Capital Punishment Is Not an Option

Put rapists to death, Isaan folk say

THE NATION October 9, 2012 1:00 am

Most residents in the Northeast believe rapists should be sentenced to death, a poll conducted by the Isaan Centre for Business and Economic Research at Khon Kaen University revealed yesterday.

A survey of 810 respondents from 20 provinces in the Northeast, conducted on September 29 and 30, showed 43 per cent worried that they or people close to them could become victims. About 35 per cent said they wanted the authorities to punish sex offenders by sentencing them to death, while 32 per cent suggested life in prison. Around 18 per cent said they wanted the offender's sexual organ cut off, while 13 per cent suggested they be imprisoned for 10 years.

To reduce sex offences, 64 per cent suggested laws be amended to ensure severe punishment, while 17 per cent said drug abuse was the root cause of sexual crimes, and 14 per cent blamed the media for showing improper images. Up to 88 per cent said sex crimes often took place in isolated areas, 6 per cent said rapes usually took place on public transport, while 1 per cent said such crimes often happened at home.

A former Prime Minister considered that drug dealing could be eliminated by extrajudicial killings. A Deputy Prime Minister in the current government is trying to speed up legal process so that those condemned on drug charges can be speedily executed. And now the people of Isaan want the execution of rapists. All of these aberrations of  justice will continue in Thailand until the death penalty is abolished, and no longer be considered an option. Meanwhile, Prime Ministers and their Deputies, as well as the good people of Isaan, must learn that human life is inviolable, that Capital Punishment has not deterred any type of crime, and that a numerical majority cannot justify measures which are morally wrong. 

Jose Ramos-Horta appeals to Thailand

ถึงเวลาที่ประเทศไทยจะต้องยืนหยัดต่อต้านความตาย

โดย โฮเซ รามอส – โฮร์ตา

 วันที่ 10 ตุลาคม เป็นวันครบรอบปีที่ 10 ของวันต่อต้านโทษประหารชีวิตโลก ข้าพเจ้าภูมิใจที่จะพูดว่าสิทธิอันละเมิดมิได้ของการมีชีวิตได้ถูกบัญญัติอยู่ในรัฐธรรมนูญของประเทศติมอร์-เลสเตของข้าพเจ้า การต่อสู้เพื่อให้ได้มาซึ่งอิสรภาพของประเทศเราไม่ใช่ไม่มีการเสียสละ ในการแสวงหาศักดิ์ศรีและการตัดสินใจด้วยตนเอง บุคคลอันเป็นที่รักของเราหลาย ๆ คนต้องเสียชีวิต ซึ่งเป็นสิ่งเตือนใจตลอดเวลาถึงคุณค่าศักดิ์สิทธิ์ของการมีชีวิต ดังนั้น สิ่งแรก ๆ สิ่งหนึ่งที่เราทำหลังจากได้รับอิสรภาพเมื่อ 10 ปีมาแล้วคือการรับรองว่าจะไม่มีใครได้รับโทษประหารชีวิต

การเคารพชีวิตมนุษย์เป็นสิ่งที่สอดคล้องกับประสบการณ์ของมนุษยชาติในโลกปัจจุบัน ในมาตราที่ 3 ของปฏิญญาสากลว่าด้วยสิทธิมนุษยชนซึ่งบัญญัติขึ้นหลังสงครามโลกที่ได้คร่าชีวิตมนุษย์ไปหลายสิบล้านคน กล่าวไว้ว่า “ทุกคนมีสิทธิ์ที่จะมีชีวิต” ในทำนองเดียวกัน ประเทศกัมพูชาผ่านความป่าเถื่อนของทุ่งสังหารและมีรัฐธรรมนูญซึ่งยืนยันคุณค่าศักดิ์สิทธิ์ของการมีชีวิต ประเทศฟิลิปปินส์ซึ่งเป็นสมาชิกอาเซียนได้ยกเลิกโทษประหารชีวิตไปแล้ว

เมื่อปฏิญญาสากลถูกประกาศใช้ในปี ค.ศ. 1948 นั้น มีเพียง 8 ประเทศที่ยกเลิกโทษประหารชีวิต ในวันที่ 13 กันยายน ที่ผ่านมานี้ นาย บันคีมูน เลขาธิการสหประชาชาติ ได้รายงานว่าจำนวนประเทศที่ได้ยกเลิกโทษประหารชีวิตในรูปแบบใดรูปแบบหนึ่งมีจำนวน 150 ประเทศ ขณะที่อีก 32 ประเทศยังคงโทษนี้อยู่

