c. Drugs
d. Case histories, “Roads to Death”
e. Rights of victims
f. Terrorist deaths

NOW: Abolition itself 
3. Experience of Robert Badinter: “I dreamt of a justice expressed in terms of liberty, the French people wanted a justice based on security”
Spoke throughout France on the right to life, met with disagreement and objections, always the same arguments. As in Thailand.

“Justice of reinsertion, or justice of elimination?”

“Lethal criminality does not depend on the presence or absence of the death penalty”

In 1981, François Mitterrand was elected president, and Badinter became the Minister of Justice. Among his first actions was a bill to the French Parliament that abolished the death penalty for all crimes, which the Parliament voted after heated debate on 30 September 1981
    4. Example of Ruth Ellis, executed in UK, 1954, women not to be executed.
    Mongolia: Abolition of death penalty for women 2002. Total abolition 2012
Abolition of execution of women. (Date of total abolition)
Austria (1950) The last woman sentenced to death by an ordinary court was Juliane Hummel. She was pole hanged for the murder of her five year old daughter, Anna, on the 2nd of January 1900 at Vienna.
Belgium (1996) The last woman sentenced to death by an ordinary court was Euphrasie-Félicie Deroux, for the murder of her child at the Cour d'assises of the province of Hainaut. She was guillotined at Mons on the 22nd of June 1846.
Denmark (1930). The last official execution was conducted in Copenhagen on ”Rødovre Mark” when Ane Cathrine Andersdatter was beheaded by axe on the 21st of December 1861. She had been sentenced to death for the murder of three of her five children.
England (1969). Ruth Ellis was hanged by Albert Pierrepoint at Holloway prison in North London on Wednesday, the 13th of July, 1955 for the murder of her boyfriend David Blakely
France (1981). On the 22nd of April 1949 Germaine Leloy-Godefroy (age 31) became the last woman executed in France, when she was guillotined for murdering her husband
Switzerland (1942). The last woman executed in Switzerland was Geneviève Guénat, who was beheaded by sword for murder at Delsberg, in the canton of Bern, on the 7th of September 1861.
Ireland (1990). Annie Walsh was hanged at Dublin’s Mountjoy prison on the 5th of August 1925, together with her nephew, Michael Talbot for the murder of her husband, Edward.

Thailand's 3rd Human rights plan, envisaged Moratorium (“Abolition) by end of 2014

5. Current Statistics for death sentences in Thailand
Total prison population 349,804 (M 303,717 F 46,087): 82% of imprisoned women are mothers
Condemned to death 517 (M 415 F 102)
- on drug charges 296 (M 201 F 95)
- on other charges 221 (M 214 F 7)
Currently 88 women: Totally unacceptable prison conditions, (“Centres of evil”!) for these, and all women prisoners

  1. Horror of execution of women
    “Successful” and botched executions
    Ginggaew Lorsoongnern,
    Tran Thi Bich Hang, see cover
    Mary Jane Veloso
    (see witch hunting and burning, also Thailand's intolerable prison conditions for women
The Thai women executed since 1932 were:
1.Yai Sonthibumroong, 25 February 1942
2. Ginggaew Lorsoongnern, 13 January 1979,  accomplice to murder of kidnapped child
3. Samai Pan-in, 24 November 1999, drug dealer

  1. Women
“ But how can we mechanize washing, cuddling, consoling, dressing, and feeding a child, providing sexual services, or assisting those who are ill or elderly and not self-sufficient? What machine could incorporate the skillls and affects needed for these tasks? Attempts have been made with the creation of nursebots and interactive lovebots, and it is possible that in the future we may see the production of mechanical mothers. But even assuming that we could afford such devices, we must wonder at what emotional cost we could introduce them in our homes in replacement of living labour...domestic work, and especially the care of children, constitutes most of the work on this planet, is of a highly relational nature and hardly subject to mechanization”

Women are irreplaceable!
So don't execute them!


Friday, December 28, 2018

Women, Imprisonment and the Death Penalty in Thailand

งาน “ผู้หญิง การจำคุก และโทษประหารชีวิตในประเทศไทย เวทีนำเสนอยุทธศาสตร์เพื่อการยกเลิกโทษประหารผู้หญิง ได้รับการสนับสนุนจากสถานเอกอัครราชทูตสวิตเซอร์แลนด์ประจำประเทศไทย โดยมีวัตถุประสงค์เพื่อยกเลิกโทษประหารชีวิตผู้หญิงในประเทศไทย เนื่องจากสถานการณ์การลงโทษด้วยโทษประหารชีวิตในประเทศไทยในปัจจุบันเลวร้ายลงอย่างมาก เพื่อที่จะยุติโทษประหารชีวิตประชาชนทั้งหหมด สามารถเริ่มจากยกเลิกโทษประหารในผู้หญิงก่อน วิธีการนี้ได้รับแนวคิดมาจากประเทศที่ยกเลิกโทษประหารชีวิตสำเร็จ โดยยกเลิกโทษประหารชีวิตผู้หญิงก่อน เช่น ประเทศฝรั่งเศส ประเทศมองโกเลีย และอีกหลายประเทศ เพื่อนำเสนอและอภิปรายถึงแนวทางดังกล่าว นอกจากนั้นแล้วภายในงานยังมีการอภิปรายถึงเหตุผลสนับสนุนเฉพาะที่ผู้หญิงไม่ควรถูกลงโทษด้วยโทษประหารชีวิต

