He was 15 years and 11 months when he committed the murder; a minor by definition of the law and so his case was tried under Section 97(2) of the Child’s Act which could result in him going free instead of under Section 32 of the Penal Code which carries a death sentence.

His crime was heinous. He slit the throat of his 13-year old schoolmate R. Surendran because of some personal differences. We may not know exactly what these teens fought over that could trigger the accused to commit such a violent crime. It could be over who’s the best at a game on Playstation or it could be a difference in opinion about some game character. Who knows?

And what is worse is that the accused named another friend as the murderer. He claimed that N. Eswaran committed the murder and he was trying to stop the fight between Eswaran and Surendran.

However, the High Court judge, Datuk Zamani A. Rahim didn’t believe that another person was involved in the crime since there’s no evidence that Eswaran was even at the crime scene. In fact, all that the police found were DNA evidence of the accused all over the crime scene where Surendran was found.

The accused is indeed very lucky to escape the gallows according to the High Court judge. If he had been a day after his 16th birthday, the judge would have no hesitation to sentence him to hang.

The fact that such a violent crime had been committed should be enough reason to try the teenager under Section 32 of the Penal Court. He may be a minor when he committed the crime but his actions indicated that he’s acting like an adult. He should have been tried as an adult and should at least be sentenced to life imprisonment if sending him to the gallows is too heavy a sentence.

I can’t imagine how the parents of Surendran may be feeling about the light sentence that their son’s murderer is getting. They lost their beloved son and the murderer is practically getting away scot-free. What kind of message are we sending the teens out there? It’s all right to commit a crime as long as you’re still a minor?

With so much violence being fed to our children nowadays in video games and television, it’s no wonder many of our children are resorting to violence when they get into an argument with their friends and even family.

I think there should be an amendment to the age of a minor. Perhaps the age should be reduced to 13. Then if such violent crimes are committed by those above the age of 13, at least justice would be served to the victim and his family.

Truth, lies and a conviction

By Abdulrazaq Magaji, (magaji777@yahoo.com)

Abuja, Nigeria

‘Yes, I lied. But I later reflected on my life and what I will meet in the hereafter. Whatever financial reward one gets here for giving false testimony, one will one day definitely die. So, I realized that what I was doing was mortgaging my hereafter, and went back to the court and told them that I lied. I was promised so many things. But let me clarify something first: when I was arrested, my case had nothing to do with Major Al-Mustapha. I was arrested concerning the issue of Mohammed Sani Abacha. They told me they wanted to recover some money from him and they promised me 10 per cent of whatever they will recover, plus a house at any place of my choice. After convicting him, they will also take me to any country of my choice. Then later, they brought Al-Mustapha’s case, read all the charges against him and told me what to say when I am taken to court.

I went back to the court earlier and said that I lied, but the court still decided to discard my second testimony and based its judgment on the lies I told earlier. That’s why I now want everybody to know the real truth, through other means. Only one promise was fulfilled. They bought me a house in Jos; but I was not relocated to Saudi Arabia and did not get 10 per cent of the Mohammed Abacha loot as I was promised. Even if they fulfill the promises now, I will not accept anything from them. My conscience is pricking me; that is because of my false testimony against an innocent person. That person is now facing death by hanging. If he is killed, his blood is on my hands; and no matter how long I live, one day I must die. So, I want the world to know that he is innocent.’

Those were the words of okro mouth Mohammed Abdul alias Katako, speaking in Hausa, few hours Hamza Al Mustapha, chief security officer to late Head of State, General Sani Abacha and Lateef Sofolahan, aide to late Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola were sentenced to death by a Lagos State High Court Judge last January. With Abdul’s confession, Nigerians now have a glimpse of the high stakes involved in the politics of the death sentence passed on Al Mustapha. Abdul has now realized he has a pricking conscience and would want Nigerians to know that he played Judas for the love of money. Hear him: ‘I was promised many things but only one promise was fulfilled. They bought me a house in Jos; but I was not relocated to Saudi Arabia and did not get 10 per cent of the Mohammed Abacha loot as I was promised.’ Poser is: would Abdul’s warped conscience have pricked him to confess if he was given 10 per cent of the Mohammed Abacha loot and was relocated to Saudi Arabia.

