Dump The Death Penalty In Thailand, Ex-Senator Urges

[webfact]

CRIME AND PUNISHMENT

Dump the death penalty, ex-senator urges

Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation on Sunday

Philippine activist tells Thais capital punishment is medieval

BANGKOK: -- Civilised society should abolish capital punishment because it is inhumane, essentially based on a medieval concept of retribution, and risks innocent people being put to death, according to Aquilino Pimentel, a former Philippine senator who played an key role in ending the death penalty in his country in 2006.

Visiting Bangkok at the invitation of Amnesty International Thailand and the Union for Civil Liberty,

the 79-year-old Pimentel urged Thais opposed to capital punishment to keep their "passion" burning, despite hearing that many Thais, including senior Buddhist monks, still support executions.

"A majority of Thais still do not support [abolition of the death penalty]," human rights lawyer Sarawut Prathumraj said. Sarawut told Pimentel that many Thais look back fondly to the 1960s and the era of dictator Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, who was known for summarily executing people accused of committing arson in public areas.

Thailand's Human Rights Master Plan for 2009 to 2013 states that the Kingdom aims to abolish capital punishment by the end of the period, but the goal seems far removed from reality, as there is no visible movement towards that end at present.

Pimentel met and addressed the Senate Committee on Justice and Human Rights, chaired by appointed Senator Somchai Sawaengkarn. Members of the committee exchanged differing views with Pimentel, with one member defending execution by lethal injection - the method practised in Thailand today - as "humane", and another saying that the death penalty was needed to rid society of its scourges.

Another member told Pimentel that it was not uncommon for some convicts who are sentenced to death to have their sentences commuted and to eventually walk free after a decade or so in prison.

Pimentel argued that the death penalty doesn't give condemned criminals the opportunity to reform themselves, while the risk of even one person being wrongly executed was too high for a civilised society to bear.

Pimentel said the notion of "an eye for an eye", also known as the Lex Talionis principle of Roman law, was medieval and not suited for modern society.

"If Lex Talionis were to be used to justify the imposition of the death penalty as an act of retribution, then in those cases of murder or rape, before the criminals are executed, they should first be subjected to the indignities or outright tortures that had been inflicted on the victims so that the criminals undergo the same level of pain as that suffered by the victims," he said.

The former Philippine senator also cited various works showing that the death penalty had no deterrent effect on criminality.

Somchai said after the meeting with Pimentel that the committee was interested in continuing to debate capital punishment, but added that "some people see the need for the death penalty to deal with those who are beyond [redemption]." He added that a compromise could eventually be struck, such as replacing the death penalty with long prison terms without parole, as is practised in the Philippines today.

Pimentel said that since the death penalty was abolished in his country, heinous crimes that would once have drawn a sentence of death were now punished by imprisonment for 20 to 40 years without parole. Some argue that long jail terms are an even worse punishment than death, he said.

One member of the Senate panel argued that it was better to kill a bird than keep it in a cage without letting it see the Sun, which was cruel and inhumane, like a long prison sentence. Pimentel said he couldn't answer on behalf of the bird, however.

-- The Nation 2012-03-11

[Om85]

Death penalty should be abolish in every country of this world.

[bendix]

Death penalty should be abolish in every country of this world.

Agreed

[stoneyboy]

Death penalty should be abolish in every country of this world.

I would prefer to see it reintroduced in the UK.

[Soutpeel]

Death penalty should be abolish in every country of this world.

I would prefer to see it reintroduced in the UK.

Yeap....

I suspect, considering the conditions in some Thai prisons, anyone who is sentenced to a life would be wishing for the death penalty

[hellodolly]

There is good arguments on both sides for abolishing the death penalty.

How ever with out it a person can go on a killing rampage knowing full good and well all he will get is prison.

Look at the case of the Norwegian who killed 77 people.

Are people saying that is OK we will support him for the rest of his life and if he needs medical attention it will be provided free.

In short he will have a better life than many of those on the outside struggling to make ends meet and not always succeeding at it.

[Om85]

There is good arguments on both sides for abolishing the death penalty.

How ever with out it a person can go on a killing rampage knowing full good and well all he will get is prison.

Look at the case of the Norwegian who killed 77 people.