แม้ว่าประเทศไทยจะยังคงมีโทษประหารชีวิตอยู่ แต่มีการประหารชีวิตเพียง 2 รายตั้งแต่ปี ค.ศ. 2009 เป็นต้นมา รัฐบาลไทยได้แจ้งต่อสหประชาชาติว่าไทยกำลังศึกษาความเป็นไปได้ของการยกเลิกโทษประหารชีวิต การยกเลิกโทษประหารชีวิตได้ถูกรวมไว้ในแผนสิทธิมนุษยชนแห่งชาติ ฉบับที่ 2 ปี พ.ศ. 2552 – 2556 และเมื่อวันที่ 15 สิงหาคม ที่ผ่านมานี้ มีการลดโทษนักโทษประหาร 58 คนให้เหลือโทษจำคุกตลอดชีวิต

ญัตติเรียกร้องให้หยุดโทษประหารชีวิตทั่วโลกถูกเสนอเข้าสู่สมัชชาใหญ่สหประชาชาติ 3 ครั้งในปี ค.ศ. 2007, 2008 และ 2010 ในสองครั้งแรก ประเทศไทยลงคะแนนเสียงคัดค้าน แต่ในครั้งสุดท้าย ปี ค.ศ. 2010 ประเทศไทยงดออกเสียง

ในเดือนธันวาคม จะมีการยื่นญัตติหยุดโทษอีกครั้งในสมัชชาใหญ่สหประชาชาติ ในฐานะมิตรของประเทศไทย ข้าพเจ้าหวังว่าประเทศไทยจะลงคะแนนเสียงสนับสนุนญัตตินี้ แม้ว่าในการลงคะแนนเสียงทุกครั้ง เสียงสนับสนุนจะมีเพียงพอที่จะผ่านญัตติโดยเสียงสนับสนุนเพิ่มจำนวนขึ้นทุกครั้ง เป็นสิ่งสำคัญที่ประเทศไทยจะลงคะแนนสนับสนุนเพื่อเป็นหลักฐานอย่างเป็นทางการของจุดยืนทางศีลธรรมของรัฐบาลและประชาชน ในเรื่องที่มีความสำคัญไม่ยิ่งหย่อนกว่ากัน ข้าพเจ้าหวังอย่างจริงใจว่าประเทศไทยจะดำเนินการสืบเนื่องคำสัญญานี้โดยการหยุดการลงโทษประหารชีวิตและหยุดการประหารชีวิต

เราจะสามารถเสนอเหตุจูงใจอะไรให้แก่ประเทศที่ยังลังเลเพื่อให้สนับสนุนการก้าวไปข้างหน้านี้? เป็นเวลาหลายศตวรรษแล้วที่ฝ่ายนิติบัญญัติและนักมนุษยธรรมได้ตระหนักว่าโทษประหารชีวิตไม่ได้ยับยั้งอาชญากรรมรุนแรง ซีซาร์ เบคคาเรีย นักอาชญวิทยาชาวอิตาเลียนได้ชี้ให้เห็นในงานที่มีชื่อเสียงของเขาเรื่อง Crime and Punishment (อาชญากรรมและการลงโทษ) ว่าการประหารชีวิตไม่มีผลในทางยับยั้ง ความมั่นใจว่าจะถูกจับและถูกลงโทษเป็นสิ่งขวางกั้นเพียงอย่างเดียวของอาชญากรรม

ข้อสนับสนุนการหยุดการประหารชีวิตมีหลายประการ สภายุโรปซึ่งมีสมาชิก 47 ประเทศ ได้ตั้งให้การยกเลิกโทษประหารชีวิตเป็นข้อแม้หนึ่งในการเข้าเป็นสมาชิก โดยประกาศอย่างกล้าหาญว่า “โทษประหารชีวิตเป็นสิ่งที่ผิด เหมือนกันกับการทรมาน” โทษประหารชีวิตไม่ได้ยับยั้งอาชญากรรม แต่ว่าเราจะได้ประโยชน์มากจากการเน้นถึงชีวิตมนุษย์ที่จะละเมิดมิได้ ในประวัติศาสตร์ของเอเชีย ได้มีการเน้นถึงความเมตตา กรุณา และการให้อภัยในทุก ๆ ศาสนาและคุณค่าทางวัฒนธรรม

