China: 8 executed

June 25, 2009: eight people sentenced to death for drug production and trafficking were executed in China.

They were identified as Wang Xilin, Lu Gang, Zhou Zhenjun, Wang Li, Li Ersa and Yan Chaomin were executed for four cases of drug production and sales. The court did not disclose the locations of the executions.

Tian Yulai was executed in Lanzhou, capital of northwest China's Gansu Province, for trafficking. And in Quanzhou City in southeast China's Fujian Province, Liu Huiyang was executed for manufacturing narcotics in 2005.

Sources: Shanghai Daily, 26/06/2009

Troy Davis: Justices delay death row inmate's appeal

The U.S. Supreme Court delayed a decision on whether to accept an appeal from a Georgia death row inmate who has gained international support for his claims of innocence in the the murder of a Savannah police officer 2 decades ago.

Troy Davis' case has earned the support of leaders including the pope and former President Jimmy Carter.

The justices were scheduled to announce Monday whether they would take the case of Troy Davis, but no order was released. The court is expected to take up the matter again in September.

Last fall, the Supreme Court granted Davis a stay of execution 2 hours before he was to be put to death. A month later, the justices reversed course and allowed the capital punishment to proceed, but a federal appeals court issued another stay.

The high court's latest delay means Davis will continue to sit on death row.

His supporters Monday delivered about 60,000 signatures in petitions to Chatham County, Georgia, District Attorney Larry Chisolm, calling for a new trial.

"This delay is an indication that the Supreme Court is concerned by the gravity of Troy Davis' innocence claims," said Laura Moye, director of Amnesty International USA's Death Penalty Abolition Campaign. "We will continue to call on all authorities, including the Supreme Court, to finally hear the evidence that has motivated hundreds of thousands of people worldwide to raise their voices and demand justice."

Davis has always maintained his innocence in the 1989 killing of Officer Mark MacPhail. Witnesses claimed Davis, then 19, and 2 others were harassing a homeless man in a Burger King restaurant parking lot when the off-duty officer arrived to help the man. Witnesses testified at trial that Davis then shot MacPhail twice and fled.

But since his 1991 conviction, seven of the nine witnesses against him have recanted their testimony. No physical evidence was presented linking Davis to the killing of the police officer. The Georgia Pardons and Parole Board last year held closed-door hearings and reinterviewed Davis and the witnesses. The panel decided against clemency.

MacPhail's mother, Annaliese, told CNN at the time, "This is what we were hoping for, and I hope pretty soon that we will have some peace and start our life, especially my grandchildren -- my grandson and granddaughter. It has overshadowed their lives."

After the justices in October refused to grant a stay of execution, Davis' sister, Martina Correia, told CNN she was "disgusted" by the decision.

"It doesn't make any sense," she said. "We are praying for a miracle or some kind of intervention. We will regroup and fight. We will never stop fighting. We just can't be discouraged. The fight is not over 'til it's over."

10 days after the high court refused last October to intervene, a federal appeals court in Georgia granted a temporary stay of execution. Since then, further appeals by Davis' legal team have dragged on for 8 months.

Prominent figures ranging from the pope to the musical group Indigo Girls have asked Georgia to grant Davis a new trial. Other supporters include celebrities Susan Sarandon and Harry Belafonte; world leaders such as former President Jimmy Carter and former Archbishop Desmond Tutu of Cape Town, South Africa; and former and current U.S. lawmakers Bob Barr, Carol Moseley Braun and John Lewis.

Source: CNN,June 29, 2009

Iran: Mandatory death penalty for apostates scrapped

Proposed amendment reportedly shot down after international outcry.

A member of Iran's Parliament reportedly revealed last week that the country's Parliamentary Committee has stricken the mandatory death penalty for those who leave Islam from proposals for an amended penal code.

Citing a BBC Persian news service report on Tuesday (June 23), United Kingdom-based Christian Solidarity International (CSW) announced on Friday (June 26) that a member of Iran's Legal and Judicial Committee of Parliament, Ali Shahrokhi, had told the Iranian state news agency (IRNA) of the decision to eliminate the mandatory death penalty amendment, which had drawn international protests.

The Parliamentary Committee had come under intense international pressure to drop clauses from the Islamic Penal Code Bill that allowed stoning and made death the mandatory punishment for apostates.

The new penal code was originally approved in September 2008 by a preliminary parliamentary vote of 196-7.

In Fridays statement, CSW said that the bill must now pass through a final parliamentary vote before being sent to Iran's most influential body, the Guardian Council, which will rule on it.

The council is made up of 6 conservative theologians appointed by Irans Supreme Leader and 6 jurists nominated by the judiciary and approved by Parliament. This body has the power to veto any bill it deems inconsistent with the constitution and Islamic law.

The Christian and Baha'i communities of Iran are most likely to be affected by this decision. Iran has been criticized for its treatment of Bahais, Zoroastrians and Christians, who have all suffered under the current regime.

Joseph Grieboski, president of the Institute on Religion and Public Policy, said the timing of the announcement of the decision during protests over contested elections might not be coincidental.

"Were the regime to maintain [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad's presidency then pass and enforce a restrictive penal code, the international pressure on Iran would be unbearable for the regime," said Grieboski. "I do not consider it a sign of opening up. Instead, I see it as a sign of self-preservation."

Security Backlash

Huge protests over the election results demonstrated considerable opposition to the Iranian government's heavy-handed tactics, and although the official churches have taken no official stance, many Christians have supported the opposition, according to sources connected to social networking sites.

In the face of the massive protests, a spokesman for the foreign ministry, Hassan Qashqavi, released a statement condemning Western involvement in Iranian affairs and accusing the BBC and Voice of America networks of spreading "anarchy and vandalism."

This passing of blame bodes ill for minorities in the country, including Christians, whom the Iranian government sees as pawns of the West; they could expect even harsher treatment in a feared post-election clamp-down.

"Since minorities, especially Baha'is and Christians, are often seen as fronts for the West, we can expect that they will feel the greatest backlash by the regime during the protests, and I would argue an even worse crackdown on them if Ahmadinejad and [Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei come out of this," said Grieboski.

An Iranian Christian who requested anonymity told Compass that both Christians and Iranians as a whole were tired of the dictatorial regime and asked for prayers for relief.

"The people are really tired, they have no hope, mentally, financially, spiritually, it is really difficult to live in Iran," the source said. "You can't have a private life, you can't make a decision about what you believe, women can't even decide what to wear. We just pray for the whole nation."

The Iranian source was reticent to predict how the government might react to Christians following the elections but said that if there were a reaction, they could be among the 1st victims.

"So what the reaction of the government will be we can't be 100 % sure," the source said, "but they could have a very radical reaction."

Iranian Christians Maryam Rostampour, 27, and Marzieh Amirizadeh Esmaeilabad, 30, who were arrested on March 5 for their Christian activities, are still held in the notorious Evin Prison. The facility has drawn criticism for its human rights violations and executions in recent years.

Compass has learned that the women have been placed in solitary confinement.

Source: Compassdirect.org, June 30, 2009

Iran: Human rights lawyer Mohammad Mostafaei has been arrested

Iran Human Rights, June 29: According to sources in Iran, Mohammad Mostafaei, lawyer of more than 20 minors on the death row, has been arrested by the Iranian authorities.

According to some sources he was arrested 5 days ago. We have no further details about where he is being kept or why he was arrested.

According to our sources Mr. Mostafei was arrested on Thursday June 25.

Following the last two week’s pro-democracy demonstrations, several known human rights defenders and lawyers such as Abdolfattah Soltani have been arrested in Iran.

Iran Human Rights has earlier issued warning that those arrested are at risk of torture and forced confessions.

Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, spokesman of Iran Human Rights, said: "The United Nations should ask Iranian authorities to immediately release all those arrested and send a special envoy to Iran in order to guarantee their safety".

Source: IHR, June 29, 2009

California's lethal-injection plan is proven to be inhumane

On Tuesday, California prison officials will hear public comment on their proposed procedures for conducting lethal-injection executions. Although officials claim their goal is to achieve humane executions, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation plans to stick with a three-drug protocol that risks just the opposite.

The protocol is so fraught with danger that it would be illegal to use to euthanize a dog or cat in this state.

It involves the administration of three drugs: first, an anesthetic; second, a drug that paralyzes the inmate; and third, potassium chloride to stop the heart.

Activists have denounced the practice of paralyzing inmates before executing them, and for good reason. Executioners are typically not qualified to administer anesthesia, let alone monitor the inmate's reaction to the drug throughout the execution. If the inmate is paralyzed and the anesthesia fails, he will feel the excruciating burn of the potassium chloride as it scorches through his veins, but will be unable to indicate he is in pain. His death will appear peaceful, and the public will never know that yet another execution has been botched.

Such a procedure would be illegal if used on animals in California. Even when accompanied by anesthesia, paralytic drugs are generally banned in euthanasia because of the risk that failed anesthesia can go undetected in a paralyzed animal. For that reason, a shelter worker who administers a paralytic during animal euthanasia is guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a $2,000 fine and a year in jail. That's been the law in this state since 1978.