Are people saying that is OK we will support him for the rest of his life and if he needs medical attention it will be provided free.

In short he will have a better life than many of those on the outside struggling to make ends meet and not always succeeding at it.

Well, i would send him to jail and make the other inmates rape him everyday and punish him and make him eat his own feces for the rest of his miserable life, giving death penalty to guys like that Norwegian is very unfair, I rather will transform the rest of his life in a living hell.

[DP25]

Death penalty should be abolish in every country of this world.

Yup. Not because I think some criminals don't deserve death, they do, but I don't trust governments not to make mistakes and execute innocent people. It happens in the US and can happen anywhere the death penalty is used.

Edited March 11, 2012 by DP25

[mauGR1]

Death penalty should be abolish in every country of this world.

Yup. Not because I don't think some criminals don't deserve death, they do, but I don't trust governments not to make mistakes and execute innocent people. It happens in the US and can happen anywhere the death penalty is used.

Yep, i find this to be the best argument against death penalty.

[bigbamboo]

Do you take the holier than thou approach or an eye for an eye, that is the question. IMO the punishment should fit the crime.

[pattayadingo]

I am and always have been for capital punishment for serious drug cases, murderers and people of that ilk.

[AngelofDeath]

I used to support the death penalty because it can, and will, send a strong message to deter criminals. Now I have to agree with the abolishment of the death penalty. Mainly because, death penalty has a chance of killing innocent lives. What I would like to see is harsher punishment being meted out. For example, if someone stole something, instead of jailing him for a few days and fining him, it will be better to chop off his hand. As for drug trafficker, chopping off the hands look better.

Edited March 11, 2012 by AngelofDeath

[Cantankerous]

instead of jailing him for a few days and fining him, it will be better to chop off his hand. As for drug trafficker, chopping off the hands look better.

Chop off their hands and make them a greater burden on society. I'm all for the death penalty why burden society with the upkeep and welfare of murderers, drug traffickers/dealers and a few more antisocial types I can think of.

[RKASA]

There is good arguments on both sides for abolishing the death penalty.

How ever with out it a person can go on a killing rampage knowing full good and well all he will get is prison.

Look at the case of the Norwegian who killed 77 people.

Are people saying that is OK we will support him for the rest of his life and if he needs medical attention it will be provided free.

In short he will have a better life than many of those on the outside struggling to make ends meet and not always succeeding at it.

Your making the large assumption that the decision balance sheet of a killer would even have that to consider. Vary Vary few would. The subject here is in Thailand as well - a state which has established a funded religion that respects the life of a bug over humans or it at least it does in practice at present.

[hellodolly]

There is good arguments on both sides for abolishing the death penalty.

How ever with out it a person can go on a killing rampage knowing full good and well all he will get is prison.

Look at the case of the Norwegian who killed 77 people.

Are people saying that is OK we will support him for the rest of his life and if he needs medical attention it will be provided free.

In short he will have a better life than many of those on the outside struggling to make ends meet and not always succeeding at it.

Your making the large assumption that the decision balance sheet of a killer would even have that to consider. Vary Vary few would. The subject here is in Thailand as well - a state which has established a funded religion that respects the life of a bug over humans or it at least it does in practice at present.

In actuality most do consider it. Studies have shown that the threat of the death penalty is preferable to life in prison.

I just tried to point out that there are cases where it should be used. And not like the backward states it should be swift. Two appeals and the needle.Most murders are not premeditated and deserve prison over death.

Ask your self if it was up to you would you have chosen to support Hitler,

Stalin or Pol Pot for life or just give them a fair trial and then the needle.

[TAWP]

I used to support the death penalty because it can, and will, send a strong message to deter criminals. Now I have to agree with the abolishment of the death penalty. Mainly because, death penalty has a chance of killing innocent lives. What I would like to see is harsher punishment being meted out. For example, if someone stole something, instead of jailing him for a few days and fining him, it will be better to chop off his hand. As for drug trafficker, chopping off the hands look better.

Death-penalty don't deter criminals.

In some instances, it will however guarantee that a criminals sees them backed into a corner and has nothing to lose by going forward in the most destructive way. What is going to happen, being sentences to two death sentences?

