Update, Thailand Death Penalty Statistics

Death Penalty Statistics of Thailand for 19^th June 2012

All cases

Gender	Appeal Court	Supreme Court	Court Procedure Complete	Total
Male	328	274	52	654
Female	55	11	6	72
Total	383	285	58	728

Drug related cases

Gender	Appeal Court	Supreme Court	Court Procedure Complete	Total
Male	156	89	31	276
Female	45	10	6	61
Total	201	99	37	337

Homicide and other cases

Gender	Appeal Court	Supreme Court	Court Procedure Complete	Total
Male	172	185	21	378
Female	10	1	0	11
Total	182	186	21	389

If the Innocent are Executed?

At last there is closure to one of the saddest misjudgments in judicial history.

In 1980 the two month old child of Linda Chamberlain was killed in an atrocious manner while the parents of the child were on a camping holiday near Ayer’s Rock in Central Australia. The parents of the child were arrested and charged with the murder. In their defence they claimed that the child had been taken by a dingo, an Australian wild dog. But the prosecution claimed that the awful wounds on the child’s body had been caused by a scissors to simulate the claws and fangs of a dog. In the very emotional climate that followed news of the child’s death, the mother was found guilty and sentenced to thirty years imprisonment with forced labour. Her partner, accused as an accomplice, escaped with a suspended sentence. But Linda Chamberlain continued to protest her innocence, and three years after sentencing the mother was released from prison on the finding of clothes of the infant near the lair of a dingo, which supported Linda’s claim. But popular opinion still considered her a murderess and she suffered continual attacks and insults.

On the 12^th June of this year, a court has finally ruled that the death was indeed caused by a dingo. The mother still raises questions of her conviction on the energetic charge that she was the killer, by police who were eager to satisfy public opinion at the time.

At last justice is done. Comments on the story in newspaper columns are mostly asking, why the fuss about an event which happened long ago in a far off place. But one commentator asked:

“A small reminder for supporters of the death penalty: that crime created an emotional climate in which the mother was found guilty of murder and sentenced to 30 years hard labour. And if she had been condemned to death? Could she be brought back to life today to receive justice?”

                            Mother Linda and her child Azaria

If there were no other argument against the death penalty, this story would suffice to put an end to it. We are always met with indignant questions that follow a savage killing; is the murderer to escape retribution for his crime? No, the murderer must not escape punishment. But should not the execution of a person who is possibly innocent outweigh the supposed satisfaction of a revenge matching the savagery of a crime? The outcome reveals human fallibility. What seems certain is never so. And even if the judgement approaches the near certainty of a public event, what is the benefit of matching one atrocity with another, killing a perpetrator to prove that killing is wrong?

Capital Punishment's latest folly

"The lethal-injection quandary is playing out in a second lawsuit brought by The Associated Press and other news organizations to challenge five states that are violating a 2002 federal court mandate that the law requires every step of execution to be witnessed in behalf of the public. When the death chamber curtains have been drawn lately in Idaho, Washington, Montana, Arizona and Nevada, the main insertion of the lethal injection has already occurred. Some subjects have been seen to barely move, with suspicions arising about some inhumane trauma taking place out of sight.

This shortcut is obviously designed to lessen the risk of official embarrassment if something goes wrong. In the past, bungled injections have left some subjects writhing in agony on a gurney. The death penalty is barbaric. These problems are all reminders of why it is folly to pretend that state execution can ever be made humane."

From editorial, New Your Times, 26th May 2012

The fairy tale is that the executed fall into a peaceful death, like children lured to sleep by their parents

Yong Vui Kong: Answer to Singapore question

“Yong Vui Kong is young. But if we say ‘We let you go’, what is the signal we are sending?”

Mr. K. Shanmugam, Minister of Law and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Singapore has posed this question. As related in an earlier posting on this blog, Yong Vui Kong was arrested when 19 years old. He has been condemned to death on a drug charge. He is now 23 years old.

Here is an answer to Mr. K. Shanmugam:

The signal will say, strongly and clearly, human life is inviolable. The Government respects and acts in respect of this principle. It rejects the trade of drugs on the same principle, but recognises that killing is not an appropriate rejection of killing. It is as simple as that.

The message you send is that this young man has wagered human life for personal gain. He must be punished. But the punishment will involve rehabilitation, the chance to remake his life, based on the same conviction that human life must never be violated.

Meanwhile, you will admit that capital punishment is not a remedy for the problem of drugs. Drugs are like cancer. It is an ill of multiple facets. Cancer may be limited and perhaps cured by therapies which are almost lethal. But cancer must also be treated by enhancing the life and health of the patient; only the mentally and bodily strong survive. The incidence of cancer in the community must be tackled by ensuring a pure environment, eliminating noxious chemicals and pollutants. Likewise, drugs are a social ill. They multiply in a society filled with stress and disappointment.