For the past three decades, the primary method of animal euthanasia in California has been a simple, one-drug procedure: the overdose of a barbiturate called sodium pentobarbital. This method causes a painless death, usually within a few minutes. When it revised the law in 1998 to outlaw another dangerous euthanasia method — carbon monoxide — the California Senate Judiciary Committee wrote that "there is a general consensus that a lethal injection of sodium pentobarbital is the most humane way to euthanize unwanted dogs and cats."

California is not alone. Euthanasia by use of a single drug — sodium pentobarbital — is the preferred method of the American Veterinary Medical Association, the Humane Society of the United States, and every major animal welfare organization in the country. The vast majority of states — 42 out of 50 — prohibit the use of paralytics in animal euthanasia.

If this method of killing is unconscionable for animals, why does California insist on using it to execute people? Prison officials cannot claim ignorance. There are decades, even centuries, of evidence that these drugs have the potential to inflict a painful and horrifying death.

In 1868, a Swedish physiologist described paralytic drugs as "the most cruel of all poisons." In the 1970s, military officers in the Philippines, Brazil and Uruguay used paralytics to torture political prisoners. The Humane Society's current training manual states that its members have a "moral and ethical duty" to end the practice of injecting animals with paralytic drugs.

Some Californians believe that inmates should suffer the same painful death that they inflicted on their victims. We cannot deny the grief and rage that accounts for these emotions, but the Constitution requires humane executions. It is time to abandon a drug that has been used to torture both people and animals, and has been rejected by veterinary and animal welfare communities for decades.

Source : Ty Alper, Special to the Mercury News, 06/27/2009. TY ALPER is the associate director of the Death Penalty Clinic at the University of California-Berkeley School of Law, and is the author of "Anesthetizing the Public Conscience: Lethal Injection and Animal Euthanasia." He wrote this article for the Mercury News.

New Mexico death penalty repeal set to take effect

Although New Mexico officially abolished the death penalty, that doesn't mean there won't be another execution in the state.

There are still 2 men on death row, their sentences untouched by the repeal and the governor unwilling to commute them. 2 other potential death cases are in the legal pipeline, awaiting trial. Conceivably, the state could end up putting someone to death a decade or 2 after capital punishment was outlawed, given the drawn-out appeals typical in such cases.

"Nonsensical," sums up Jeff Buckels, head of the capital crimes unit of the New Mexico Public Defender Department.

"It makes no sense to be seeking the death penalty in a state which has abolished the death penalty," he said.

After a decade of effort, capital punishment opponents managed to persuade the Legislature in March to replace lethal injection with a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.

The new law applies to certain murders committed as of July 1 and made New Mexico just the 2nd state , after New Jersey, to ban executions since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty 33 years ago.

Unlike New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, who commuted the sentences of eight men when he signed the death penalty repeal in 2007, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson declined to commute the sentences of Robert Fry of Farmington and Timothy Allen of Bloomfield.

The Legislature clearly intended the new law to go into effect on July 1 and the governor respects that decision, Richardson spokesman Gilbert Gallegos said.

"He has no intention of commuting the sentence of anyone facing the death penalty before that effective date," Gallegos said this week.

Fry and Allen are still in the midst of their appeals processes, with no execution dates in sight. New Mexico has executed only one person since 1960: child killer Terry Clark in 2001.

The state Supreme Court is being asked, meanwhile, to rule out the possibility of death sentences in 2 pending murder cases. Michael Astorga is charged in the shooting of a Bernalillo County sheriff's deputy and Billy Joe Watson is accused of hiring another man to kill a Roosevelt
County rancher.

Among other arguments, their lawyers contend it would be unconstitutional to pursue death sentences now that New Mexico has decided it is no longer an acceptable punishment.

"It's over with, and the repeal applies to everybody," said Ruidoso lawyer Gary Mitchell, who represents Watson.

The attorney general's office disagrees, saying the repeal was specific and clear in its effective date and that defendants in pre-July 1 cases don't benefit from the new law.

"We certainly think the community is really expecting us to do everything we can to pursue justice and keep the community safe," said Pat Davis, a spokesman for Bernalillo County District Attorney Kari Brandenburg, who is prosecuting Astorga in the high-profile case.

Defense lawyers argue the state shouldn't continue to pour money into death-eligible cases, which require a heightened level of scrutiny and are more expensive than others.

"They are sucking up resources that could be better used to promote public safety," said defense lawyer Mark Donatelli, a longtime lobbyist for repeal.

Viki Elkey, executive director of the New Mexico Coalition to Repeal the Death Penalty, said her group was advised that a death penalty repeal could not be written to apply retroactively or to affect pending cases.

The new law might have been crafted to effectively preclude any further executions , for example, by eliminating the procedures for lethal injection, Donatelli said. But doing that could well have made it harder to get the repeal through the Legislature, he said.

Death penalty opponents are hopeful that court decisions, or commutations by a future governor , Richardson leaves office next year , or some combination of the 2 will rule out any further executions.

Such an execution "would be an appalling spectacle," Donatelli said.

Source: Associated Press, June 27, 2009

Senior Iranian cleric says rioters should be severely punished

Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami says those involved in 'destructive acts' during postelection protests are enemies of God and 'should receive the severest of the punishments.'

A senior cleric who is close to Iran's supreme leader said in a Friday sermon that anyone who engaged in violence in protests over alleged fraud in the reelection of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should receive the "severest of punishments," according to state broadcasting.

Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami, a confidant of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, described the unsanctioned public gatherings and rallies as being against Islamic law.

In the sermon, he described anyone taking part in "destructive acts" as muharib, enemies of God whose annihilation by true believers is religiously permitted.

"Anyone who takes up arms, be it guns or knives, is a muharib and Islam has said that muharib should receive the severest of the punishments," said Khatami, who shares a last name with a popular former reformist president but has opposite political views.

After refusing to grant demonstrators permission to protest election results, officials have increasingly cast those who massed in the streets for a series of peaceful rallies as extremists opposed to the government or dupes of antagonistic foreign leaders.

Khatami did not directly equate peaceful protesters with rioters, but most observers say that distinction may be lost on the club-wielding pro-government Basiji and Ansar-e Hezbollah vigilantes who have allegedly been beating demonstrators. Critics regard their actions as an attempt to terrorize dissidents into submission.

Instead, the cleric thanked the Basiji forces for their help in quelling unrest. Khamenei last week appeared to give such militiamen sanction to crack down violently on protesters, sparking fiery riots through central Tehran the following day.

Khatami also urged the courts to come down hard on those arrested in connection with the protests.

"I call on officials of the judicial branch to deal severely and ruthlessly with the leaders of the agitations whose fodder comes from America and Israel so that everyone learns a lesson from it," he said.

In Washington, President Obama offered his highest praise yet for Ahmadinejad's challenger, and said more strongly than before that his long-standing diplomatic goal of engagement with Iran could be affected by the election crisis.

"There is no doubt that any direct dialogue or diplomacy with Iran is going to be affected by the events of the last several weeks," Obama said after a White House meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. "And we don't yet know how any potential dialogue will have been affected until we see what's happened" in Iran.

Obama said that despite the Iranian government's crackdown on protests, the U.S. and its allies have a national security interest in preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Tehran has denied that its nuclear program is aimed at building nuclear bombs.

The president says Iranians must determine the outcome of the country's election, but went further Friday in hailing Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the reform candidate who has continued to challenge the results.

In an earlier remark, Obama questioned whether Mousavi's election would affect key issues. Since then, Obama said, it's become clear that Mousavi has "captured the imagination" of pro-reform protesters.

"He has become a representative of many of those people who are on the streets and who have displayed extraordinary bravery and extraordinary courage," Obama said.

Around Iran on Friday, small groups of people released green and black balloons in symbolic acts of protest meant to honor Mousavi and those killed in the election aftermath.

Most independent analysts and Iran experts regard the results of the June 12 election, which Ahmadinejad claimed to have won in a landslide, as highly suspicious.

Western officials and the United Nations have decried a broad crackdown on dissidents and activists. Diplomats at a meeting of wealthy Group of 8 countries in Italy issued a statement condemning the violence in Iran.

Russia, often a backer of Iran, joined the West in noting some unease about the Iranian government's reaction to the unrest.

"Naturally, we express serious concern over the use of force, the death of civilians," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in Trieste, Italy, according to Interfax news agency. "We do not interfere in the internal affairs of Iran, and we base our position on the principle that all issues that have arisen in the context of the election will be resolved in accordance with democratic procedures."

Khatami criticized Western leaders and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon as hypocrites. "You are a miserable fellow," he said, addressing Ban. Many children were killed in Israel's incursion into the Gaza Strip this year, he said, adding, "You were not worried then?"

The election, which reportedly drew 85% of eligible voters, showed the "power and grandeur" of Iran's Islamic system, Khatami said, and he urged Iranians to let bygones be bygones.

"We should put aside the preelection resentments and act brotherly," he said. "We are one nation and one country. Let us not institutionalize grudges and instead institutionalize brotherhood and friendship against the foreigners who have prepared their sharp satanic teeth to loot the legacy of your martyrs."