What needs to be done is a complete reformation of the thought behind prisons and what the aim is when someone comes out - aswell as having layers of living in prisons for those that are being sentenced to longer sentences. Even if sentences to life, one could always have it worse...depending on how that life behind bars is forcefully spent.

[richard_smith237]

This subject really is a can on worms.

On one side, why should somebody who has proven themselves not fit for society be a further burden to society?. i.e. why should the society in which they have committed such crimes worthy of the death penalty be burdened with the cost of keeping them alive in jail for the remainder of their life.

For simple practical and financial reasons, someone who is found to be unequivocally guilty of reprehensible and heinous crimes to society (cold blooded murder, rape) should place no further burden on society and face the death penalty in the most humane way possible. This is not punish them, but simply to protect the society thye will never be fit for.

I’m not talking about two guys getting into a fight and one accidentally kills the other. I am talking about cold blooded murder etc, where it can be proven without a doubt…

That said, the other side of this argument contains ideals such as two wrongs don’t make a right etc, the innocently charged may fall foul of such penalties. A moral and just society should rise above neanderthal and barbaric practices of punishment to such a degree.

IMO the issues lie with what type of world we live in. If we are to be realistic we have to accept that we live in a society that is far from perfect. Thus on occasion we may be forced to make judgments which themselves are also far from perfect.

When a criminal breaks the law he has shown that he no longer wishes to be part of society, he should be penalized / prisoned, all-be-it for a short period of time until he has learnt from his mistakes and has been rehabilitated back into society with all the help the system can provide.

However, when someone knowingly commits a crime judged by society and the law to be so heinous that the individual is likely never again to become part of society in any form other than risk, this individual should be permanently removed from that society. IMO, in this case the issue is; is it more humane to kill him?.

The outstanding issue is perhaps: Could an innocent man be wrongly accused and sent to his death? I agree that this is enough reason alone not to permit the death penalty.

The solution as I see it: For those crimes currently worthy of the death penalty: Life in Prison without the chance of parole means exactly that, and provide the prisoner with the option of the death penalty thus removing the decision from society.

I also would support the issue of consistent sentencing globally. i.e. all crimes face similar sentencing in different countries.

Edited March 11, 2012 by richard_smith237

[lungmi]

1. One point of International standard of law is the agreement that no one could be punished by a punishment no one knows (death).

2. The death penalty promotes murders more than detering them from murdering.

Following these by modern civilisation and science accepted facts is an ethic duty.

[samuidreams]

This is such an emotive subject and its not a straight forward, black and white issue.

It's hard to set the criteria of what should result in the death penalty, i think offering the prisoner the option of the death penalty opposed to a life in prison is a very interesting point.

[lungmi]

Do you take the holier than thou approach or an eye for an eye, that is the question. IMO the punishment should fit the crime.

Eye for the eye makes the world blind, One poster has is in his subscription, quoting Gandhi.

[lungmi]

This is such an emotive subject and its not a straight forward, black and white issue.

It's hard to set the criteria of what should result in the death penalty, i think offering the prisoner the option of the death penalty opposed to a life in prison is a very interesting point.

The subject is not emotive. Posters make it emotive against the facts.

[miksguevara]

multiple rapist/paedophiles, genocide and large scale drug traffics all need to be put down imho with cast iron convictions of course ie

frederick west uk

moira hindley and ian brady uk

pablo esobar colombia

so not your run of the mill crims for sure

Edited March 11, 2012 by miksguevara

[lungmi]

The 79-year-old Pimentel urged Thais opposed to capital punishment to keep their "passion" burning, despite hearing that many Thais, including senior Buddhist monks, still support executions.

Disrobe these seniors monks. The vinaya justifies it.

[lungmi]

About the topic. Phaisan Visalo is an activist against the capital punishment. Every Buddhist ? must be like him. Google him.

THAILAND:

Blood on the hands -- As 2 Cambodian sisters hope for a pardon, how deep

does Thailand's support for the death penalty run?

In the visiting area of the Klong Prem women's prison, Cambodians Montha

Khuon, 27, and her sister, Srey, a 35-year-old mother of four, stand

behind several layers of Perspex and strain to make themselves heard.