ในฐานะประชาชนคนหนึ่งของประเทศพี่น้องในครอบครัวของประเทศในทวีปเอเชีย ข้าพเจ้าหวังว่าทุกประเทศในเอเชียจะร่วมกับติมอร์-เลสเตในการลงคะแนนเสียงสนับสนุนชีวิตเหนือความตายในสมัชชาใหญ่สหประชาชาติ ข้าพเจ้าภูมิใจอย่างยิ่งที่ติมอร์-เลสเตไม่มีโทษประหารชีวิตและโทษจำคุกสูงสุดคือ 25 ปี เราไม่มีโทษจำคุกตลอดชีวิต

โฮเซ รามอส-โฮร์ตา

ผู้ได้รับรางวัลโนเบลสาขาสันติภาพ (1996)

ประธานาธิบดีประเทศติมอร์-เลสเต (2007-2012)

อดีตนายกรัฐมนตรี, รัฐมนตรีกระทรวงต่างประเทศ

  

Time for Thailand to Take a Stand against Death

by Jose Ramos-Horta

(Published in Bangkok Post, Wednesday 10th October 2012)

October 10 marks the 10th World Day Against the Death Penalty. I am proud to say that the inalienable right to life is enshrined in the Constitution of my country, Timor-Leste. Our struggle for independence was not without sacrifice. Many of our loved ones died in the quest for self-determination and dignity, a constant reminder of the sacredness of life. Therefore, one of our first priorities upon gaining independence 10 years ago was to ensure that no one would be subject to the death penalty.

This reverence for human life is consistent with humanity’s experience of the modern world. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, formulated after the devastating world wars that caused the deaths of tens of millions of people, declares in Article 3 “Everyone has the right to life”. Similarly, Cambodia emerged from the savagery of its Killing Fields with a Constitution that also upholds the sacredness of life. The Philippines, another ASEAN member, has also abolished the death penalty.

At the time the Declaration was proclaimed in 1948, only eight countries had abolished the death penalty. On September 13^th of this year, the UN Secretary General Mr. Ban Ki Moon reported that the number of countries which have now, in one form or another, abolished the death penalty has reached a total of 150 States, while another 32 are retentionist.

Although Thailand retains the death penalty, there have been only 2 executions since 2009. The government of Thailand has told the UN that it is studying the possibility of abolishing the death penalty. Abolition of the death penalty has been included in Thailand’s National Human Rights Program of 2009 to 2013. On August 15^th this year, there was a remarkable commutation of sentence from execution to life imprisonment of all 58 condemned prisoners.

The resolution calling for a World Wide Moratorium on the Death Penalty has been presented at the UN General Assembly 3 times already in 2007, 2008, and 2010. Thailand on the first two occasions voted against the Moratorium, but in 2010, abstained.

In December, a vote on a Moratorium will again be submitted to the UN General Assembly. I hope, as a friend of Thailand, that it will vote in favor of the resolution. While the votes have been enough to get the resolution passed, with an increasing number of countries voting “Yes” with each occasion, it is important that Thailand votes “yes” as official evidence of the moral stand of its government and people. Just as importantly, I sincerely hope that Thailand follows up on such an official commitment by stopping the imposition of death sentences and executions.

What motivation can be proposed to favor a step forward for countries which still hesitate?  For centuries now, law makers and humanists have come to realize that the death penalty does not deter serious crime. Caesar Beccaria, an Italian criminologist pointed out in a famous work on Crime and Punishment, that execution was an ineffective deterrent, that certainty of detection and punishment were the only bar to crime.

There are many arguments for a Moratorium on execution. The Council of Europe, an association of 47 states, makes abolition of the death penalty a condition of membership, declaring boldly: “Capital Punishment, like torture, is simply wrong”. The death penalty doe not deter crime, however much is to be gained in emphasizing the inviolability of human life. In the history of Asia, there is an emphasis on mercy, kindness and forgiveness in all our faiths and cultural values.

As member of a brother nation in the family of Asian nations I hope that all the countries of Asia will join Timor-Leste in the UN General Assembly to cast a positive vote in favor of life over death. I am very proud that Timor-Leste does not have the death penalty, and that the maximum prison sentence is 25 years. We do not have life imprisonment.