Source: Los Angeles Times, June 27, 2009

Iran: Danger of executions after torture and forced confession

According to the Iranian daily Kayhan (close to Ali Khamenei, the Iranian authority's supreme leader) the person who took the film showing Neda Agha Soltan being killed by a bullet has been arrested and confessed participation in planning the shooting at Neda.

Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, the spokesperson of Iran Human Rights, warned that many of those arrested under the pro-democracy demonstrations in Iran could be in danger of torture, forced confessions and possibly execution. He said to the Italian daily Corriere della sera: "we have entered a new phase where the Iranian authorities, by taking forced confessions is preparing further arresting and possibly execution of some of those participated in the demonstrations". He continued: "The Iranian authorities will be at the same time using these constructed TV-confessions to intimidate those who are sending pictures and reports of the demonstrations to the international media".

Emphasizing that several hundred detainees are in risk of torture, forced confessions and execution, he asked the world community and UN to intervene and guarantee the safety and humane treatment of those who were arrested.

Several hundred people have been arrested after the pro-democracy demonstrations in Tehran, and they are being held at different detention centers such as Evin prison.

We still do not have the exact number of those arrested or killed in relation to the pro-democracy demonstrations of the past 2 weeks in Iran.

Source: Iranhr, June 27, 2009

Iranian Cleric calls for the execution of "rioters"

TEHRAN (Reuters) - A hardline Iranian cleric on Friday called for the execution of "rioters" in the latest sign of the authorities' determination to stamp out opposition to the June 12 presidential election.

Iran's top legislative body, the Guardian Council, said it had found no major violations in the election, which it called the "healthiest" vote since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

The council had already rejected a call for the annulment of the vote by moderate former Prime Minister Mirhossein Mousavi, who has led mass protests since he was declared a distant second in the election behind incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

"I want the judiciary to ... punish leading rioters firmly and without showing any mercy to teach everyone a lesson," Ahmad Khatami told worshippers at Tehran University.

Iranian state television said on Thursday eight Basij militiamen were killed by "rioters" during the protests. State media previously said 20 people were killed in the marches.

Iranian authorities have accused Mousavi of being responsible for the bloodshed, while the moderate former prime minister says the government is to blame.

Khatami, a member of the Assembly of Experts, said the judiciary should charge the leading "rioters" as being "mohareb" or one who wages war against God.

"They should be punished ruthlessly and savagely," he said. Under Iran's Islamic law, punishment for people convicted as mohareb is execution.

Mousavi's supporters plan to release thousands of balloons on Friday with the message: "Neda you will always remain in our hearts," in memory of the young woman killed last week who has become an icon of the demonstrations.

CRACKDOWN

The authorities have used a combination of warnings, arrests and the threat of police action to drive large demonstrations off Tehran's street since Saturday with small gatherings dispersed with tear gas and baton charges.

Seventy professors were detained after meeting Mousavi and his campaign manager was among many arrested. The professors were released on Thursday.

The 12-man Guardian Council's statement leaves little scope for more legal challenges, short of an attack on the position of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has expressed strong support for Ahmadinejad.

"The Guardian Council has almost finished reviewing defeated candidates' election complaints ... the reviews showed that the election was the healthiest since the revolution ... There were no major violations in the election," said Abbasali Kadkhodai, spokesman of the council.

Former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a Mousavi ally, chairs the Assembly of Experts which has the constitutional power to depose Khamenei. The assembly has never tried to do so and Rasfanjani is seen as unlikely take such a radical step.

Group of Eight powers meeting in Trieste will issue a statement calling on Iran to settle the crisis soon through democratic dialogue and peaceful means.

"We deplore post-electoral violence which led to the loss of lives of Iranian civilians and urge Iran to respect fundamental human rights including freedom of expression and ensured by the international treaties it has ratified," the final draft said.

President Barrack Obama has said he was "appalled and outraged" by the security crackdown in the world's fifth largest oil exporter.

The condemnation by Obama, who had been trying to improve ties with Iran before the election, prompted Ahmadinejad to accuse him of behaving like his predecessor and say there was not much point in talking to Washington unless Obama apologised.

Mousavi said he was determined to keep challenging the election results despite pressure to stop.

"A major rigging has happened," his website reported him as saying. "I am prepared to prove that those behind the rigging are responsible for the bloodshed."

He called on his supporters to continue "legal" protests and said restrictions on the opposition could lead to more violence.

Source: Reuters, June 26, 2009

USA: Holder pushes for hate-crimes law; GOP unpersuaded

Bill would expand scope of federal protection against hate crimes

Eric Holder says hate crimes against certain groups, such as Hispanics, on the rise. Republicans on Senate panel dispute assertion of increase in hate crimes. Some religious groups worry law could be used to criminalize speech

Attorney General Eric Holder stepped up his call for the passage of federal hate crimes legislation Thursday, arguing that the federal government needs to take a stronger stand against criminal activity fueled by bias and bigotry.

Attorney General Eric Holder has been a vocal proponent for tougher laws regarding hate crimes.

He also sought to assure opponents that such a bill would not allow Christian clergy to be prosecuted for outspoken opposition to homosexuality.

Holder made his remarks during testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is currently considering the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

The bill would allow the Justice Department to provide assistance to state and local authorities in the prosecution of hate crimes while also expanding federal protection against hate crimes to cover disability, gender and sexual orientation.

"Hate crimes victimize not only individuals but entire communities," Holder said.

"Perpetrators of hate crimes seek to deny the humanity that we all share, regardless of the color of our skin, the God to whom we pray or the person who we choose to love. ...," he said. "The time is now to provide justice to victims of bias-motivated violence and to redouble our efforts to protect our communities from violence based on bigotry and prejudice."

The attorney general argued that recent numbers "suggest that hate crimes against certain groups are on the rise, such as individuals of Hispanic national origin."

Specifically, he said, more than 77,000 hate crime incidents were reported by the FBI between 1998 and 2007, or "nearly 1 hate crime for every hour of every day over the span of a decade."

In light of such statistics, he said, it was one of his "highest personal priorities ... is to do everything I can to ensure this critical legislation finally becomes law."

Republicans on the Judiciary Committee disputed Holder's assertion that there has been a noticeable increase in the number of hate crimes. They also questioned the need for federal involvement in the prosecution of violent acts -- traditionally a function of state and local governments.

They pointed to FBI figures showing a slight decline from 7,755 hate crimes reported in 1998 to 7,624 in 2007, the most recently compiled statistics.

It is "important to know (if) we have a problem of significant numbers of (hate crime) cases ... not being prosecuted in state and local governments," said Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, the ranking Republican on the committee.

"Murders occur all over America every day. Robberies, assaults, rapes, burglaries occur every day, and those are handled by our state and local jurisdictions. ... They do a pretty good job."

When pressed, Holder acknowledged he had no hard evidence of trends showing the problem getting worse, nor that states are not prosecuting cases based on their own state hate crimes statutes.

The attorney general insisted, however, that the issue should be viewed more broadly.

"It seems to me this is a question of conscience," Holder argued. He emphasized that the bill is designed to give special protections to groups that historically have been victims solely based on who they are.

Holder added that while state and local governments generally do a good job prosecuting violent crimes, there is nevertheless a need for the federal government to serve as a "backstop" on occasion, particularly if localities lack the resources for an effective investigation or prosecution.

"There are instances where the (federal) government needs to come in," he said.

He also asserted that any federal hate crimes law would be used only to prosecute violent acts based on bias, as opposed to the prosecution of speech based on controversial racial or religious beliefs.

"It is the person who commits the actual act of violence, who would be subject to this legislation, not the person who is simply expressing an opinion," Holder said.

Several religious groups have expressed concern that a hate crimes law could be used to criminalize speech relating to subjects such as abortion or homosexuality.

The attorney general has been a vocal proponent of federal hate crimes legislation since his tenure in the Clinton Justice Department. Last week, in a speech on civil rights, he cited 3 recent fatal shootings in calling for stricter hate crimes laws.

"The violence in Washington, Little Rock and Wichita reminds us of the potential threat posed by violent extremists and the tragedy that ensues when reasoned discourse is replaced by armed confrontation," he said.

Holder was referring to the shooting death of a security guard at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, allegedly by a self-avowed white supremacist; the shooting of 2 U.S. soldiers in Little Rock, Arkansas, allegedly by a man prosecutors say was targeting the U.S. military for its treatment of Muslims; and the slaying of a doctor who ran a women's clinic in Wichita, Kansas, allegedly by an abortion opponent.

Source: CNN, June 26, 2009

Maryland: State drafts lethal injection rules

The administration of Gov. Martin O'Malley took a giant step toward restoring Maryland's death penalty on Wednesday, as the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services completed draft regulations on performing executions by lethal injection.

Maryland has had a de facto death-penalty moratorium since December 2006, when the state's highest court invalidated the states execution protocols because they had not been adopted in compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act.

The draft lethal-injection regulations, which must be reviewed by a legislative committee and published for public comment, comply with the high courts decision in Evans v. State, state officials said.