Everyone shouts here: Family and friends crowd into the booths, leaning

close to scratchy speakers. When guards cut the microphones at the end of

the strictly enforced, 20-minute visiting period, Montha is left mouthing

words in mid-sentence, trying to explain how she and her sister came to be

on death row.

While government and police tactics during the "war on drugs" _ including

an alleged 2,500 extrajudicial killings and disappearances _ have received

much attention in the local and international press over the past few

years, the legal administration of the death penalty in Thailand has

largely been absent from national discussion. However, when a Thai

delegation appears before the United Nations Human Rights Committee in

Geneva tomorrow and on Wednesday to answer 26 human-rights queries,

several will relate directly to the way that the death penalty has been

applied here in hundreds of cases like the Khuons.

During the mid-1990s, Montha Khuon ran a small shop in the market near the

Cambodian border in Had Lek, Trat. In interviews conducted during prison

visits by the Bangkok Post and Forum-Asia, a regional human-rights

organisation based in Bangkok, the Khuon sisters said that in 1997 Montha

was approached by a soldier who asked her to contact a drug dealer on his

behalf. Montha agreed, she said, because another soldier had run up a

100,000-baht debt at her shop, and she was hoping to recoup some of her

losses.

On October 7, 1997, the soldier who had contacted Montha carried five

plastic bags full of pills into the bedroom of Srey's house with the help

of 2 men, the sisters say. The men promptly placed the women under arrest.

"I wasn't afraid then, because I knew those bags weren't mine," recalls

Srey. "I became very angry as the process went on and I realised the

severity of the charge." It was the sisters' first offence. Their

14-year-old brother and Srey's husband, Thai national Bunchu Kesee, were

also arrested, but the brother was later released.

A document obtained by Forum-Asia, that draws on court records, says that

according to the police, the soldier who approached the Khuon sisters was

a "spy", or informant, who organised the drugs bust. Police claim they

came to the house as undercover agents and saw Montha, Srey and Bunchu

exchange 3 million baht in cash for 100kg of amphetamine pills.

The defendants were sentenced to death on April 3, 2001. Last August they

lost their final appeal to the Supreme Court. Their only remaining chance

to avoid execution is a royal pardon.

>From January 2001 to December 2003, the height of the Thaksin

administration's "war on drugs", the number of people convicted of capital

crimes tripled to nearly 1,000, according to Amnesty International, a

figure also cited in a report by the European Union-funded International

Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the local Union for Civil Liberty.

Wasant Panich, a member of the National Human Rights Commission, says that

the Thaksin administration's fixation on blacklists, quotas and timetables

during the "war on drugs" has had a dramatic effect on the way that

capital cases were prosecuted and sentences meted out in the last few

years.

"Setting targets and deadlines puts pressure on officials," Wasant says.

Under normal circumstances the police know that they should wait for

enough hard evidence before pressing charges, "but under the 'war on

drugs' policy they skipped the waiting part, and this caused a lot of

problems". Courts had to dismiss too many hastily brought cases due to a

lack of solid evidence, he says. The policy may also have pressured

officials into resorting to "irregular" methods, such as planting

evidence.

"We got consistent reports of police beatings, and of people signing

confessions admitting to trafficking drugs in an attempt to bargain for a

lighter sentence," says Siobhan Ni Chulachain, an Irish barrister and one

of the authors of the FIDH report, which also raises other concerns,

including 24-hour shackling of prisoners, inadequate defences for people

who aren't able to afford their own legal representation, and no

requirement for the police to notify detainees of their right to a lawyer.

Still, executions in Thailand are surprisingly rare. No one has been put

to death since December 2003, when 4 people - 2 men and a woman convicted

of drug trafficking and a man convicted of murder 2 were given lethal

injections 2 months after the official method of execution was changed

from death by shooting.

Royal pardons (commuting a death sentence to life imprisonment) may be

granted to individual applicants, or en masse to mark a special occasion,

as happened last August on Her Majesty the Queen's 72nd birthday. In the

last 2 years His Majesty the King has pardoned around 52 prisoners.