Jose Ramos-Horta

Nobel Peace Prize Laureate (1996)

President of Timor-Leste (2007-2012)

Former Prime Minister, Foreign Affairs Minister

Vietnam court upholds drug smuggler's death sentence

Published:  Bangkok Post 7/10/2012 at 04:52 AM Newspaper section: News

Vietnam's Supreme Court has refused to commute the death sentence of a 24-year-old Thai woman who smuggled narcotics into the country, according to the Saigon Daily.

The Supreme People's Court in Ho Chi Minh City has upheld the lower court's death sentence against Preeyanooch Phuttharaksa, the newspaper said on its website.
Preeyanuch was arrested in October of last year after customs officials at Tan Son Nhut Airport found more than three kilogrammes of methamphetamine hidden inside her luggage. Before her arrest, Preeyanuch had sneaked drugs into Vietnam twice, according to the indictment.
She was handed the death penalty on June 26 by the People's Court and she later appealed to a higher court.
Preeyanuch, a student, had confessed to having been paid 50,000 baht by a Nigerian drug gang to bring the drugs into Vietnam from the west African country of Benin. She had met her Nigerian contact originally at a mall in Bangkok.
Thai officials have said that even if the Supreme Court upheld the death sentence, she could still petition the Vietnamese president for mercy. Vietnam executes criminals with lethal injections, which replaced the firing squad last year.
Statistics from the Thai Foreign Ministry show that about 100 Thai women are currently being detained for drug trafficking in several countries, including China, India, United Arab Emirates, Spain, Brazil and South Africa.
Some of them had married citizens of African countries and were forced to become involved in the trans-national drug trade, officials say.

Comment: 

Discussion 34 : 07/10/2012 at 01:50 PM34

It is surely opportune to point out that according to international law (as interpreted by the UN Human Rights Council) the death penalty may apply only for premeditated homicide, not for drug crimes. Firstly, the Government of Thailand should immediately abolish the death penalty for drug crimes, and then impress the principle on other members of ASEAN. Do it now, and urgently. Then take the responsibility to save our fellow citizen from unjust execution. The death penalty is not the solution to drug crimes!

On this website we have pleaded for clemency in the case of a young Vietnamese condemned to death in Singapore. Now we plead for a young Thai woman in Vietnam. Yes, she is foolish and has committed a criminal act for derisory payment. But she does not deserve to die. And her death will serve no purpose. Yes, confine her in prison; in time send her back to Thailand to serve a further prison term. She will realise the wrong she has done and her life will change.  She has life before her still, and a purpose to fulfill.

How fast do the wheels of justice turn?

On the same day that a man under the age of 60  is condemned to death in a Thai Court of First Instance, he is shackled. The shackles are welded to his ankles and are intended to remain until his execution or until the death sentence is rejected by a Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court, or by a Royal Pardon. In a judgement made by the Administrative Court such shackling is illegal and prohibited by the Thai Constitution. The judgement has been appealed by the Department of Corrections, three years have passed without a response from the Appeal Court, during which time the prisoner concerned has remained shackled.
In shackling prisoners the wheels of 'justice' turn very fast indeed.
However, when prisoners benefit from a Royal Pardon, the wheels of Justice turn slowly. A recent proclamation of Commutation of Sentence, dated 11th August, allows 90 days for its implementation. Which is hardly intended to mean that a delay of 90 days is mandatory or even advisable. Prisoners are assured by well meaning officials that the shackles will be removed, perhaps tomorrow. Is this extra frustration for a prisoner who has been shackled for years necessary or tolerable?   

Chalerm and the Way of Death

Death no deterrent

Re: ''Critics of swift drug executions blasted'' (BP, Aug 30).

In pursuing his campaign to hurry to the execution chamber prisoners condemned to death on drug-related charges, Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yubamrung appears to ignore the implications of the recent royal pardon extended to all prisoners condemned to death, for whom legal process is complete. Of the 58 people who have been pardoned, 37 were condemned on drug-related charges.

The Chalerm proposal to execute them within 15 days of an Appeal Court sentence, was already a travesty of national and international law, which still allowed submission to the Supreme Court, and the prerogative of the procedure of royal pardon. On a previous effort to accelerate executions initiated by Justice Minister Pracha Promnok, the Corrections Department had declared the legitimacy of waiting for a royal response. To their great credit the Corrections Department rejected the proposal of swift execution by the minister, quoting their right to act only on the delivery of the royal decision.