There are brave new initiatives against the culture of drugs. The basis is an honest appraisal of the harm of drugs. Amphetamines are not as addictive and destructive as heroin and its derivatives. The injury of drugs cannot be measured by mere quantity, such that the death penalty applies to all on a quantitative scale. Some drugs can be tolerated to the same extent as alcohol or nicotine. Though their use is regrettable they cannot be measured on the scale of a human life.

Let Singapore look to its competitive, stressful, and very unequal society where the invitation to escape into a drug nirvana becomes attractive. Every life is valuable, life can be fulfilled in various ways, economic success is not the measure of a life.

The final message is an admission that the death penalty is not an effective counter to drug trafficking. Surely, Singapore’s history as the world’s highest executioner in proportion to its population has proved this point. Drugs are still traded, and the low level drug dealers are still executed. For what end? To promote the false premise that Singapore is serious about drugs? The experience of the great majority of nations rejects the claim. Let Singapore respond that its barbarity is ill placed. Your respect for human life will be warmly welcomed and you will receive encouragement and cooperation in joining efforts throughout the world to control the morbid trade of drugs and addiction.

Death of Thai Executioner

At the end of April, Khun Chavorat Jaruboon , the executioner of Bang Kwang prison, died of cancer.
His wife prayed that he would be accepted in the afterworld by the 55 persons he had executed. No doubt they will have learned the wisdom of pardon and be merciful to him.
The best that can be said of him is that he tried to make the process of execution as efficient as possible. One cannot say, as painless as possible, for execution is the most horrendous injury which can be inflicted on a human being.

Why did he volunteer to be executioner, the choice was his? He mentions that he needed the cash payments of  2000 baht he received each time he carried out a killing. He also enjoyed the prominence he received from his superiors and from those outside who knew his trade; in ordinary prison service he would have passed unnoticed. The British Embassy liked to have him on show at receptions.

A Canadian film, 'The Widow of St. Pierre' depicts a small French colony having neither a guillotine nor an executioner. A murder is committed in a moment of drunken rage. The murderer could have passed his life in some kind of penal servitude if he had not attracted the interest and attraction of the wife of the Governor of St. Pierre. To end the gossip of the island, a guillotine was imported. But an executioner was not available. Eventually, an illegal immigrant was pressed to take on the post.

Executions require an executioner. Khun Chavorat accepted the mandate of the State to execute as directed. But he was also a Buddhist and knew well that the primary teaching of the Buddha was a respect for all living things and a consequent prohibition on killing. He consulted the monk who accepted the bodies of those executed in the temple adjoining the prison, who told him that his act was good as it gave entry to a new incarnation for those whose fate it was to die for their crimes.
He accepted the command of the State and the rationalisation  of religion, ending the days of execution with a beer drinking session.

Such is the personal tragedy of the one who takes on our responsibility of punishment. Violence is accepted in the State, in the life of the executioner, and in the lives of all of us.
On an occasion when I met Khun Chavorat, he held out his hand in greeting. Perhaps he did not sense my hesitation to return the hand shake. It took a moment for me to realise that I too, citizen of a country which executes, was also an executioner. Chavorat was my deputy.

Justice, not yet

The story may be found in the archive (13/5/2007) of a Karen villager condemned to death for a murder committed 19 years earlier. The trial and sentence were blatant miscarriages of justice, but four years were to pass before the case was dismissed by the Appeal Court. Meanwhile the unfortunate villager, 66 years old and in poor health, was confined to prison. Bail was refused on the unlikely ground that he might try to flee, to where who knows. While he was in prison his wife died but relatives concealed the news from him as he was already in a depressed state.
He has been released, and has returned to his village in the mountains. There has been no compensation paid for the miscarriage of justice and the last years of his life spent in cruel confinement.
Here is his picture, a man who has suffered, and who still waits for justice.

Chalerm would bypass Thai and International Law

 The website of the Phua Thai Party has posted a statement by Police General Chalerm Yoobamrung, that discussion is imminent on implementation of the law relating to drug crimes, to the effect that when a person has been condemned to death for drug related crime, in a court of first instance, and in an appeal court, execution will be carried out within 15 days.

Is the Thai Phua Thai Party not aware that such a proposal is contrary to the Thai justice system which assures the right of all persons to refer their cases to the Supreme Court, and to submit an appeal for Royal Pardon?

Such a measure conflicts with Thailand’s 2^nd National Human Rights Programme, 2009 -2013, which includes abolition of the death penalty as an objective.

Finally, it is a measure which is in conflict with International Human Rights Law:

As contained in the UN Economic and Social Council resolution of 1984/50 of 25 May 1984

·        “the deprivation of life by the authorities of the State is a matter of the utmost gravity” par 51.

·        “To determine whether a particular offence falls among the most serious crimes,..., requires interpretation and application of the relevant international law rather than of the subjective approach opted for within a given State’s criminal code and sentencing scheme” par 44.