A bigger poser which borders on the credibility of the judiciary revolves around whether or not the Lagos High Court judgment was ‘bought’ as peddled by those who claim Al Mustapha is fighting a lost battle. No, says Chief Joe- Kyari Gadzama, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria. In his words: ‘The only way we can begin to doubt the venerability or tenability of the judgment is if the prosecution was unable to establish and prove its case against the accused person and elements of the offence were not proved beyond reasonable doubt.’ In the absence of that, Chief Gadzama believes the Lagos High Court judgment was valid until it is set aside by a higher court and that any claim that the judgment was harsh or bought ‘will not hold water.’ According to him it is natural for courts to be cautious when cases are bordered on criminality because a hurried trial may lead to injustice. ‘It is better that truth is established than to hurry and condemn an innocent person’, he said, adding: ‘The authorities should allow Al Mustapha the breathing space to exercise his constitutional right of appeal to its logical conclusion.’ That, expectedly is the natural course which Al Mustapha’s defence team, led by Olalekan Ojo, has taken.

Apparently, Abdul’s confession which he had earlier made before the court when he recanted did not sway Justice Mojisola Dada who convicted Al Mustapha. In convicting Al Mustapha and Sofolahan, the judge said the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Al Mustapha provided arms and logistic to Sergeant Barnabas Jabila alias Sergeant Rogers to murder Hajiya Kudirat, wife of late Alhaji MKO Abiola on June 4, 1996 in Lagos. In his prison cell, Al Mustapha probably need not strain his ears to hear the ongoing battle to save his life. The battle to get him off the hook took a different turn after he was sentenced to death and especially after Abdul’s public confession. Clearly, a date with the hangman was the least on the mind of Al Mustapha on the day he made his last appearance in court. His optimism was not misplaced: few months before he was sentenced, Jabila, Abdul and other accused persons were let off the hook over a related criminal offence. Al Mustapha’s defence team and his supporters alike had, on the basis of their acquittal, reasoned that it was just a matter of time before their man too would breath the air of freedom. The air of optimism was further reinforced by the confession of Jabila and Abdul when they recanted in court. The optimism turned out to be misplaced.

There are those who believe Al Mustapha’s conduct in the course of the trial was enough to task the patience of the most lenient judge. Right from the beginning of his trial, Al Mustapha did not fail to intrigue Nigerians. For most part of the trial, he conducted himself a politician hauled before the courts to answer to charges of corruption. And like the politicians, most of whom hire praise singers each time they make court appearances, Al Mustapha displayed the characteristics of a man oblivious of the gravity of the charge hanging on his neck.  Even on the day of his conviction, Al Mustapha, probably playing out a line presented to him by his handlers, was full of banters and theatrics. For a man battling to save his life, he did not cut the picture of a man who was about to keep a date with the hangman. Though there are many Nigerians who argued that the wheel of justice, in respect of Al Mustapha, dragged rather too slowly, the man’s conduct in court probably cost him some of his fans. Interestingly, his fans and supporters did not see anything wrong with his conduct as they insisted that the man had no cause to be remorseful since, in their words, Al Mustapha was innocent of the charge levelled against him. One of them is Al Mustapha’s wife, Hafsat.

Within hours of her husband’s conviction, picked holes in the judgment and defended Al Mustapha’s conduct in court. ‘Why must he show remorse?’ she asked rhetorically. ‘After all, he did not commit the offence they charged him with. He would have been remorseful if he had committed the offence. But now, he has no need to bend down to beg anybody over an offence he did not commit.’  But Aminu Dalhatu, one sympathizer who runs an online pressure group to free Al Mustapha disagrees. ‘If the picture of bravado was what Al Mustapha’s handlers wanted him to cut, they got it all wrong and it was better they changed tactics’, he said, adding: ‘If, however, Al Mustapha chose that course, in defiance of his handler’s wish for him to cut the picture of a man wrongly accused of murder, then he had better begin to listen to his handlers.’ According to Dalhatu, sobriety should not be equated with complicity. It is not being suggested here that Al Mustapha had a hand in the murder. No! But he will also do well to remember that even some of his staunchest admirers feel less impressed with his antics in court.’

Even before his conviction, Al Mustapha had, in other cases, played the role of a man ahead of a conquering army. For most part of those trials, he pointed accusing fingers in the direction of prominent Nigerians and created the impression that he was being persecuted for who he is instead of addressing the substance of his case. There are Nigerians who argue that Al Mustapha was merely being a soldier by his conduct in court. If that was his aim he did hit the bull’s eye. In the not too recent past, Nigerians were treated to last minute theatrics by convicted coup plotters few minutes before they were tied to the stakes and shot. One convicted coup plotter, realizing that he was going to miss life on the fast lane in pepper soup joints in the barracks even requested for a stick of cigarette before he was shot: remorseless, heartless and unrepentant till the end.