Thaksin's 1st "war on drugs" enjoyed widespread support. Nathee

Chitsawang, director-general of the Department of Corrections, cites the

popularity of the death penalty as one reason for keeping it. He says that

while he himself would like to see the day arrive when Thailand does not

need the death penalty, "now we still have too much crime. As a society we

are not as mature as places like Europe".

A survey conducted in 2000 by the Poll Research Centre of Rajabhat

Institute Suan Dusit, found that 91.5 % of the population believes that

Thailand should retain the death penalty.

But 5 years on, Thai society seems more divided over the issue, says

Thammasat law professor Kittisak Prokati. Opinions tend to break down

along socio-economic and educational lines. Buddhism still holds

significant sway over the culture, and Buddhism prohibits killing of any

kind, including by the State.

It's "out of the question", says Phra Phaisan Visalo, a respected monk and

noted writer on Buddhism. Phra Phaisan tells a story from the Jataka about

a previous life of the Buddha: The young prince had learned from his

father that one of the duties of a king was to order executions, so he

pretended to be deaf and mute so he wouldn't have to succeed to the throne

and take on that responsibility.

"Killing is bad for the killer," Phra Phaisan says. "Hatred and violence

can not be eliminated by violence."

That's why His Majesty is so careful about reviewing death-sentence

appeals, says Kittisak; he understands that the punishment is irrevocable.

Not all of Phra Phaisan's fellow members of the Sangha agree with his

stance. The Matichon newspaper reported that in September 2003, a popular

monk from the Northeast, Luang Por Khoon Parisutto, told Thaksin, "The sin

from killing a ya ba dealer is the same as from killing one mosquito.

Nothing to be afraid of."

In fact, Thais have long had a healthy fear of taking human life in the

name of justice. During the Ayutthaya period, criminals arrested for

stealing or killing were sent to the victim's family, who decided whether

the offender should be put to death or given a chance to redeem himself by

becoming a monk. In almost all cases, Kittisak says, the family chose to

pardon the criminal. In 1435, methods of execution included cracking open

the skull and filling it with red-hot pieces of metal, but by 1934 Prime

Minister Phraya Phahol Polphayuhasena proposed to his Cabinet that the

death penalty - carried out by beheading at the time - be repealed. It

wasn't, but the method of execution was declared "clearly inhumane". It

was changed to firing squad and an effective moratorium was put in place

until 1950. Prior to the change to lethal injection in 2003, the

executioner used a screen so that he could aim his sub-machine gun at a

target rather than at the blindfolded prisoner, who, typically, was given

flowers, joss-sticks and a candle to hold. Before pulling the trigger the

executioner would ask for forgiveness from the condemned.

By and large, says Kittisak, the influence of Buddhism on Thai society

still means that while many people may want the primal satisfaction of

revenge, they maintain a profound ambivalence toward the taking of life.

Kittisak believes that contemporary Thais adopt an "it's not my business"

approach to the death-penalty issue because to engage in the process would

mean shouldering a responsibility they don't want to bear. Like their

Ayutthayan ancestors, they don't want to feel as though they have blood on

their hands.

A recent proposal by the Department of Corrections to broadcast the lives

of death-row inmates up until the time of their execution was dropped when

the public voiced its strong disapproval. Last August a 12-year-old girl

in West Bengal was one of at least six children across India who died

imitating a criminal's widely publicised execution. The girl was trying to

show her younger brother how the man had been hanged.

Kittisak disagrees with the notion that the death penalty deters crime.

"All of the scientific research shows that it is clear - that the only

reason for the death penalty is revenge.

"The question is, 'Do all Thais really want revenge?"'

There is also the possibility of error. Since 1976, when the US Supreme

Court re-instated the death penalty (the same court had declared it

unconstitutional in 1972), at least 100 people awaiting execution have

been released after evidence emerged proving their innocence - 12 because

of DNA evidence.

In 2003, 2 days before leaving office, the conservative governor of the

state of Illinois, George Ryan - strongly supportive of the death penalty

when he was elected - cancelled court orders to execute all 167 men and

women on death row after a number of investigations by journalists

convinced him that the system was flawed.