While Chalerm is to be lauded for his successes in seizing drugs and lowly carriers in the current campaign, he has still to capture the drug lords who are behind the whole drug trade. There is ample evidence that the death penalty is not a deterrent to the drug trade, nor according to international law, as interpreted by the United Nations Human Rights Council, does it even constitute a valid punishment for drug-related crimes. In fact, the death penalty is being recognised as an irrelevant and disproportionate response to all crimes. But in a Thai context, and with respect to royal prerogatives in Thailand, the attempt of Chalerm to preempt royal pardons is odious. If Chalerm had his way, none of the 37 pardoned people would have lived to benefit from this reaffirmation of the value of all human life and the opportunity to rebuild their lives. I suggest that he respects humane practices and announces a rejection of the way of death he is attempting to install.

DANTHONG BREEN
The Union for Civil LIberty

All death sentences for which legal procedures are completed, to be commuted to life imprisonment by royal pardon

It is reported from a prison source that an announcement was made this morning in Bang Kwang prison that all prisoners condemned to death and whose legal procedures are completed, will benefit from a royal pardon; their death penalty sentences will be commuted to life imprisonment. Confirmed by publication in the Royal Gazette of 11th August, Article 14:
มาตรา ๑๔ นักโทษเด็ดขาดซึ่งต้องโทษประหารชีวิต ให้ได้รับพระราชทานอภัยโทษลดโทษ
ลงเป็นโทษจําคุกตลอดชีวิต
This is a momentous event which may be the beginning of the end for the death penalty in Thailand

USA: a mentally retarded person executed in Texas despite protests

Marvin Wilson, African American convicted of murder in 1998, was finally executed Tuesday in Texas. He had a mental age of seven years. In the afternoon, the Supreme Court of the United States rejected a last resort by his lawyers.
This African American, 54, who was convicted in 1998 for a murder committed in 1992, was pronounced dead by lethal injection at 18:27 local time.

Several organizations defending human rights had protested this execution. Among them, Amnesty International said that the Supreme Court decision not to postpone the execution was "particularly disturbing". In 2004, Marvin Wilson had been diagnosed as mildly mentally retarded. Amnesty said that he had an IQ of 61.

Before his execution, he addressed members of his family, assuring them he loved them. "Take me home, Jesus, take me home, Lord," he also said, according to comments reported to AFP by a spokesman for the Prison Services of Texas. Then, turning again to his family, he concluded: "I love you all. I'm ready."

In 2002, the Supreme Court of the United States prohibited the execution of mentally retarded convicts who, because their disability, "would run the risk of wrongful execution". But the Court has never given a precise definition of mental retardation, leaving each state to set requirements to determine the level of disability intended by the prohibition. According to the criteria in force in Texas, Marvin Wilson did not suffer from mental disability.

Already on July 18 , Yokamon Hearn, a Black American, 34, was executed in Texas, despite evidence of mental disorder since childhood, and many protests. On July 23, however, the execution of a condemned man also suffering from a mental disorder was suspended in Georgia (southeast), two hours before the fatal time. The suspension was granted not because of mental disorder but on account of a technicality relating to a change in the procedure of lethal injection. US justice appreciates the niceties of technical efficiency rather than arguments relating to humanity.

Toshi Kazama in Bangkok

From 15th to 19th July, Japanese photographer Toshi Kazama, renowned for his photographs of young people who are condemned to death, was in Bangkok. He visited and met with prisoners who had been condemned to death in Bang Kwang prison. On the evening of the 17th he showed a selection of his work in the Foreign Correspondent's Club of Thailand. More significantly, on the 18th he addressed a meeting of government officials in the Department of Liberties and Human Rights of the Ministry of Justice, the office which is preparing the proposal to parliament on abolition of the death penalty in Thailand.
The message of Toshe Kazama is the value of human life. His images show the humanity of the condemned who are indistinguishable from young people around us. He engages with these young people, but engages equally with the families of murder victims. He reveals the surprising experience that all the families, whatever their initial anger against the murderers,  come in time to realise that vengeance cannot satisfy their pain, and reject capital punishment. The depth of healing they experience comes not from the execution of the perpetrator, but from forgiveness which releases them from a cycle of bitterness and hatred.

Chicanary

Is there no end to US chicanery on the death penalty? To give credit where it is due, the NYT is tireless in tracking down examples of indifference to the value of one human life.
Thailand, in revising laws regarding Capital Punishment, beware of taking the US as an example.