Before Jabila and Abdul recanted on their roles in the alleged murder they had told the court that Sofolahan gave them information on the itinerary of Hajiya Kudirat which eased their task of eliminating her. Kudirat was on her way to the American Embassy on the day she was killed at the Toll Gate end of the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway. Jabila, a member of the special security outfit established to protect Abacha and his family, had also confirmed he fired the shot that killed Kudirat, while Abdul, who was the personal driver to Mohammed Abacha, narrated how himself and Jabila went out the day after meeting Sofolahan, trailed a white Mercedes Benz car from Ikeja to the old Lagos toll gate and how Jabila shot at the car and directed the party to drive back to Dodan Barracks. Jabila further narrated how he was, some days before Kudirat’s murder, summoned by Al-Mustapha, briefed on ‘a special assignment’ and handed some bags containing guns. He also told the court that Sofolahan provided them with information about Kudirat’s movement and even led them to her residence after which his team planned strategies for the operation. Jabila also said Sofolahan’s information aided them in trailing Kudirat until he shot her on 4 June, 1996 from a car driven by Abdul. The testimony was corroborated by Abdul who also said he once worked with Mohammed Abacha’s late senior brother, Ibrahim, but had his service transferred to Mohammed after the latter’s death. Jabila and Abdul later recanted during cross-examination.

The case also suffered some hiccups after the fourth prosecution witness, Yusuf, who allegedly obtained statements from Al-Mustapha during investigation, also, midway into his testimony, refused to cooperate with the prosecution. He allegedly refused to attend court, a development that forced the court to close the prosecution’s case at a point after several adjournments. Al-Mustapha denied all the allegations saying he did not send anybody to kill Kudirat. He also denied sending any emissary to monitor the activities of NADECO members even after being

confronted with his statement in which he admitted sending Rabo Lawal, a chief superintendent of police, to monitor a NADECO rally in Lagos. On Kudirat, the prosecution confronted Al Mustapha with a statement by Mohammed Abacha, contained in the Supreme Court’s judgment in an interlocutory appeal by Mohammed, and upon which he was freed.

In the statement, part of which was read to the court by the lead prosecution lawyer, Lawal Pedro, SAN, Mohammed admitted witnessing where Al-Mustapha gave Jabila a bag containing guns. This was vehemently opposed by Al-Mustapha’s counsel, Mr. Olalekan Ojo. Also, Al-Mustapha, who earlier testified not to have tortured anyone in his life, later admitted, during cross-examination, that he tortured Turner Ogboru. He also admitted that, as trained military personnel, he could take lives in public interest. The defence also called a retired army personnel, Kyari Gadzama, who worked as an aide to Al-Mustapha, who testified in his favour. He admitted knowledge of Kudirat’s assassination, but said he heard of it from media reports. He also denied accompanying his ex-principal always to every of his engagements and meetings. On August 17, 2011, Sofolahan had denied involvement in the offences for which he was accused and denied ever working for any member of Abiola family.

 Al Mustapha came to the attention of General Abacha on account of his conduct of interrogation during interrogations into two coup attempts he participated in. As a major in the military, Al Mustapha had exceptional powers and wielded considerably greater influence than his superiors. Within and outside the military, Al Mustapha’s name was synonymous with fear and he did instill fear in many Nigerians especially those who were as perceived of ‘enemies’ of the military regime. After being appointed Chief Security Officer, Al-Mustapha established a number of small security outfits recruited from the military and other security organizations, and trained in Israel and Korea. As Chief Security Officer, Al Mustapha led a Special Strike Force Unit till the death of General Abacha on June 8, 1998. Al-Mustapha was quickly removed from his job when General Abdulsalami Abubakar took over as Head of State in June 1998.Three months later, Al Mustapha appeared in court with Abacha’s son Mohammed, charged with the murder in June, 1996, of Hajiya Kudirat. At the trial Jabila, said by shooting Hajiya Kudirat ,he was only doing his duties by merely obeying orders from his superior. Al Mustapha and four others were also charged with a 1996 attempt to murder late Alex Ibru, publisher of The Guardian Newspapers who once served as Abacha’s Minister of Internal Affairs. Another charge was laid against al-Mustapha for the attempted murder of former naval chief, Isaac Porbeni.