Completion of the draft regulations follows an unsuccessful legislative effort this year to repeal the state's death penalty, an attempt O'Malley backed. A compromise measure was passed that greatly restricts the use of capital punishment.

O'Malley praised the new law and said he had no choice but to allow the drafting of new protocols to move forward after the repeal effort failed.

"These new regulations mark an important step in ensuring that the death penalty in Maryland is carried out in a manner consistent with state and federal law," O'Malley said in a statement after the draft regulations were released. "While I personally oppose the death penalty, I took an oath to uphold the laws of our state."

Anti-death penalty advocate Jane Henderson expressed strong concern that the proposed lethal-injection protocols call for the continued use of Pancuronium. The paralytic drug immobilizes the condemned making them unable to express any pain they might otherwise be experiencing, said Henderson, executive director of Maryland Citizens Against State Executions.

Henderson said she welcomed that the proposed lethal-injection regulations will be spelled out in their entirety and submitted for public comment, rather than exposed piecemeal or through litigation.

"It is nice to finally have this all out in the public domain," she said. "Up until now it's been pretty secretive."

The proposed lethal-injection regulations would do the following:

* Clarify prohibitions preventing a Department of Corrections employee from performing a medical procedure known as a "cut down" in which an incision is made to expose a vein at the time of execution in order to administer the injections;

* Reinforce requirements for pre-execution examination of the convict to determine appropriate locations to insert intravenous needles necessary for execution;

* Reduce from 4 hours to 3 hours the time before execution that the condemned may have visitors, excluding attorney and clergy;

* Require that an inmate with multiple attorneys decide which one, if requested, witnesses the execution;

* Require a contracted paramedic to be immediately outside the execution area if a certified paramedic is not on the execution team; and

* Clarify existing requirements for non-Department of Corrections execution team members to have appropriate credentials to perform assigned duties.

The regulations will next be reviewed by the General Assembly's Joint Committee on Administrative, Executive and Legislative Review (AELR), a 20-member panel consisting of 10 members each from the Senate and House of Delegates. The committee will determine if the proposed rules comport with state law and procedural due process.

The proposed regulations will also be published within the next 30 days in the Maryland Register, marking the start of a 30-day public comment period.

"I feel comfortable the General Assemblys AELR Committee will find that these draft regulations meet the requirements set forth in Evans v. State," said Gary D. Maynard, secretary of the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services, in a prepared statement. "It has always been the duty of the department to carry out the laws and regulations of the state of Maryland. These new regulations will ensure we can meet those obligations."

Source: The Md Daily Record, June 25, 2009

In 98, Hints From Sotomayor on Death Penalty

As a drug kingpin and his bodyguard, both black, faced the 1st death penalty trial in Manhattan since the days of the Rosenbergs, their lawyers argued that the practice of capital punishment was racist.

"We're doing what the death penalty has always done historically, which is target minority people," one of the lawyers said in 1998 as he asked a Federal District Court judge to declare the penalty unconstitutional. That judge was Sonia Sotomayor a Bronx-born woman of Puerto Rican descent who as a young lawyer had leveled much the same attack on capital punishment. And as she listened to the arguments that day, she acknowledged there were many unresolved "tensions" surrounding the death penalty.

But she flatly told the lawyers she had no power to resolve them. "I don't as a judge," she said. "They are not up to me. Ultimately, they are up to Congress and the Supreme Court."

Judge Sotomayor, of course, is now up for a seat on the Supreme Court, and her nomination has sparked questions about her early advocacy and whether that might flavor her performance as a justice.

The 1998 case, the only death penalty matter she appears to have handled on the federal bench, offers some answers. Transcripts provide a revealing look at the judge, acting as an official arbiter on an issue she once addressed strongly and weighing the lives of 2 men.

The case record shows she was curious enough about the defense arguments that she ordered prosecutors to produce data on the race of defendants considered for the death penalty. But it also shows she was tough on defense lawyers, repeatedly challenging their claims that minority defendants were disproportionately singled out.

She even rejected the same kind of statistical argument against capital punishment that she had made years earlier as a lawyer, saying it was not sufficient to prove discrimination.

"We gave her enough ammunition that she could have struck down the death penalty," recalled David A. Ruhnke, a defense lawyer in the case. "Whether it would have stood up in the U.S. Supreme Court, who knows? But we gave her enough room to do it had she wanted to reach out and do it and she didn't."

In the end, Judge Sotomayor never ruled on the merits of the death penalty, even though her remarks made clear that she was unlikely to find it unconstitutional. Some 2 years into the case, she was elevated to the federal appellate bench in New York, and the case was handed to another judge, who declined to strike down the law. Both defendants pleaded guilty and avoided execution.

But Judge Sotomayor conducted three lively pretrial hearings that explored the death penalty. In more than 100 pages of transcripts, she emerges as deeply engaged, vocal and demanding, scrutinizing both sides and sometimes floating provocative ideas.

At one point, pressed by defense lawyers to resolve the death penalty's inequities, she advised them to be careful what they wished for.

"As my law clerk said to me the other day, what is the remedy? Should we just have more people sentenced to capital punishment? That's as effective a remedy as having fewer people sentenced to capital punishment if we find that we need to remedy some overall societal inequity."

Judge Sotomayor, who turns 55 on Thursday, has spoken very little publicly about the death penalty during her long career, which included about 5 years as an assistant district attorney in Manhattan. But conservatives who oppose her nomination have seized on a 1981 internal memo signed by her and 2 other directors of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund recommending that the organization oppose restoration of the death penalty in New York State.

The memo said capital punishment was "associated with evident racism in our society" and cited statistics to show that "the number of minorities and the poor executed or awaiting execution is out of proportion to their numbers in the population."

Seventeen years later, she heard a similar argument on behalf of two defendants charged with multiple murders: Clarence Heatley, who led a multimillion-dollar crack-cocaine operation based in the Bronx, and his bodyguard, John Cuff, a former New York City housing police officer.

In 1997, Mary Jo White, the United States attorney in Manhattan, received authorization from Attorney General Janet Reno to seek the death penalty against both men. Congress had reinstituted the federal death penalty in recent years, and Ms. White's office had considered a dozen other cases before settling on Mr. Heatley's and Mr. Cuff's.

Before the men could be tried, however, Judge Sotomayor had to consider their lawyers' challenge to the law. They presented data showing that since 1988, the federal government had authorized 119 capital cases, with 79 % involving minority defendants. Of the 16 men who had been sentenced to death, 13 were members of minorities.

But the judge agreed with prosecutors that the numbers alone did not prove discrimination in this case. The high percentage of minority defendants, she said, "tells me nothing about the pool from which that number comes from." She said the defense had to offer more "some actual proof of discrimination besides statistical evidence, because it can be manipulated."

The defense had, indeed, tried to get more evidence, asking the judge to order the government to produce information on federal defendants across the country who had been considered for capital punishment, and on how each decision had been reached.

Judge Sotomayor balked. "The only way that we can end up with your getting anything that would be admissible," she said, "is if we literally redid all of the deliberative processes in every single case that was eligible for the death penalty."

Ultimately, she agreed to order data on the racial and ethnic composition of the pool of defendants.

"I would like to see the numbers myself," she said. "I do agree with you that the death population in the federal system is so disparately different from the general population that one look more should be done, at least an initial inquiry."

The judge also seemed open to the idea of allowing the defense, during a possible future sentencing hearing, to tell the jury that other murderers had been spared the death penalty.

She said: "You can very well see a potential argument by the defense that says, If Joe Blow, who kills his wife, 10 children, his mother, and didn't get the death penalty, why should my client? Why shouldn't society put to death murderers of more heinous crimes? These are drug dealers killing drug dealers."

Judge Sotomayor was not shy about asserting a personal opinion. She allowed that in the past five years, she had noticed "a sea change" in Manhattan federal prosecutors' handling of the death penalty an apparent reference to an increase in cases considered for capital punishment and new policies on how such decisions were made. But she dismissed the defense's claim that racial bias was the cause.

"It may be based on politics," she said, "since it's the only explanation that could justify the sea change. But I have no basis to believe, in what you presented me with or otherwise, that it's based on race."

Whatever her own feelings on capital punishment, the judge showed a willingness to understand and apply the death penalty law, even if the result could be 2 executions. When the prosecutor, Andrew S. Dember, seemed to ask for too much legal leeway on 1 point, she cautioned that his approach could lead to a reversal of any verdict.

"Remember 2 things," she told him. "A conviction is important. Surviving conviction is more important."

She also had a pointed word for the defense: Do not expect the Supreme Court to abolish capital punishment anytime soon.

Mr. Ruhnke, the defense lawyer, had suggested that in 50 years there might not be a death penalty. He asserted that the Supreme Court almost struck down capital punishment in a 1987 case involving racial disparities. The author of the 5-to-4 ruling, Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr., later said he regretted his vote.

"It was that close to being no death penalty," Mr. Ruhnke said.

Judge Sotomayor suggested that the Supreme Court of 1998 was even less likely to overturn the penalty than the court had been in 1987.

"Unfortunately for your client, regardless of what the makeup of the decision-making will be 50 years from now, in the short run," she said, the death penalty "will still be here."