An Urgent Plea for Mercy

Published: July 6, 2012 Editorial, New York Times

The Supreme Court banned the death penalty for mentally retarded offenders a decade ago, but Georgia apparently has not gotten the message. It is the only state with a statute requiring a defendant to meet the unfairly heavy burden of proving retardation beyond a reasonable doubt. This stringent standard could be readily manipulated by experts, resulting in unconstitutional executions.

In a closely divided 4-to-3 ruling, the State Supreme Court wrongly upheld the statute on the grounds that the United States Supreme Court left it to the states to set procedures for deciding on retardation. This unjust procedural requirement effectively denies protection for the mentally impaired, as required by the Eighth Amendment.

This week, Georgia issued a warrant to execute Warren Lee Hill Jr., a death-row inmate convicted of murder, who has an I.Q. of 70. The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles is the fail-safe in the state’s criminal justice system, with a mandate to exercise mercy when the court system has failed to come to a just result. That is clearly true in this case. The trial judge found that Mr. Hill was mentally retarded by applying the fairer “preponderance of the evidence” standard in determining his mental impairment.

The State Supreme Court, however, ruled that Mr. Hill had to prove his mental retardation beyond a reasonable doubt. The dissent rightly argued that applying the tougher standard is unconstitutional because it imposes too high a risk that a court’s conclusion will be wrong. The dissent relied on the United States Supreme Court holding that it is unconstitutional to require a defendant to prove that he is incompetent to stand trial by any standard higher than a preponderance of the evidence.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit avoided correcting the state court’s stark constitutional error, claiming that a federal statute on habeas corpus review imposes severe limits so that Mr. Hill had to show “that no fair-minded jurist” could agree with the Georgia court. The United States Supreme Court denied a review of Mr. Hill’s case in June. He is scheduled for execution this month.

Jurors from this case said they would have sentenced Mr. Hill to life without parole if they had had the option. The family of the victim has said Mr. Hill should not be executed. The pardon board has the discretion and the duty to commute his sentence to life without parole. The legal and factual record strongly compels that just decision.

Singapore Yields Grudgingly on Death Penalty

Singapore which claims success in countering drug trafficking and ascribes the supposed success to its practice of mandatory death sentencing,  yields in exempting certain cases from mandatory death sentences. Academic studies have long disproved the effectiveness of executions in countering crime. But it appears that Singapore is finally forced to admit that mandatory executions are inappropriate when confronted with the inhumane absurdity of the practice. 
The death penalty will be changed, allowing judges discretion to impose life imprisonment in certain specific instances of drug trafficking and murder. The announcement of the change in policy says that the leniency will apply to mere couriers of drugs, not the drug kingpins and distributors. But when has Singapore succeeded in arresting the higher echelons of the drug trade, rather than the fumbling nervous couriers?
The relaxation of mandatory death sentences will apply under two conditions:
"First, the trafficker must have only played the role of courier, and must not have been involved in any other activity related to the supply or distribution of drugs. Second, discretion will only apply if having satisfied this first requirement, either the trafficker has cooperated with the Central Narcotics Bureau in a substantive way, or he has a mental disability which substantially impairs his appreciation of the gravity of the act."

But we must not think that Singapore is embracing any quality of mercy. The mandatory death sentence will be replaced by life sentence in prison, and caning. Singapore's executioner used to comfort those whom he was about to dispatch to a 'better life", by assuring them that their fate was preferable to life imprisonment in Singapore's jail. He may have been right. But just to give an extra tilt to the balance of justice, the new sentence throws in a measure of the abominable practice of caning, a process which leaves everlasting scars on the body, marks of degradation and reprisal. 

Singapore provides an elaborate cover story to justify its changes in sentencing. In reality the steps leading to the change are:
1. The contradictions in practice. While Singapore claims that the basis of its capital punishment policy is deterrence, the statistics of executions are hidden, no doubt to inculcate fear while maintaining a benign face.
2. Claims that Singapore justice is equal for all have been discounted The rich and well connected can escape sentence. The poor and unrepresented are hanged
3. The increasing juridical isolation of Singapore in its claim to be democratic while denying the right to life.
4. All of these faults of justice have come to a head in the case of the young Malaysian, Yong Vui Kong, arrested at the age of 19 whose story is told below in a posting made on May 25th last. Protest and outrage has been expressed across the world at the seeming certain execution of this young man. At last Singapore has found a way out. Yong Vu Kong is likely to be the first to escape execution, and relieve Singapore of acute embarasment.

We do not thank you Singapore for this concession, the alternative you offer is a regression and further diminution of respect for human rights.