A number of NGOs, including Amnesty International and the Cambodian rights

group Licadho, have petitioned His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej on the

Khuon sisters' behalf. King Norodom Sihamoni of Cambodia has also sent a

letter. "The Royal Government of Cambodia has attached great interest to

this case," says Cambodian Ambassador Ung Sean. "We don't want to see

Cambodians executed. We have no death-penalty law." The envoy says that

had the Cambodian embassy been made aware of the Khuon sisters' arrest in

1997, it would have sent officials to help them. Cambodia generally asks

the Thai authorities to inform its mission in Bangkok of such arrests.

A treaty currently under consideration by the Cambodian government would

allow for extradition between Thailand and Cambodia, but it's been 2 years

since the latter country began considering that document.

In the meantime, the sisters wait. Teary-eyed, Montha says she wants a

chance to hold her young son. The psychological stress took such a toll on

Srey that she had to be medicated and became sickly and frail.

"Whenever I thought about this whole thing," she recalls, "I would shake

from anger." She's feeling a bit better now. To keep herself occupied she

sews her own clothes, and says she's trying not to get her hopes up too

much.

"I don't mind being in prison for 50 years," she says. "I just don't want

to die this way."

(source : In this Forum I cannot quote)

[lungmi]

multiple rapist/paedophiles, genocide and large scale drug traffics all need to be put down imho with cast iron convictions of course ie

frederick west uk

moira hindley and ian brady uk

pablo esobar colombia

so not your run of the mill crims for sure

I understand your emotions

A mother see her baby is killed. Kill the murder of my baby she asks authorities.

Her other baby killed her son/daughter. She will ask for death penalty?

[thaifkrlim]

Death penalty should be abolish in every country of this world.

Agreed

which method of death penalty execution need to be abolished?

hanging, electric chair, firing, gassing or by injection

i think hanging is the most awful way of execution.

[RKASA]

There is good arguments on both sides for abolishing the death penalty.

How ever with out it a person can go on a killing rampage knowing full good and well all he will get is prison.

Look at the case of the Norwegian who killed 77 people.

Are people saying that is OK we will support him for the rest of his life and if he needs medical attention it will be provided free.

In short he will have a better life than many of those on the outside struggling to make ends meet and not always succeeding at it.

Your making the large assumption that the decision balance sheet of a killer would even have that to consider. Vary Vary few would. The subject here is in Thailand as well - a state which has established a funded religion that respects the life of a bug over humans or it at least it does in practice at present.

In actuality most do consider it. Studies have shown that the threat of the death penalty is preferable to life in prison.

I just tried to point out that there are cases where it should be used. And not like the backward states it should be swift. Two appeals and the needle.Most murders are not premeditated and deserve prison over death.

Ask your self if it was up to you would you have chosen to support Hitler,

Stalin or Pol Pot for life or just give them a fair trial and then the needle.

It would have been interesting to see what Hitler had to say from his cage - knowing he would never leave it - ever and die there slowly. He knew he didn't want that and executed himself to avoid it. So I would say yes - lock them up - it is worth it that they stay around to serve the time rather then take a short cut and easy way out. In addition to that we have to do this for our self - None of us can really know if the taking of a life that does not need to be taken is truly right - but we know that sparing it is not wrong.

[Exsexyman]

I used to support the death penalty because it can, and will, send a strong message to deter criminals. Now I have to agree with the abolishment of the death penalty. Mainly because, death penalty has a chance of killing innocent lives. What I would like to see is harsher punishment being meted out. For example, if someone stole something, instead of jailing him for a few days and fining him, it will be better to chop off his hand. As for drug trafficker, chopping off the hands look better.

Very good to see we have some Islamist fundamentalists on this forum, with their support of Sharia Law! Fair play to you sir! Allah Akbar!

[JemJem]

In the article, it says :

''the 79-year-old Pimentel urged Thais opposed to capital punishment to keep their "passion" burning, despite hearing that many Thais, including senior Buddhist monks, still support executions.''

Senior monks supporting executions ?! Gees; I am both surprised and saddened.

Jem

[aussiejosh]

I think it would be hard to find Thais to care about this, if you are in an influential position you generally don't care about lower cast society of which take the brunt of these systems. Whether inadequate justice system, or poor investigation by the police; poor people always get the short end. Thus you won't get people talking about it without influential people doing the same first.