Source: New York Times, June 25, 2009

Egyptian tycoon, ex-cop face execution

An Egyptian court on Thursday confirmed the death sentences of a business tycoon and a former police officer convicted of killing rising Lebanese pop star Suzanne Tamim.

In a case that has captivated Egypt and the region because of the fame of the victim and one of the defendants, a judge sentenced to death real estate mogul Hisham Talaat Moustafa and former officer Muhsen el Sukkari last month. Tamim's body was found stabbed, with her throat slit, in her apartment in the United Arab Emirates in July 2008.

The court's latest decision came after a review of the sentence by Egypt's grand mufti, the country's highest religious official. Because the two men were sentenced under Islamic law, it is widely expected they will be hanged.

The court usually seeks to get the Mufti's "advice only on any death sentence, according to the law," a legal source in Cairo told CNN.

"However, the Mufti's advice to the court is not binding at all," added the source, who asked not to be named.

"Even if the Mufti was against the death sentence, that will not have any effect on the judge's decision, who will have the final say," the source said.

Since his 2003 appointment as grand mufti, Sheikh Ali Gomaa has received about 480 cases from the court that included death sentences. He supported the judge's decision in 478 and opposed twice, but the rule was implemented according to the court conviction.

Moustafa's lawyer previously told reporters that he would appeal the conviction, saying there was "a 1 million percent guarantee" the sentence would be overturned.

Prosecutors alleged Moustafa, a parliament member for the ruling National Democratic Party, paid el Sukkari $2 million to kill Tamim.

During the trial, Moustafa's lawyer told CNN his client loved the singer but could not take Tamim as a second wife because his family objected.

Polygamy is legal in Egypt, and it's not unusual for men such as Moustafa, a married father of three, to take on additional wives.

Prosecutors have said Tamim's death was a "means of taking revenge" but have not elaborated.

Moustafa and el Sukkari claim the prosecution's evidence could have been fabricated or tampered with by UAE authorities and should not be used against them.

Although Tamim was killed in the UAE, the Egyptian judiciary tried the case in Cairo because the accused were arrested in Egypt.

After Moustafa's arrest in September, Egyptian authorities indicted him, stripped him of his parliamentary immunity and jailed him pending trial.

He also resigned as chairman of Talaat Moustafa Group -- a conglomerate with construction and real estate arms that was founded by his father, Talaat Moustafa. Moustafa's brother, Tarek Talaat Moustafa, now chairs the company.

More on this story...

Source: CNN.com, June 25, 2009

Man beheaded in Saudi Arabia

June 23, 2009: a Saudi Arabian Interior Ministry statement said that authorities beheaded Ahmed bin Ali bin Hassan in the southwestern province of Asir.

Hassan was convicted of fatally shooting compatriot Abdel-Rahman bin Dafer bin Ali in a dispute. It did not elaborate on the nature of the dispute.

According to an Associated Press count, the execution brought the number of beheadings in the kingdom this year to 43.

Source: Canadian Press, 24/06/2009

The final week of my parents' lives

Ethel and Julius Rosenberg (pictured) were members of the Communist Party who were convicted of espionage for allegedly stealing atomic secrets. On June 19, 1953, they were executed--the most prominent victims of the McCarthyite campaign to crush political and social dissent.

Robert Meeropol, one of the Rosenbergs' two sons, has dedicated himself to helping provide for the children of activists who have been persecuted for their political beliefs, founding the Rosenberg Fund for Children. This year, in the days leading up to the anniversary of his parents' death on June 19, Robert wrote this diary, remembering what happened each day 56 years ago.

Monday, June 15

Have you ever wondered why anniversaries that are multiples of five or 10 are more significant milestones than those that are multiples of other numbers? I wonder if we had six fingers, instead of five, whether a 24th wedding anniversary might be a bigger deal than the 20th, and if we had seven fingers a 49th might be much more important than a 50th.

This week will mark 56 years since my parents' executions on June 19, 1953. I expect that unlike the 50th anniversary in 2003, the day will pass with very little public notice. But this week will resonate more powerfully for me because for the first time in 11 years, the days of the week track the weekdays of 1953.

In other words, my parents' executions took place at sundown on Friday the 19th, and the 19th will also fall on a Friday this year.

To mark this echo, I'll recall in daily posts to this blog the events of the final five days of my parents' lives and my feelings at the time.

Fifty-six years ago today, on Monday, June 15, 1953, the Supreme Court denied my parents' request for a stay of execution by a 5-4 vote. This was the eighth time my parents had asked the Supreme Court to review their case, and the Court had refused them all.

With this denial, the Supreme Court adjourned for the summer. The Federal Bureau of Prisons scheduled the executions for that Thursday, June 18, on my parents' 14th wedding anniversary.

My brother Michael and I were living with acquaintances of my parents, Ben and Sonia Bach, in Toms River, N.J. I had just turned 6, and my brother was 10. The previous Friday had been the last day of school, so our summer vacation had just started. I have no specific recollection of the Supreme Court's denial that Monday, but I do remember attending a big demonstration to save my parents in Washington, D.C., the day before. Here's what I wrote in my memoir about that event:

We went to New York or Philadelphia and got on a bus with many others going to Washington. I peered out the window as we drove south on Route 1, apparently racing a passenger train I believed was filled with people going to the same place; it was exciting to observe and imagine everyone rushing to a common destination. But once we got off the bus and became part of the commotion, it wasn't fun anymore.

Then I was a small person amid crowds of milling adult legs. I observed the process of getting to the demonstration so closely because I wanted so much to understand what was happening. I could see how we got there with my own eyes, but no one told me why we were doing this or what was happening once we got there, and incomprehension left me anxious.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Tuesday, June 16

Early Tuesday morning, June 16, Ben Bach drove us to meet our parents' attorney, Manny Bloch, in Manhattan. From there, Manny took us to Sing Sing prison, 30 miles to the north, for what would become our last visit with our parents.

This was the only prison visit where we saw both our parents together at the same time. My brother wrote in We Are Your Sons, "[T]hey sat at opposite ends of the table. Robby and I wandered around the room, hugging them and listening" while they talked strategy with Manny.

I did not understand that with the executions scheduled for Thursday, it was probable that we would never see them again, but Michael did, and at the end of the visit, he started to wail, "One more day to live. One more day to live." They hurriedly said goodbye before we all broke down.

While we were all visiting at Sing Sing, unbeknownst to us, two attorneys who had not been involved in the case previously presented a petition to Justice Douglas as he left for vacation. The new lawyers claimed my parents had been tried under the wrong law, and that under the correct law, the death sentence was illegal. Douglas decided to postpone his vacation one day to consider the request.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Wednesday, June 17

On Wednesday morning, June 17, Justice Douglas announced he was staying the executions and left for vacation. He did not rule on the merits of the new lawyers' claim, but rather said that the petition must be considered by the District Court and then the Court of Appeals. This would add months, if not years, to my parents' lives.

Michael recalled in We Are Your Sons that we were playing our usual game of Monopoly when Michael heard a commotion in the kitchen: "[Sonia Bach] burst in on us and starting hugging us. 'The Douglas stay! The Douglas stay!'...As the news sunk in, we became wildly happy, Robby included."

This was, without a doubt, the best news we'd had since my parents' arrest. Although I couldn't read newspaper articles, I saw reports on TV and heard them on the radio. My interpretation was that at the hearing on Monday, the Supreme Court's justices had asked Manny to give them 10 reasons why my parents should not be killed, and he had done this, so they stayed the executions.

But we didn't know that, according to FBI files forced into the open 20 years later by our Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, late on the previous evening, the Attorney General of the Unites States had met secretly with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. They agreed that if Douglas issued a stay the following morning, the entire Court would be called into special session to vacate Douglas' action. They conspired to do this knowing neither the legal reasoning behind the request for the stay nor the contents of Douglas' ruling, which had not yet been written.

So our good news only survived about eight hours. By late afternoon, the Attorney General had asked that the Supreme Court be called into special session, and by evening the Chief Justice had scheduled a hearing on Douglas' stay for the following morning.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Thursday, June 18

Thursday, June 18, was my parents' 14th wedding anniversary, but I have no recollection of knowing that fact as a 6-year-old. In fact, I have no memory of this day whatsoever other than my belief that the Supreme Court was reconvened to ask Manny Bloch to provide an 11th reason why my parents should not be killed. I think I confused everything I heard about "eleventh hour appeals" with giving an "eleventh reason."

For Michael and me, this was a day of waiting. Manny Bloch and the two new lawyers, Fyke Farmer and Daniel Marshall, argued before the Supreme Court in the morning that Douglas' stay should be upheld. The justices retired to their chambers after the argument and had not announced a decision by the end of the day.

Our parents were in limbo. For all they knew, the Supreme Court could overturn the stay at any moment, and their executions would go forward as planned at 11 p.m. that very day. They drew up their wills and wrote what would be their last letter to Manny Bloch. In what for my brother and me turned out to be a momentous decision, they insisted that Manny become our legal guardian if they were executed. But the Supreme Court remained silent that day, and so they lived to see the sun rise on Friday, June 19, 1953.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Friday, June 19

Friday, June 19, 1953, was a warm, sunny, slightly humid day.