ก ําหนดกําร

งานผู้หญิง กํารจําคุก และโทษประหํารชีวิตในประเทศไทยเวทีระดมความคิดเห็นข้อเสนอเพื่อการยกเลิกโทษประหารของผู้หญิงจัดโดยสมคมสิทธิเสรีภาพของประชาชน ในการสนับสนุนของสถานเอกอั


09.30 -10.00 ลงทะเบียน

10.00-10.10พิธีเปิด โดย ปิแอร์ฮักมันน์ หัวหน้าคณะทูตสวิสประจ าประเทศไทย

10.10 -10.15ฉายฉาก การประหารชีวิตผู้หญิงจากภาพพยนต์ เพชฌฆาต

10.15 -10.45ข้อเสนอยุทธศาสตร์กํารยกเลิกโทษประหํารในผู้หญิงโดย ดร.แดนทอง บรีน สมาคมสิทธิ


10.45 10.55 พัก

10.55-11.25สถํานกํารณ์ผู้หญิงที่ได้รับโทษประหํารในประเทศไทยโดย อังคณา นีละไพจิต


11.25 11.50สถํานกํารณ์เรือนจ ําไทยโดย กรกนก ค าตา นักกิจกรรมทางการเมือง

11.50 12.20สิทธิตํามกฎหมํายของเด็กที่จะได้รับกํารเลี้ยงดูจํากแม่โดย ณัฐาศิริ เบิร์กแมน นักกฎหมาย


12.20 12.50เปิดอภิปราย

12.5013.00 สรุปและปิดการประชุม โดย ดร.แดนทอง บรีน สมาคมสิทธิและเสรีภาพ


Seminar on the Death Penalty for Women in Thailand on 14th January

The aim of the seminar, in Thai language, is to promote abolition of the death penalty for women. Abolition of the death penalty in Thailand is opposed by over 80% of the Thai population, blocking a government intention to respond to a UN declared moritorium.  In such a case there is precedent, such as in the case of Mongolia, of Belarus, and of some European countries several decades ago, of abolishing the death penalty for women as a first step, which is more easily accepted by people in general. Women are rarely involved in violent crime; their crime is usually opportunistic to meet needs inherent in their special caring relationship ties with their children and families, in a society where their earning opportunity is limited. They are often enticed or tricked into crime by a male. Even facing a death penalty, their primary preoccupation is anxiety for their family rather than the horror of their own fate. The seminar will explore such arguments and propose that execution of women is especially inappropriate. The photograph above is the cover image of a study to be distributed to those attending.

10.00 – 10.10 Opening remarks, Pierre Hagmann, Deputy Head of Mission, Embassy of Switzerland in Bangkok
10.10 – 10.15 Scene of Woman Execution in The Last Executioner: the film directed by Tom Waller
10.15 - 10.45 Abolition of Death Penalty for Women, Dr. Danthong Breen, Union for Civil Liberty
10.45 - 10.55 Coffee and tea break
10.55 – 11.25 Death Penalty in Thailand, Angkhana Neelapaijit, National Human Rights Commission
11.25 – 11.50 Prison Condition of Women prisoners, Kornkanok Khumta, Political activist
11.50 – 12.20 Legal Right of Child to be Reared by Mother: Judgment of South Africa Constitutional Court 2007, Natthasiri Bergman, Human Rights lawyer
12.20 – 12.50 Reflection and discussion
12.50 – 13.00 Closing remarks, Dr. Danthong Breen, Union for Civil Liberty

Tuesday, December 11, 2018

Senator Leila M. De Lima

Senator Leila de Lima of the Philippines is imprisoned in the Philippines for her opposition to extra-judicial killings, a death penalty without legal procedure. She has expressed support on this website for total abolition. The following message is released from her isolated imprisonment.



Today, 10 December 2018, the world celebrates the 70th anniversary of that extraordinary document, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).  Born from the havoc of the Great Depression, World War II and the Holocaust, the UDHR was proclaimed by the UN General Assembly as “a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to be promoted by education, and, more optimistically, by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance.”