While the trials proceeded, Al Mustapha was detained at the Kirikiri maximum security prisons. Then on April 1, 2004, he was charged with involvement in a plot to overthrow the government. The clamour to release Al Mustapha began in 2007, when former president, General Ibrahim Babangida was joined by some Nigerian newspapers to plead his case. Twelve years after he was taken into custody, precisely on December 21, 2010, Al-Mustapha was acquitted of most charges against him alongside James Danbaba, former Lagos State Police Commissioner, former Zamfara State military administrator ,Jibril Bala Yakubu, and Rabo Lawal, former  head of Aso Rock Anti Riot Police squad. Al-Mustapha was however not cleared of the alleged murder of Kudirat Abiola for which he was eventually convicted to hang.

Interestingly, what Hafsat said her husband will not do to get him off the death row is exactly what prominent Nigerians have been doing, especially since 2007, to spare Al Mustapha the noose. In the midst of her tough talk, prominent Northern leaders, yet in one of their several crisis management meetings on Al Mustapha, met in Kaduna barely forty eight hours after the judgment to explore their next move. Outside the north, critical support came the way of Al Mustapha even from very unlikely quarters. For instance, members of the Abiola family now have the unusual duty of joining placard carrying Nigerians in the clamour for Al Mustapha’s life to be spared. Hafsat and Mohammed Jamiu,  children of the slain Hajiya Kudirat Abiola, said though they still feel the pain of the cold blooded murder of their mother, they are not about to join in celebrating the death sentence passed on Al Mustapha. While Jamiu waxed philosophical saying whoever killed his mother should be prepared to account for their deeds in the here after, Hafsat was specific in condemning the death sentence preferring a life in jail for those who murdered her mother. Few bereaved families will tow that line, especially in these self imposed hateful and hate filled days Nigeria is passing through. It is also as well that, even outside the Abiola homestead, prominent Nigerians, especially from the south west, some of whom had one ugly tale or the other to tell in their past encounters with Al Mustapha by being members of NADECO, or the National Democratic Coalition, have joined in the clamour for his life to be spared. One of them is Dr. Frederick Fasehun, founder of the OPC, or Oodua Peoples’ Congress.

The campaign to free Al Mustapha is gaining momentum and attracting more support. One Abuja lawyer who did not want his name in print said Al Mustapha should be freed not because he is innocent of the several atrocities of the Abacha era but if anything, the lower court’s pronouncement must have sobered him. ‘I hope he learns the lesson.This judgment has sobered a man whose name instilled fear in many Nigerians. That is life but I believe the man should be allowed to live the lesson outside prison.’

Hamza Al Mustapha: Between the Noose and the Muse

By Abdulrazaq Magaji, (magaji777@yahoo.com)

Abuja, Nigeria.

Right from the beginning of his trial, Hamza Al Mustapha, a Major and former Chief Security Officer to late General Sani Abacha has not failed to intrigue Nigerians. For most part of the trial, he has conducted himself as one of the politicians hauled before the courts to answer to charges of corruption. And like the politicians, most of whom hire praise singers each time they make a court appearance, Al Mustapha has so far displayed the characteristics of a man oblivious of the gravity of the charge hanging on his neck. Interestingly, his fans and supporters are not helping matters.

For the records, Al Mustapha alongside Lateef Shofolahan, top aide to late Alhaji Moshood Kashimawo Abiola, were recently convicted for the 1996 murder of Abiola’s wife, Hajiya Kudirat by a Lagos state High Court. Even on the day of the convictions, Al Mustapha, probably playing out a line presented to him by his handlers, was full of banters and theatrics. For a man battling to save his life, Al Mustapha did not cut the picture of a man who was about to keep a date with the hangman. And for some of us who feel the wheel of justice had dragged rather too slowly in the case, the man’s appearance did not help matters.

Even before his conviction for the murder of Hajiya Kudirat Abiola, Al Mustapha had, in other cases, played the role of a man ahead of a conquering army. For most part of those trials, he pointed fingers in the direction of prominent Nigerians and created the impression that he was being persecuted for who he is instead of addressing the substance of his case. But that is not unusual: when a man has his back to the wall, foul play could as well mean fair play. It is done even in the so called advanced countries. Remember the case of the randy Dominique Strauss Kahn, former IMF chief in his encounter with Nafisatou in a New York hotel room? The man simply got some of the best lawyers around who dug into the poor woman’s past and presented her as a liar. Here at home, Saburi Oladimeji Bankole, former speaker of the House of Representatives, treaded that weather beaten path when he spent hours trying to discredit a member of the prosecution team. Fair enough!