In the morning, the Supreme Court denied the stay by a 6 to 3 vote, and the executions were set for 11 p.m. that evening. Manny Bloch and several other lawyers spent the day filing a variety of appeals to judges and the president, but it was all to no avail. When they pointed out that it would be improper to carry out executions during the Jewish Sabbath, which started at sundown on Friday, the government obliged by moving the executions forward to 8 p.m. so they could be carried out just before sunset.

Michael and I tried to play outside, but the Bachs' front lawn was now swarming with reporters. To get away from the press, we were whisked to a friend's house in the next town. I don't remember leaving the Bachs', but I do recall playing ball with my friend Mark that evening, while my brother played with Mark's older brother Steve. Earlier, we'd been watching a baseball game on TV when the news flashed across the screen that plans for the executions were going forward. I do not recall Michael's reaction, but he remembers moaning, "That's it, goodbye, goodbye."

Michael's reaction, which was followed by the adults' deciding to send us outside, gave me the sense that something terrible was happening. We came back in only when it got too dark to see the ball. I remember that Michael was distraught, but I doubt I fully comprehended that my parents had just been executed. However, I do remember thinking that Manny Bloch had failed to provide the "11th reason," and that's why my parents' were killed.

Throughout that evening, upwards of 10,000 people had gathered on 17th Street off Union Square in New York City. The rally was originally planned to celebrate Justice Douglas' stay, but it turned into a death watch. Hundreds of thousands, perhaps more, demonstrated against the executions throughout the world that Friday. They promised never to forget, and even now, many communicate with me and describe what they did that day.

The 56th anniversary may not be a marker of great note, and a long chunk of my life has passed since then. But this year, the week that has led up to today has brought the matching days from 1953, and the memories they evoke, very close.

This diary originally appeared on the Rosenberg Fund for Children Web site.

Source: socialistworker.org, June 24, 2009

Togo's parliament votes unanimously to abolish the death penalty

June 23, 2009: Togo's parliament voted unanimously to abolish the death penalty.

The vote was witnessed by Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, who has been campaigning for a global moratorium on the death penalty as a first step towards its total abolition.

“The Togolese parliament has raised a voice for justice and human dignity,” Zapatero said. And Justice Minister Kokou Tozoun said: "I think that it's the best decision that we took in this year... we don't have the right to give death to someone if we know that death is not a good thing to give."

Togo stopped applying the death penalty more than three decades ago. The last executions of people sentenced to death date back to 1978 and the last death sentence was handed down in 2003. As of June 23, 2009, there were at least six convicts on death row.

Sources: Xinhua, 23/06/2009; BBC, 24/06/2009

Vietnam voted in favor of dropping the death penalty on eight crimes

June 19, 2009: Vietnam voted in favor of dropping the death penalty on eight crimes.

The amendments to the Criminal Code, passed at the closing day of the National Assembly's month-long session, will take place from January 1, 2010.

Those convicted of rape, fraud for appropriating property, smuggling, making and trafficking in counterfeit money and bonds, using drugs, giving bribes, hijacking or piracy and destroying military weapons will be spared, parliament said in a statement (the proceedings were closed to foreign reporters). Those already convicted of capital crimes and awaiting the death penalty will have their sentences commuted to life imprisonment.

Those already convicted of capital crimes and awaiting the death penalty will have their sentences commuted to life imprisonment.

Seventy-five percent of deputies in the communist-dominated National Assembly endorsed the amendments to the penal code. The parliament removed using drugs from the list of crimes punishable by death, but deputies maintained capital punishment for drug trafficking.

Vietnam last reduced the number of death penalty crimes from 44 to 29 in 1999, but even with the latest amendments the country still has 21 crimes on its statutes that are punishable by death.

Sources: AFP, 19/06/2009; Reuters, 21/06/2009

Saudi Arabia: two Saudis executed

June 22, 2009: two Saudi Arabian men have been recently executed for rape, murder.

The first Saudi Arabian man was beheaded on June 21 in the central city of Unaizah after being convicted of kidnapping and raping a boy. Faleh al-Mozaiberi left the boy in the desert after raping him, the Interior Ministry said in a statement carried by the official SPA news agency. The boy's fate was not disclosed.

The second Saudi Arabian man was beheaded on June 18 by the sword in the southwestern region of Asir after being convicted of murdering a compatriot. Ali bin Gheithan al-Harithi was found guilty of stabbing Abdullah bin Namshan al-Harithi to death in a dispute, said a statement carried by SPA state news agency.

Sources: Agence France Presse, 18/06/2009; Agence France Presse, 21/06/2009

Iran: six men executed

June 22, 2009: six men have been recently executed in Iran for drug trafficking, murder.

The website of Iran’s State-run television said that two men were hanged on June 20 in a prison in southeastern city of Zahedan for drug trafficking. It gave no further details.

Two men convicted of drug trafficking were executed on June 17. A report in the Vatan Emrouz newspaper identified the men as Hamid A and Ali A. They were hanged in a prison in the southwestern city of Ahvaz.

Iran hanged two men convicted of murder on June 16. A report in the Vatan Emrouz newspaper identified the two as Mohammad Reza F and Moslem Gh. They were hanged in a prison in the city of Ahvaz.

Sources: Agence France Presse, 20/06/2009

Research shows no connection between death penalty, deterrence

New research released June 16 [2009] concludes criminology experts do not believe the death penalty effectively deters criminals from committing murder.

In a report from Northwestern University School of Law's Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, researchers argued data show the death penalty does not deter homicide more than long-term imprisonment.

Capital punishment as "deterrence has always been controversial and we simply wanted to try to resolve the issue by learning from those that know most about it," said Michael Radelet, who released the information.

"There has been some research that shows a connection between deterrence and the death penalty, but all of that research has been discredited. I think the data that we gathered pretty much settles the issue," he told Catholic News Service in a telephone interview.

Frank McNeirney, national coordinator of Catholics Against Capital Punishment, said the new study reaffirmed his beliefs. McNeirney said capital punishment sends the wrong message to criminals.

"When a state attempts to solve its problems via the use of capital punishment, it sends a message to all that killing people is an effective way to achieve one's goals," McNeirney told CNS in an e-mail.

While the research supports his ideology, McNeirney said capital punishment would still be an unacceptable practice regardless of what research shows. According to Catholic Church teaching, capital punishment is only acceptable in rare situations where execution is the only way to defend human life against an aggressor.

McNeirney said he doubted supporters of the death penalty will be able to consistently make cases for the use of executions as the only alternative.

"It seems to me that proponents of the death penalty, each time they seek to execute someone, have to make an ironclad case that killing the criminal is an absolute necessity, and that incarcerating him or her for life in a supermax prison would not protect human lives," said McNeirney. "That's going to be hard to prove."

In the study, titled "Do Executions Lower Homicide Rates? The Views of Leading Criminologists," Radelet and co-author Traci Lacock conveyed new findings and revealed flaws in studies that have drawn opposite conclusions.

Both an Emory University study and another study by two University of Colorado students published by The Washington Post argue that executions do decrease the number of homicides, but Radelet's research said many of these findings cannot be supported by any theory and have been disproved.

Others support Radelet's research, saying their views coincide with the data; one of these is Richard Dieter, executive director at the Death Penalty Information Center. He said Radelet's research asked the right individuals the right questions to clarify the debate.

"I think this is an important research document because it goes to the experts in this field on a confusing issue. Many Americans aren't clear about it and here an overwhelming percentage of these experts believe the evidence just isn't there to support the death penalty as a deterrent," Dieter said.

Dieter argued the research confirms a long-standing conclusion from experts on the issue. He said he believes most research supporting the view that the death penalty is a deterrent is flawed because it tends to apply findings nationally from states he said aren't representative of the entire country.

More than 1/2 of the country's executions this year took place in Texas, according to Dieter, who said data from Texas should not be used as representative of the rest of the country.

Radelet's study serves as a good response to conclusions based on unrepresentative data, Dieter said, and will have an impact on the debate.

"The death penalty is now on the defensive. Many states considered abolishing it this year and some have abolished it. I think it does make a difference," Dieter said. "There is very little or no proof of the death penalty as a deterrent, and that hasn't changed."

Source: The Catholic Spirit, June 23, 2009

An ethical "line in the sand"

Dr. Marc Stern drew an ethical "line in the sand" prohibiting all 700 health-care staff members in Washington's prisons from participating in the death penalty. Little did Stern know how involved his staffers were in the planning for a lethal injection.

About two years ago, Dr. Marc Stern tripped over a jarring line in Washington's death-penalty policy: As head doctor for the state's 16,000 prison inmates, he had to ensure the state's lethal-injection table was in working order before each execution.

"This is ludicrous," Stern, then medical director for the Department of Corrections (DOC), remembers telling his boss. "I can't do this. I won't do this. I'm not allowed to do this."