For 70 years since its adoption, the UDHR has been a bedrock of freedom and equality all across the world, lifting the lives of billions of people in the planet, influencing almost a hundred national Constitutions and inspiring numerous international, regional and national laws, institutions and mechanisms. For all its gains and achievements, the UDHR, as Eleanor Roosevelt (chair of the committee that drafted it) had prophesied, “might well become the international Magna Carta of mankind.”

Seven (7) decades since the birth of the UDHR, the work that it has set out for all of us to do is far from over. And, it will never be over as the world now faces an almost endless barrage of attacks on human dignity and freedom. 

UDHR proclaims that we are born free and equal, but millions do not stay free and equal as their rights have been trampled upon on a regular basis. We see this in various conflict-stricken places, like Syria, Yemen, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, and a number of countries in Central America.

UDHR promises that  we are all “entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms …can be fully realized”, but institutions and systems established in many countries to protect the dignity and liberty of human persons have either been mangled or undermined. We witness this in the decimation of democratic opposition in Cambodia, in the massive displacement and violence against the Rohingya minority in Myanmar, and the unabated killings and disappearances of thousands of poor Filipinos under Rodrigo Duterte’s bloody and sham “war on drugs.” 

            Now, more than ever, the 30 pathbreaking articles of the UDHR and the principles behind them have become relevant. And, it is the duty of every one – every individual and organ of society, as the UDHR puts it – to promote and protect our common rights and freedoms.

            There is observation about the growing absence of human rights leadership in the world today. There are dissension and discord in major liberal democracies. Some governments themselves, led mostly by populist demagogues and autocrats, have actually attacked their own people.  And, far too many politicians and so-called leaders – including those in my country, the Philippines – seem to have forgotten the UDHR.

            But, causes for continued optimism remain. Still intact are the admirable legacy of the UDHR, the endurance of some relevant conventions, treaties and international law, and the resilience of a vibrant global human rights movement. Hope springs eternal for human rights.

            The momentum and progress on the areas of human dignity and freedom now largely depend on the action and solidarity of some enlightened inter-government bodies, a number of progressive governments, and countless civil society organizations, including activist groups and individuals. This new movement for human dignity and equality has the advantages of reputational standing, institutional resources, and renewed passion. It is impervious to the partisan narrow-mindedness, selfishness and neglect of our leaders.

            We must then come together in our common defense of human rights. We cannot remain quiet and rely passively on governments. We the people ourselves have to act – act urgently and in solidarity with one another. We must be able to demonstrate, now and always, what the UDHR’s preamble declares that indeed the “the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.”                  

            Let us all shine our light for dignity, freedom and equality of every one. Each has the power and the duty to make a difference – to make our homes, communities, countries, and our world safer, just and more humane for all of us.

#Stand up for human rights!

                                                                                               LEILA M. DE LIMA

PNP Custodial Center, Camp Crame
10 December 2018

World Majority Against Death Penalty Increases Further


In a two yearly vote on a world wide moritorium on the death penalty, those in favour increase further
Today the international community offered unprecedented support to a UN call to halt executions when the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly considered a draft resolution on a moratorium on the use of the death penalty.

 A total of 123 UN member states – the highest number on record to date – voted in favour of the proposal, mirroring recent increases in the number of countries that have abolished the death penalty in law or practice globally.

A minority of countries, 36, voted against the proposal and 30 abstained at the vote. For the first time, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica and Malaysia positively changed their vote to support the resolution, while Antigua and Barbuda moved from opposition to abstention. Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Mauritius, Rwanda and Seychelles once again voted in favour of the call for a moratorium on executions, after they did not do so in 2016. Only two countries negatively changed their votes compared to December 2016, with Bahrain switching from abstention to voting against and Suriname from voting in favour to abstention.

The increase in the support for the draft resolution offers yet another indication that the world’s direction on the death penalty continues to be in favour of its eventual abolition. Since the adoption of the last UNGA moratorium resolution in 2016, indefinite stays of execution were put in place in Gambia, Malaysia and Papua New Guinea and several other countries have taken important steps to move in this direction. In 2017 Guinea and Mongolia each abolished the death penalty for all crimes and Guatemala became abolitionist for ordinary crimes only. Burkina Faso was the last country to have removed the death penalty from its Criminal Code last June, while Gambia ratified the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, last September. The weight of the death penalty is carried by an isolated group of countries. In 2017 executions were reported in 22 UN member states, 11% of the total. Of these executing countries, only 11, or 6%, were “persistent” executioners, meaning that they carried out executions every year in the previous five years.
Amnesty International & Comunità di Sant'Egidio published on November 16th, 2018

Wednesday, November 07, 2018

Asia Bibi

                                        The condemnation to death of Asia Bibi
The trial and condemnation to death of Asia Bibi is certainly one of the most horrifying examples of death penalty. She is a Christian Pakistani woman, convicted and sentenced to death by a Pakistani Court in November 2010. The facts of the case have always been subject to fierce debate. Yet, inconsistencies in witness testimonies and fragmented evidence did not prevent the court from securing Bibi’s conviction and from passing the death sentence. In 2014, the Lahore High Court upheld her death sentence. Nonetheless, the execution was stayed in July 2015, when the Pakistani Supreme Court agreed to hear her appeal. It was listed to take place during October 2016. Unfortunately, the appeal had to be adjourned after one of the three judges due to hear the case, Justice Iqbal Hameed-ur-Rehman, recused himself quoting a conflict of interests. Two years later, on October 31, 2018, the Supreme Court handed down the judgement acquitting Asia Bibi. The judgment indicated that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. 