·        “With respect to particular offenses, the Commission on Human Rights and the Human Rights Committee have determined that a wide range of specific offences fall outside the scope of the “most serious crimes” for which the death penalty may be imposed. These include: ...., drug related offences, ...” par 51

·        “the Committee and the Commission have rejected nearly every imaginable category of offence other than murder as falling outside the ambit of the most setious crimes” par 52

·        “the death penalty can only be imposed in cases where it can be shown that there was an intention to kill which resulted in the loss of life” Summary 3

·         

The Phua Thai party must be aware that its human rights record, pursued so assiduously in the recent UPR process in Geneva, will be utterly destroyed by such blatant abuse of the law. The proposal must be immediately rejected and the plan of the 2^nd National Human Rights Plan reinstated.

Executions in Japan

  Today, 29th March 2012 three men were hanged at prisons in Tokyo, Hiroshima and Fukuoka. As is usual in Japanese death penalty practice, the men were hanged without notice to their relatives or lawyers. 2011 had passed without executions, the first time in 19 years that executions had not taken place. There are suggestions that the executions have been offered to appease a public who massively support the death penalty, to distract criticism  of a controversial consumption tax rise. Is human life so cheap in Japan that it can be sacrificed for political objectives?

A week ago we met with senior diplomats of the Japanese Embassy in Bangkok to hear an account of the commutation of sentence of a Japanese prisoner sentenced to death in Thailand. There were reports of flagrant human rights abuse in the passing of sentence and we were pleased to learn of Japanese concern relating to the case. Why are the same concerns not active in respect for the norms of humane procedure in Japan itself? And why does the concern for the value of human life not extend to outright rejection of capital punishment in a country where education and cultural humanism are the most advanced in Asia?

Mongolia Chooses Life over Death

During its universal peer review (UPR) Mongolia received 129 recommendations of which it accepted 126. Among those accepted were ratification of the 2^nd Optional Protocol to the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, which rejects the death penalty in all cases. The decision was approved by a very large majority of Mongolian Parliament with total support of the Mongolian People’s Party Group.

The task of removing the death penalty from the legal system will follow.

We welcome this courageous confirmation of human value by the Mongolian Parliament. The action is of great significance and shows the way forward for countries in the Asian region which refuse to accept the advice of peer countries and attempt to avert criticism by minor concessions, while retaining the cruel reality of capital punishment.

Twists and Turns of Singapore Justice

 The farcial saga of Singapore death penalty legislation continues.

 Judgement reserved at Yong Vui Kong's hearing
http://secondchances.asia/judgement-reserved-at-yong-vui-kongs-hearing/
secondchances, March 14, 2012

The Court of Appeal has reserved judgement in the case of Yong Vui Kong 
once again after he filed a criminal motion alleging unequal treatment.

Yong's lawyer Mr M Ravi, submitted in court this morning that his client 
has been a victim of unfair treatment, as Yong had been charged and 
convicted of a capital offence, while the prosecution withdrew charges 
against his boss Chia Choon Leng.

The prosecution had initially filed 26 charges against Chia. Five of the 26 
charges were directly related to Yong, stating that Chia had instigated 
Yong to carry drugs into Singapore. The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) 
later withdrew all 26 charges.

Chia recieved a discharge not amounting to an acquittal, and is currently 
held under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act. It is likely that 
he may be released in one to two years' time. Yong, on the other hand, 
faces the gallows.

Mr Ravi argued that this differentiated treatment was in breach of Article 
12 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality under the law, pointing 
out that a less culpable offender has been sentenced to death while the 
mastermind has not been prosecuted at all.

Mr Ravi also submitted that the AGC had exercised their discretion based on 
irrelevant considerations while ignoring relevant considerations in their 
decision to proceed with a capital charge against Yong. He stated that the 
prosecution had not given enough weight to the fact that Yong was young and 
in a vulnerable position when the crime was committed, while giving undue 
weight to the fact that Yong did not want to identify Chia in court, 
although his refusal was due to fear for the safety of his family.

He thus asked that Yong's conviction be quashed and his case be sent back 
to the AGC for review in light of the new circumstances.

Mr Ravi also pointed out that in the exercise of the law, one should also 
keep in mind the intention of Singapore's policy. He reminded the court 
that when the Misuse of Drugs Act was first amended to include the 
mandatory death penalty in 1975, its aim was to target the masterminds of 
drug syndicates, and not mere couriers. The then Law Minister, Mr Chua Sian 
Chin, highlighted this in his speech to Parliament:

It (the Mandatory Death Sentence) is not intended to sentence petty 
morphine and heroin peddlers to death.

However, Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong and Justices of Appeal Andrew Phang 
and V K Rajah asked if Chia could be charged under Singapore law for his 
alleged abetting and instigation, pointing to the fact that the act was 
committed in Johor Bahru, Malaysia.

After hearing from both sides, the court reserved judgement, asking that 
both the applicant and prosecution file additional written submissions on 
whether Chia's alleged offences can or should be tried under Singapore law. 
The submissions will be filed on Monday.

After the court delivers its verdict on this new appeal, Yong will have 
another three months to file a new petition for clemency to the President.