By Andrew Loh
Singaporean lawyer, Mr M Ravi, was invited to attend a two-day consultation by the United Nations Special Rappoteurs on the death penalty this week at Harvard Law School in the United States.
At the meetings, Mr Ravi shared his views on capital punishment in Singapore and he also raised the case of Yong Vui Kong, death row inmate in Singapore’s Changi Prison.
THE DEATH PENALTY: 'MOST SERIOUS CRIMES', COMPLICITY AND THE QUESTION OF TORTURE.
The two day expert consultation held at Harvard Law School , Boston , brought experts on the various issues relating to the imposition of death penalty . Its outcome will be presented to the United Nations General Assembly at its 67th regular session in October 2012 .
The expert consultation is organized on the initiative of the United Nations Rapporteur on extrajudicial , summary or arbitrary executions ,Mr. christof Heyns and the the United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Mr. Juan Mendez.
The overarching goal of the meeting is to reflect the extent to which the imposition and implementation of the death penalty comply with the existing international standards. Experts addressed the remaining protection gaps and discrepancies in the imposition and implementation of the death penalty.
Three main issues dominated the discussions : a) the notion of the "most serious crimes”; b) different forms of material, legal, financial and technical cooperation between the abolitionist and the retentionist States which contribute to the imposition or implementation of the death penalty; how the death row phenomenon and the methods of execution may constitute torture or other cruel or unusual punishment .
a) Most serious crimes
Article 6(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) prescribes that the death penalty is an exceptional measure which can only be imposed in connection with "the most serious crimes" and following a trial which meets the due process guarantees. Minority of countries around the world including Singapore still impose the death penalty for drug trafficking. Over the past decades, UN treaty bodies, UN special procedure, and regional mechanisms for the protection and promotion of human rights have contributed to limiting the notion of "the most serious crimes" to those offences which result in the victims’ death.
In accordance with the safeguards guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of Those Facing the Death Penalty, “the death penalty may only be imposed for intentional crimes with lethal or other extremely grave consequences". The mandatory death sentence regime in Singapore which strips judges of their discretionary powers to hear deserving mitigating circumstances in capital cases was highlighted and the fact that Singapore and Iran execute the majority for drug trafficking ( for non intentional crimes with no killings ) was noted by the UN Special Rapporteur. The group was naturally surprised by Singapore's position when the global trends are pointing to abolition. Experts proceeded to address the ways "the most serious crimes” have been applied by domestic legislators and the courts , and the remaining challenges.
b) Complicity:
Under this item, experts focussed on different forms of State complicity in the imposition and implementation of the death penalty where the state in question is abolitionist or in cases where the international safeguards regarding the death penalty have not been met. In particular, the panel discussion turned around instances of cooperation such as exchange of intelligence information; extradition or refoulement of persons to territories where they risk facing the death penalty. The norms and standards under international law governing these forms of cooperation were further examined.
c) The death penalty and torture:
In this section, experts examined the circumstances under which the methods of execution of the death penalty, on the one hand , and the death row phenomenon, on the other, may amount to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. On a number of occasions, the UN Human Rights Committee has held that 'particularly abhorrent ' methods of execution that involve physical and mental suffering constitute cruel punishment and violate Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
Hanging as a method of execution is one such example of a cruel method of punishment that Singapore continues to practice since 1826.
In line with the UN Human Rights Committee's General Comment No. 20, the death penalty can only be carried out in a manner to cause "the least possible physical and mental suffering ". With respect to the death row phenomenon, solitary confine can tantamount to torture. Once again, Singapore retains the cruel and outmoded practice of solitary confinement which may be reviewed by UN at the next meeting in October 2012.
Yong Vui Kong
Mr Ravi also brought the plight of Yong Vui Kong, currently on Singapore’s death row, to the attention of Mr Christoff (UN Special Rapportuer). Mr Ravi explained how Yong is being treated unequally despite being only a mule, while the mastermind is only kept under preventive detention (s55 CLTP). Mr Ravi appealed for UN intervention in Yong’s case. Mr Christoff said he will look into it.
At another meeting in Harvard, Mr Ravi presented a memorandum outlining the breach of international law by Singapore and the courts' judgments in Yong's case and handed the same to Mr Orest Nowosad, Chief of the Civil and Political Rights Section, Special Procedures , Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
This memorandum will be shortly presented to the Malaysian government by Yong's Malaysian lawyers to urge the Malaysian government to file a complaint with the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to protect Yong from being unlawfully deprived of his life under international law. Details will be released shortly once it's presented to the Malaysian Government .