The decision of Pakistan’s highest court appears to matter little to the protesters. They have little respect for law and legal procedure.

Obscurity surrounds the case. Despite the acquittal, it was announced that Bibi had not been released, and that in any event, she would not be allowed to leave Pakistan. Then it was announced that she had left for an unknown destination. Clearly, if released in Pakistan she would have been brutally murdered by frantic mobs. Her husband and lawyer, are also trying to find refuge abroad, as are two of the judges who agreed to her acquittal.  Even before the acquittal, Shabez Bhutti, Minister of Minorities, and Salman Taseer, Governor of Punjab, who visited Asia Bibi in prison and argued her innocence were assassinated. The former was murdered by Taliban, the latter by his own bodyguard. 
It is clear that forcing Asia Bibi, now 47 years of age, to stay in Pakistan amounts to the imposition of a death sentence, what changes is that the execution will most likely come at the hands of an angry mob, not under the control of the justice system. This prediction is not far removed from reality, protesters are already calling for Asia to be hanged, and a mullah in Peshawar has promised a fortune, 500,000 rupees to anyone who kills her.

While details of the original offense are obscure, it relates to the alleged ritual impurity of a non-Muslim woman in an environment of fanatical religion. What was Asia Bibi accused of?

The trial stems from an argument Asia Bibi had with a group of women in June 2009.They were harvesting fruit in the full heat of the sun when a row broke out about a cup of water. Asia herself describes the incident which took place beside a well:

"I pull up a bucketful of water and dip in the old metal cup resting on the side of the well. The cool water is all I can think of. I gulp it down and I feel better. I...fill the cup again, this time holding it out to a woman next to me...She smiles and reaches out...There is a cry, 'Don't drink that water, it's haram!
'Listen all of you, this Christian has dirtied the water in the well by drinking from our cup and dipping it back in.. Now the water is unclean and we can't drink it"

Prosecutors alleged that in the row which followed, the women said Asia Bibi should convert to Islam and that she made offensive comments about the Prophet Muhammad in response.
She was later beaten up at her home, during which her accusers say she confessed to blasphemy. She was arrested after a police investigation.

Whatever the details, the fault is trivial. What arose in the subsequent verbal brawl cannot be more serious than the alleged uncleanliness. There are photographs of demented crowds calling for the hanging of Bibi. This is certainly not the teaching of the Prophet whose action to save the life of a woman taken in adultery is as striking as an identical event in the life of the founder of another world religion. Such actions strike at the heart of humanity, beyond all laws, religions, legal systems and ethical standards. 
Details of the incident are taken from "Blasphemy, the true heart-breaking story of the woman sentenced to death over a cup of water" Asia Bibi, who is illiterate, related the event in secret to a French journalist, through her husband who alone could visit her. Hachette Digital, London 2011
The book reveals her deep devotion to her husband and five children, all of whose lives are in danger.
                                                      Men call for death of Bibi


   In surat 5 of verse 32, the Koran teaches that anyone who kills an innocent person kills all  mankind, and anyone who saves a life saves all mankind

November 10: Scared of Muslim backlash, UK denies asylum to Asia Bibi

November 14: A voice of reason
Prominent British Muslims, including three imams - Qari Asim, Mamadou Bocoum and Dr Usama Hasan - have written a letter to Home Secretary Sajid Javidasking him "to make a clear and proactive statement that Britain would welcome a request for sanctuary here" The letter, also signed by MPs from across the political divide, goes on: "We are confident that action to ensure Asia Bibi and her family are safe would be very widely welcomed by most people in Britain, across every faith in our society. "If there are intolerant fringe voices who would object, they must be robustly challenged, not indulged."

November 12: Bibi's lawyer, Saif-ul-Mulooktold the Bild am Sonntag German newspaper that Asia Bibi "would be happy if she could leave for Germany with her family."

Bibi, who was acquitted by Pakistan's Supreme Court on blasphemy charges on October 31, is reportedly still in Pakistan despite her release from jail. Her life is in extreme danger, from frantic Muslim extremists 
Mulook fled Pakistan to the Netherlands a day after the court's decision.