That was the beginning of Stern's unlikely evolution into a hero of the anti-death-penalty movement. He quit the DOC late last year on the eve of a scheduled execution, formally accused the DOC of illegally obtaining the lethal-injection drugs and, last month, was a star witness for death-row inmates challenging their executions in court. He is heralded on blogs and recently received a letter from Denmark's Amnesty International praising his "brave, difficult and recommendable act" of quitting.

Stern says he opposes the death penalty but insists he is no zealot for the condemned. Instead, he felt he had to quit when he found out some of his 700 health-care staffers had become involved in preparations for an execution.

To Stern, medical-ethics policies as far back as the 4th century B.C. — Hippocrates' admonition to do no harm — apply to his actions and to his supervision. If he couldn't play a role, neither could his staff. And he wasn't willing to suggest alternatives, because that would, indirectly, assist in the execution.

But little did Stern know at the time, his staff was far more involved than he imagined, according to depositions taken as part of a pending lawsuit filed by two condemned inmates challenging the constitutionality of the lethal-injection procedure.

And with three potential executions within the next year, the question of medical ethics and executions is likely to grow.

States are "in a bind"

Stern, a trim 55-year-old, gravitated to prison health care after studying at medical schools in Belgium and New York and working at clinics for veterans and the poor.

It may seem naive, he now admits, but he did not ask about the death penalty when he was recruited from New York's prison system in 2002 to overhaul Washington's prison health-care system.

"It simply wasn't on my radar," Stern said. "There were a lot more important issues on my doorstep."

Washington last executed an inmate in 2001, using a three-drug lethal-injection cocktail used by about 30 states. Eight men currently are on death row in the state.

Stern, who earned $173,000 a year, soon was handed a $125 million-a-year budget and hire-and-fire authority. He became a nationally known expert, giving ethics lectures to peers.

The death penalty was a distant issue for Stern until 2007, when he saw a draft of the lethal-injection policy requiring him to inspect the execution table.

The American Medical Association (AMA), like other medical groups, admonishes physicians from any direct role with lethal injections, including "an action which would assist, supervise, or contribute to the ability of another individual to directly cause the death of the condemned."

Richard Deiter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, said he knows of a handful of physicians willing to act as roving consultants for lethal injections, but relatively little is known about the involvement of medical staff because of secrecy surrounding executions.

"States are in a bind because they are bound to avoid cruel or unnecessarily painful punishment, and this is a medical procedure, so doing all you can means usually having a doctor involved," Deiter said. "The best course of action is one that is ethically compromised or questionable [for physicians]."

For Stern, the AMA's code was clear. All medical procedures in a prison — including insertion of an IV for lethal injection — ultimately fell on his shoulders as head of medical training. "If a nurse put in an IV and missed, and it turned out the chain of training was bad, that's my responsibility," Stern said.

After explaining to his supervisors about the strength of his objections, Stern felt reassured. "I thought we'd fixed the problem," he said last week.

Crossing "the line"

But last fall in Walla Walla, as the state prepared for its first execution in eight years, prison medical staff were busy helping with the plans, according to the depositions.

A physician assistant checked the veins of the condemned, Darold Stenson, marking a chart with red pen where an IV could be inserted. A pharmacist ordered the lethal cocktail and gave the drugs to the prison superintendent to store in his office refrigerator.

The prison's medical director, a nurse, attended at least eight practice sessions with the four-member lethal-injection team, including some held on the kitchen countertop at a team member's home. One member was recruited out of retirement for $3,500. It is unclear whether any of the four members worked for Stern because their identities are secret, but Sherilyn Peterson, a Seattle attorney presenting Stenson, believes some must have. "I'd think they have to have been because the DOC policy requires a minimum [medical] qualification," she said.

It is clear non-DOC health-care staff were involved. A former Washington state toxicologist consulted on appropriate dosages. An Oregon doctor has certified the death — a job the AMA specifically bans — for the past four Washington executions, dating to 1993, according to the depositions.

Stern said he knew none of this until recently but does not believe his staff intentionally ignored his orders. "I think [DOC's Olympia headquarters] believed the health-care staff were following the line in the sand I laid out," he said. He now believes prison administrators in Walla Walla, who were enlisting the health-care staff, never heard of his objections.

But Scott Blonien, a DOC administrator involved in the planning, said he didn't know of Stern's line in the sand. Nor was such a rule appropriate, Blonien said.

"It would have been just as inappropriate as putting in the policy, 'You shall participate,' " Blonien said. "What [Stern] was trying to do was inject his own personal beliefs on the persons below him in the chain of command."

"What else is going on?"

A few weeks before Stenson's scheduled Dec. 3, 2008, execution, Stern asked DOC Secretary Eldon Vail if he could send a memo to penitentiary staff reaffirming his "line in the sand," and instructing them to continue treating Stenson as a typical inmate. No need to send a memo about his ethical objections, Stern remembers Vail saying.

About a week later, Stern first learned staff had crossed his line. A pharmacy staffer asked Stern how to account for unusual drug requisitions from Walla Walla. Stern recognized the lethal-injection cocktail instantly.

Stern first wanted the drugs returned, and then wanted to investigate for other involvement. The drug requisition, he believed, may have been illegal under state and federal laws because they had not been ordered from prescription and had been stored improperly.

"I thought, 'My God, what else is going on? What nurse may have been asked to look at veins?' "

Stern went to his Tumwater home over the weekend before Thanksgiving, hoping the problem still could be fixed. But when he got back to work, he was told the drugs would not be returned. His other objections were moot.

After he quit, he filed complaints to the state Department of Health and the Drug Enforcement Administration about the drugs. Both complaints were closed without any consequences.

"A moral-code issue"

In the days before he resigned in November, Stern consulted with Dr. Robert Greifinger, former medical director of New York's prison system who quit in 1995 after being ordered to be involved in an execution. "It is a moral-code issue," Greifinger said. "It has nothing to do with execution as a means of punishment. It's the physician role."

Since he quit, Stern has taught at the University of Washington and worked as a consultant on a project to improve medical-records access in the state's jails.

Stenson's execution — and two others scheduled for last March — were all stayed, pending various further court actions. In March, the four-member execution team quit for fear their identities would be disclosed in a pending lawsuit.

Blonien, the DOC administrator, said it is possible medical staff from outside DOC would be hired for lethal injections, but, with no executions imminent, that decision has not been made.

But the issue that made Stern quit remains. A doctor who assumed some of his duties has lodged similar objections about involvement of DOC staff. No changes have been made to the state execution policy, but Vail, the DOC secretary, took the issue "under advisement," according to a spokeswoman.

Stern said he is willing to discuss his resignation with medical-ethics groups, but he has avoided anti-death-penalty groups.

"You only have a limited amount of yourself to go around and to devote yourself to," he said. "For me, I don't think that's in the death penalty."

Pending executions

Execution dates for three of Washington's eight inmates on death row have been set, then stayed by continuing court action.

Darold R. Stenson: Convicted in Clallam County in 1994 for murders of wife, Denise Stenson, and business partner, Frank Hoerner. Execution set for Dec. 3, 2008; stayed by Clallam County Superior Court pending review of possible new evidence.

Cal C. Brown: Convicted in King County in 1993 for murder of Holly Washa. Execution set for March 13, 2009; stayed by the Washington Supreme Court pending a civil lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the lethal-injection protocol.

Dwayne Woods: Convicted in Spokane County in 1997 for deaths of Telisha Shaver and Jade Moore. Execution set for March 20, 2009; stayed by U.S. District Court pending an appeal.

Source: Washington State Attorney General

Source for both: The Seattle Times, June 23, 2009

China: Beijing to adopt lethal injection

Chinese officers training to
perform lethal injections

By the end of the year all criminals sentenced to death in Beijing will receive a lethal injection instead of being executed by gunshot.

A lethal injection site has been built next to the city's No 1 detention house, which houses the majority of the city's condemned, in Dougezhuang town, about 20 km northwest of downtown Beijing, the Beijing Youth Daily reported.

The Beijing Municipal High People's Court has already made preparations for the change, including allocation of staff and boosting technical capacity.

It will soon start training judicial police, who will deliver the prisoners and administer the injections, and also medical staff who will supervise the use of the drugs as well as monitor and confirm the deaths.

The new execution site is equipped with rooms for execution, observation and the storage of bodies. The execution bed, injection pump and disinfection facilities are all specially produced, the report said.

Hu Yunteng, director general of SPC's research bureau told China Daily that lethal injection was considered cleaner, safer and more convenient.

Criminals condemned to execution by gunshot need to be delivered from the detention house to a large open area, a process requiring a lot of judicial resources, including armed police.

"Lethal injection will be used in all intermediate people's courts, though such a procedure is not possible in the short term because of the high costs of input and enforcement," he said.

"As lethal injection is the most popular method for execution adopted by countries with capital punishment, China will follow suit.

"It is considered more humane as it reduces criminals' fear and pain compared with gunshot execution," Hu said.

The process of a lethal injection is complete within a few minutes, without pain, twitches and obvious facial changes.

Lethal injection was made legal in China in 1997 when the country's Criminal Procedure Law was amended to provide an alternative method of execution.