It is enough to send a jury on a wild goose chase. But even if that was not the intention of Al Mustapha, he appeared to have perfected the art of whipping up sentiments rather than addressing the charges against him. Beyond maintaining a straight face, he also presented himself as a lion hearted, no nonsense military officer to whom death should mean nothing. In the not too recent past, Nigerians were treated to last minute theatrics by convicted coup plotters just minutes before they were tied to the stakes and shot. One funny coup plotter, realizing that he was going to miss life on the fast lane in pepper soup joints in the barracks (where, on earth, is former cop, Alozie Ogugbuaja?) even requested for a stick of cigarette before he was shot: remorseless, heartless and unrepentant till the end. If the picture of bravado was what Al Mustapha’s handlers wanted him to cut, they got it all wrongand it was better they changed tactics. If, however, Al Mustapha chose that course, in defiance of his handler’s wish to for him to cut the picture of a man wrongly accused of the murder, then he had better begin to listen to his handlers.

Being accused of murder is certainly not a thing to be proud of and nobody is saying Al Mustapha should wear a mournful face at his next court appearance. But even if deep down, he is convinced that he knew nothing about the murder of Hajiya Kudirat Abiola, there was and, certainly there is no need for him to play to the gallery. What, through his theatrics, has he been trying to tell the world? That, by bantering and joking and playing to the gallery, he is innocent of the charge against him? Or, that, as a soldier and just as the cigarette puffing coup plotter, he was trained in the rather fatalistic school of thought that a soldier’s life is worthless? Sobriety, lest we forget, should not be equated with complicity. It is not being suggested here that Al Mustapha had a hand in the murder. No! But he will also do well to remember that even some of his staunchest admirers feel less impressed with his bold face.

It is just as well that some members of the Abiola family now have the unusual duty of joining placard carrying Nigerians in the clamour for Al Mustapha’s life to be spared. Namesake of Al Mustapha’s wife, Hafsat and her brother, Jamiu, both children of the slain Hajiya Kudirat Abiola, literally said, in the wake of the convictions, that though they still feel the pain of the cold blooded murder of their mother, they are not about to join in celebrating the death sentence. While towing the religious line, Jamiu was non committal, insisting that whoever killed his mother should be prepared to account for his deeds in the here after. But Hafsat was specific in condemning the death sentence: she prefers a life in jail, rather than the hangman’s noose, for those whoever murdered her mother. Few bereaved people will tow that line, especially in these self imposed hateful and hate filled days Nigeria is passing through.

It is also as well that, even outside the Abiola homestead, prominent Nigerians, especially from the south west, some of whom had one ugly tale or the other to tell in their past encounters with Al Mustapha by being members of NADECO, or the National Democratic Coalition, have joined in the clamour for his life to be spared. One of them is Dr. Frederick Fasehun, founder of the Oodua Peoples’ Congress. And as the campaign to get Al Mustapha off the death row gathers momentum, here is a wish as well as a prayer that the man is spared the noose. Inspite of everything, Nigerians are a largely forgiving people with a short memory of hate. In his cell, the man must be musing over his role in the days of General Abacha. If anything, the lower court’s pronouncement must have jolted him; it is expected to have sobered him up, something the thirteen years he has spent as an awaiting trial man failed to do.

Abdulrazaq Magaji, a journalist and writer, lives in Abuja

Rizal was immediately transferred to a chapel cell to wait for his last moment. Among those who visited him were his Jesuit professors at the Ateneo de Manila where he attended high school and earned the degree of Bachiller en Artes. There was no representative from the University of Santo Tomas where he pursued Medicine and Philosophy.

Standouts among those who viewed him on his last hour were his lawyer; his bodyguard; Fr. Federico Faura who had predicted that his novel the Noli Me Tangere would cost him his life; Fr. Vicente Balaguer who was known to have married him and Josephine Bracken and who convinced him to retract his “anti-Catholic” ideas found in his novels; Donya Teodora his mother; Trinidad his sister to whom he gave the alcohol cooking stove which contained his last poem of farewell; Josephine Bracken his “wife”.

