~by: Patrick Gallahue/Human Rights Analyst~

A survey of countries that enforce the death penalty for drug offences reveals that in many nations the majority or even entirety of those facing execution are foreigners.

In a follow-up to its landmark survey on the death penalty for drug offences, Harm Reduction International reveals that in many of the 32 nations or territories that have capital drug laws in force, the vast majority of those executed or facing death are from abroad. [SEE APPENDIX]

There are hundreds, if not thousands, of non-nationals who are facing or have faced the death penalty for drugs in recent years including citizens of Australia, France, Israel, Liberia, Mexico, Mongolia, The Netherlands, Nepal, Nigeria, Peru, The Philippines, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, Zambia and many more.

‘This report should encourage governments to reflect on their counter-narcotics assistance to states which continue to sentence people to death for drug offences,’ said Rick Lines, executive director of Harm Reduction International. ‘No government in the world can say with absolute confidence that these laws won’t potentially lead to a death sentence for one of its own citizens. What we would not impose at home, we should not expose people to abroad.’

In its report, The Death Penalty for Drug Offences – Global Overview 2011: Shared Responsibility and Shared Consequences’, HarmReduction International reveals that there were hundreds of executions for drug offences in the past year. Moreover, the organisation estimates that the number of people executed for drugs every year likely surpasses a thousand when states that keep their death penalty figures a secret are included.

These executions are carried out in direct violation of international law that limits the legal application of capital punishment. UN human rights monitors have also expressed their concern about the number of foreigners represented on death row.

Many governments claim to retain the death penalty primarily for drug offences as a means of deterring trafficking and drug use in theircountries. There is, however, no credible evidence that the death penalty for drugs is an effective deterrent.

‘Drug policies must respect human rights, international standards and proven public health measures to be effective,’ said Lines ‘It is simply wrong for a government to try and kill its way out of a drug problem. These killings are arbitrary and morally repugnant.’

Patrick Gallahue, a human rights analyst for Harm Reduction Internationaland researcher on the report said, ‘These incidents demonstrate the need for international standards to be respected when governments work together to address transnational issues.’


APPENDIX

Key findings of the report:

  • There are likely to be more than a thousand people executed every year for a drug offence and in many environments the majority or even totality are non-nationals of the executing state.
  • There are hundreds, if not thousands, of non-nationals who are facing or have faced the death penalty for drugsin recent years including citizens of Australia, France, Israel, Liberia, Mexico, Mongolia, The Netherlands, Nepal, Nigeria, Peru, The Philippines, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, Zambia and many more.
  • Indonesia: Past reports indicate that about half of the estimated one-hundred people on Indonesia’s death row are drug offenders and that 80 percent of those are foreign, including citizens Australia, the Netherlands and the United States. In 2009, the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions wrote: “While it seems clear that foreigners play a significant role in smuggling drugs into Indonesia, the fact that four out of five prisoners awaiting execution on drugs trafficking charges are foreigners raises certain questions in terms of possible discrimination in relation to both criminal enforcement and sentencing in drug-related cases.” In 2008, two Nigerians imprisoned for drug trafficking in an EU-US funded supermax prison in the country were executed by firing squad having been given one day’s notice of their deaths.
  • Saudi Arabia: Harm Reduction International estimates that 53 of the 62 executions for drugs identified in 2007 and 2008 were of foreign nationals.
  • Singapore: The government of Singapore has executed at least five people for drugs since 2008. In the past decade the government has executed citizens of Australia and Nigeria.
  • Kuwait: There have been at least 14 executions for drug offences since 1998 – and it is believed that the overwhelming majority, if not the entirety, were from abroad.
  • Iran: Of the 650-plus people executed in Iran in 2010, 590 were drug offenders, according to a report published by the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
  • China: Credible reports indicate that in the week leading up to 26 June 2010, the UN International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, China executed at least fifty-nine people, including 20 in a single day


Note:
The lawful application of capital punishmentis significantly restricted under international law. Article 6(2) of theInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that the penalty of death may only be applied to the ‘most serious crimes’. Over the past twenty-five years UN human rights bodies have interpreted Article 6(2) in a manner that limits the number and type of offences for which execution is allowable under international human rights law. While many retentionist governments argue that drug offences fall under the umbrella of ‘mostserious crimes’, this is not the perspective of the UN Human Rights Committee or the UN Special Rapporteur on extra judicial, summary or arbitrary executions, both of which have stated that drug offences do not constitute ‘most serious crimes’ and that executions for such offences are therefore in violation of international human rights law. This is supported by international State practice given the small minority of countries retaining capital punishment for drugs. In recent years there has also been increasing support for the belief that capital punishment in any form violates the prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment, as enshrined in numerous UN and regional human rights treaties, and customary international law.


Harm reduction International’s report HERE.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

SAJC student's blog causes controversy

This year’s Pre-University Seminar (PUS) was held on 28 May – 1 June,…

Reform Party leader pledges to fulfil father’s vision

by Deborah Choo and Joshua Chiang photos by Terry Xu, Joshua Chiang…

要求穆斯林员工撤下头巾,即日起诗家董取消穿戴头巾限制

诗家董日前因要求穆斯林员工拿下头巾,引发许多争议。对此,诗家董即日起取消有关穿戴头巾的限制,第一线职员将会允许穿戴头巾。 诗家董向《联合早报》透露,表示新衣着规范自本月21日起生效,适用于公司员工和外部品牌合作伙伴。 “我们已立即做出改变,以确保有关政策平等尊重所有员工和品牌合作伙伴。” 哈莉玛总统也对此作出回应,指我国社会和工作场所不允许任何形式的歧视存在。 哈莉玛昨日(20日)在脸书上表示,职场上的其实会让人造成不安,尤其是在面对疫情期间,人们对工作和生计甚感忧虑,因此发生歧视性事件只会加剧人们的焦虑,让人们备受威胁。 对此,哈莉玛也希望所有雇主能够根据员工的能力、聘用员工,确保员工的职业发展。 “多元化是我们的力量,我们社会已逐渐接受。因此,我希望雇主也能够充分接受多元化,并保持公平开放的社会价值观。” 诗家董百货公司(TANGS)的摊位商家日前在社交媒体Instagram上申诉,自己的马来员工努林在首天上班时,被两名自称是诗家董的经理,要求她拿下头巾才能继续在摊位工作,引发争议,致使劳资政公平与良好雇佣联盟(TAFEP)介入调查。 诗家董百货公司发言人对此表示,旗下员工并未曾要求任何人将头巾取下,并强调当天只是要提醒商家相关规则。

A stranger, my friend.

By zyberzitizen He sleeps there every night – rain or shine. Everytime…