Kunming became the first city to use lethal injection the next year, followed by Wuhan, Shanghai, Chengdu, Hangzhou, Luoyang as well as other cities.

Beijing began using the method to execute some prisoners in June 2000.

Hu said only a small number of criminals nationwide had so far been executed by lethal injection.

Han Yusheng, a professor in criminal law with Renmin University of China, said the adoption of lethal injection was the result of the country's economic growth.

"The country's municipalities are taking the lead in using lethal injection for all those sentenced to death," Han told China Daily.

The application of drugs and facilities involved will be under strict management, the official said.

SPC will help equip all facilities and distribute the drugs.

Only the intermediate people's court can carry out the death penalty.

Source: ChinaDaily.com.cn, 16/06/2009

Iran prosecutor warns of death penalty for violence

An Iranian provincial prosecutor has warned that the "few elements" behind post-election unrest could face the death penalty under Islamic law, an Iranian news agency reported on Wednesday.

Mohammadreza Habibi, prosecutor-general in the central province of Isfahan, said these elements were controlled from outside Iran and urged them to stop "criminal activities," Fars News Agency said.

"We warn the few elements controlled by foreigners who try to disrupt domestic security by inciting individuals to destroy and to commit arson that the Islamic penal code for such individuals waging war against God is execution," Habibi said.

"So before they are stricken with the law's anger they should return to the nation's embrace and avoid criminal measures and activities," he said.

It was not clear if his warning applied to just Isfahan or the country as a whole.

Source: Reuters, June 19, 2009

U.S.: Court finds convicts have no right to test DNA evidence

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court said Thursday that convicts have no constitutional right to test DNA evidence in hopes of proving their innocence long after they were found guilty of a crime.

The decision may have limited impact because the federal government and 47 states already have laws that allow convicts some access to genetic evidence. Testing has led to the exoneration of at least 232 people who had been found guilty of murder, rape and other violent crimes.

The court ruled 5-4, with its conservative justices in the majority, against an Alaska man who was convicted in a brutal attack on a prostitute 16 years ago.

William Osborne won a federal appeals court ruling granting him access to a blue condom that was used during the attack. Osborne argued that testing its contents would firmly establish his innocence or guilt.

In parole proceedings, however, Osborne has admitted his guilt in a separate bid for release from prison.

The high court reversed the ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. States already are dealing with the challenges and opportunities presented by advances in genetic testing, Chief Justice John Roberts said in his majority opinion.

"To suddenly constitutionalize this area would short-circuit what looks to be a prompt and considered legislative response," Roberts said. Alaska, Massachusetts and Oklahoma are the only states without DNA testing laws. In some other states, the laws limit testing to capital crimes or rule out after-the-fact tests for people who confess.

But Justice John Paul Stevens said in dissent that a simple test would settle the matter. "The court today blesses the state's arbitrary denial of the evidence Osborne seeks," Stevens said.

The woman in Alaska was raped, beaten with an ax handle, shot in the head and left for dead in a snow bank near Anchorage International Airport. The condom that was found nearby was used in the assault, the woman said.

The woman identified Osborne as one of her attackers. Another man also convicted in the attack has repeatedly incriminated him. Osborne himself described the assault in detail when he admitted his guilt under oath to the parole board in 2004.

Osborne's lawyer passed up advanced DNA testing at the time of his trial, fearing it could conclusively link him to the crime. A less-refined test by the state showed that the semen did not belong to other suspects, but could be from Osborne, as well as about 15 percent of all African-American men.

Osborne is awaiting sentencing on another conviction, a robbery he committed after his parole.

Source: The Associated Press,Thursday, June 18, 2009

WHERE IS MY VOTE?

Let Iran know that the global community

is monitoring their every move!

Click here to take action now!

Alabama executes Jack Trawick

Twice-convicted murderer Jack Trawick died by lethal injection tonight [June 11, 2009], as relatives of the 2 murder victims watched.

Trawick, 62, who also had claimed to have committed another Birmingham area murder and 2 in the Pacific northwest, was executed at 6:17 p.m. for abducting, stabbing and strangling Stephanie Gach, 21, of Irondale on the night of Oct. 9, 1992. He had been on death row at Holman Correctional Facility since 1994, and no legal efforts were made to stop his execution.

In his final statement, Trawick said: "I wish to apologize to the people whom I have hurt and I ask for their forgiveness. I don't deserve it but I do ask for it."

Stephanie Gach's sister Heather watched Trawick die. So did Donna Middlebrooks, sister of Aileen Pruitt, 26, whom Trawick was convicted of stabbing to death a few months before Gach's death. Trawick had been sentenced to life without parole for that killing.

Trawick's witnesses were 2 of his cousins, Rebecca and Norman Sudduth; James Slack, a UAB faculty member who has been a spiritual adviser to Trawick, Randy Susskind, an attorney with the Equal Justice Initiative, Ben Sherrod of the Kairos prison ministry, and Tod Bohannon, the operator of a Web site that auctions memorabilia from notorious criminals.

Stephanie Gach's mother, Mary Kate, who had planned to give a statement after Trawick's execution, chose not to come to Atmore after hearing that Trawick was planning to give his possessions to Bohannon. "That sort of threw her for a loop," said Janette Carr, victims advocate for Atty. Gen. Troy King.

Prison officials said Trawick had decided to give Bohannon a Bible, a dictionary, a wallet, a television, and assorted photos and cosmetics. He also planned to give pictures and a Bible to a cousin, Mary Anne Pearson.

Department of Corrections spokesman Brian Corbett said authorities were going to examine all of the items before releasing them.

Essays attributed to Trawick that detail the Gach murder, and a drawing, also attributed to him, that shows the mutilated body of a young woman, have been for sale on the Web.

An envelope signed by Trawick is listed on Bohannon's Web site, with a starting bid of $15.

Prison officials said Trawick was in a good mood throughout the day, receiving visitors and eating a last meal of fried chicken, French fries, onion soup and a roll. Though Trawick was sentenced to life without parole for Pruitt's murder, a new state law allowed up to 2 of Pruitt's family members to witness Trawick's execution because only Heather Gach was on hand for the Gach family.

A provision in that law basically states that if an inmate has another murder conviction on his record, two immediate family members of the victim of that crime can witness his death. That only applies if the 6 available family witness spaces are not taken by those with immediate family ties to the crime for which the inmate is being executed. Joshua Pruitt, Aileen Pruitt's son, had been planning to come and witness Trawick's death, but chose not to.

Eliot Kew, a British filmmaker who plans to make a movie about people who collect items from serial killers was in the Atmore area. Prison officials said he was not allowed to be near the execution site or around relatives of Trawick's victims while they were on state property.

Trawick's execution ended a life that his defense attorney said was plagued by mental illness, and decades of crime that included burglaries he said he committed to terrify women he found attractive. In an interview after the Gach and Pruitt murders, Trawick said he cut up women's undergarments and left menacing lipstick messages on mirrors.

After he was convicted of Gach's murder in 1994, Trawick wrote Circuit Judge James Hard, who presided in his trial. In the letter, Trawick told Hard that if he did not sentence him to death but to time in the prison system, he would kill a prison system employee. Hard sentenced him to death.

Trawick's execution was the 5th this year in Alabama. He was the 196th inmate to be put to death by the state since 1927, the 43rd (in Alabama) since executions resumed in 1983 after an 18-year pause, and the 19th to die by lethal injection.

Trawick becomes the 32nd condemned inmate to be put to death this year in the USA and the 1168th overall since the nation resumed executions on January 17, 1977.

Sources: Birmingham News & Rick Halperin, June 12, 2009

Somalia: man executed for murder

June 9, 2009: Al Shabaab militants, who control Mogadishu’s Baidoa town, the former seat of Somalia’s Parliament, executed a man accused of killing another man in the town.

Sheik Hassan Adan, the deputy Bay region judge, told reporters that they sentenced Hussein Hassan Nor to death. It is the second execution that al Shabaab administrators in Baidoa fulfilled since they seized the town in late January 2009.

Source: Mareeg, 08/06/2009

Algerian Government rejects a proposal to abolish the death penalty

June 9, 2009: the Algerian Government rejected a proposal to abolish the death penalty based on the struggle against Islamic terrorism, and security and organised crime considerations.

The death penalty is no longer applied in Algeria, the last execution was in 1993.

Though leaving the door open for eventual abolition in the next few years, the Algerian government justified the rejection of secular RCD Party (Rassemblement pour la culture et la démocratie) parliamentarian Ali Brahimi’s proposal, with a statement by the Prime Minister Ahmed Ouyahia to the Assembly: "The continuing fight against terrorism makes it necessary to maintain the death penalty. Algeria is committed to fighting all forms of criminality. Abolition could be interpreted as a lack of strength and an admission of weakness by the public authorities," the Government argued.

The Government’s decision arrives in the middle of a debate on the death penalty that saw the secular front against the Islamic front in February.

The Muslim Oulemas Association, led by Abderahmane Chibane, ex Minister of Religion during the 1980s, played an important role in the campaign. He called the elimination of the death penalty "a threat to the spirit and the letter of the Koran."

Source: AP, 09/06/2009