About 6:30 a.m. of December 30, 1896 a trumpet heralded the start of Dr. Jose Rizal’s death march to Bagumbayan (now the Luneta or Rizal Park), a mound facing the sea. At a distance lay the island of Corregidor and the hills of Bataan. Four soldiers with bayoneted rifles formed the advance guard. A few meters behind them Rizal marched calmly in black suit, black derby hat, black shoes, white shirt, and black tie. His arms were tied from elbow to elbow, but the rope was loose enough to make him move. To the muffled sounds of the drums the cavalcade marched serenely. A few curious spectators lined the street from Fort Santiago to Plaza del Palacio of the Manila Cathedral.

Rizal and the cavalcade arrived at Bagumbayan at exactly 7:00 a.m. He faced the firing squad ready to be shot facing the enemy. He asked Captain Dominguez that he be shot through his heart but the request was denied because the death sentence specified that he be shot at the back. Rizal reluctantly turned his back facing the sea. Dr. Felipe Ruiz Castillo felt his pulse and was surprised to find that it was normal— meaning, he was not afraid to die. One friar came forward to let him kiss the Crucifix. Without a word he turned his face away. (Was this the action of a man who retracted his “anti-Catholic religious errors”?)

Captain Dominguez raised his sword and ordered the executioners: “Ready, aim, fire!” Riddled with bullets Rizal whirled and fell on his back, looking up at the sky. He died at exactly 7:03 a.m. on December 30, 1896. He was 35 years, 5 months, and 11 days old.

In his prophetic vision (like his dream which foretold the exact date of his execution, December 30) he had seen himself die (as described in the third stanza of his celebrated “Mi Ultimo Adios”, his last farewell poem) wherein he imagines his blood dyeing with crimson the newborn day.

I die just when I see the dawn break,
Through the gloom of night, to herald the day;
And if color is lacking, my blood thou shalt take,
Pour’d out at need for thy dear sake,
To dye with its crimson the waking ray.

In previous executions at Bagumbayan, it was normal for spectators to be noisy after the execution. But when Rizal fell Capt. Rafael Dominguez who supervised his execution ordered the crowd and his men to be silent. The silence was a recognition of “the brave recognizing the brave.”

Rizal’s remains were first buried at Paco Cemetery which, since early times had been a graveyard for early prelates and governors-general as well as victims of cholera that plagued Manila in 1820. Sixteen years later on December 30, 1912 his remains were exhumed and placed in a glass crypt at the base of Rizal’s present monument and tomb at the Luneta or Rizal Park (previously Bagumbayan where he had been shot by firing squad). The cemetery became a national shrine during the American Occupation.

“The verdict is final by the Chinese judicial authorities in strict accordance with the Chinese law. We hope that the Philippine side could understand,” Sun Yi, Chinese embassy spokesman, said.

“The Chinese side will provide all the necessary assistance to the relatives and Philippine consular officials for their visits to the convicted and other related matters,” he said.

Earlier, officials said they were resigned to the fate of the three convicts.

“Not that I know of,” said acting Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario when asked if there was word from Beijing on the Philippines’ last minute plea for a stay of execution of Credo, Ordinario-Villanueva and Batain.

“I think we’ve tried everything that we can already and at some point I think we have to accept the fact that the sentence is a finality,” Del Rosario told reporters.

He said President Aquino himself had written Chinese President Hu Jintao thrice, seeking reprieve for the three Filipinos. This was on top of Vice President Jejomar Binay’s own initiative to convince Beijing to spare the three Filipinos from death.

“The President has written three times, there have been back-channeling and I’m afraid at this point in time there really isn’t much left we can do,” he said.

He said Philippine Ambassador to Beijing Francisco Benedicto has been busy making representations with the Chinese government.

“We obviously sympathize with them (families) and we’ll be holding a Mass here (DFA) tomorrow (today),” Del Rosario added.

Villanueva, 32, was convicted for smuggling 4,110 grams of heroin on Dec. 24, 2008, and Credo, 42, four days later for smuggling a slightly bigger amount of heroin. Batain was sentenced to death on May 24 in the same year also for drug trafficking.

DFA spokesman Eduardo Malaya said the families of Credo and Ordinario-Villanueva have been allowed by the Fujian Provincial Higher People’s Court to visit them today from 8 to 9 a.m. at the Xiamen No. 1 Detention House.

The Batain family will have the opportunity to visit her at 9:30 a.m. at the Shenzhen No. 3 Detention House. The exact time of execution was not revealed.

Malaya said the families of the three would not be allowed to witness the execution.

“No. Under Chinese law and regulation the carrying out of the sentence will be made in private,” Malaya said.

“Officials of the Philippine Consulate General in Xiamen will be with the Credo and Ordinario families during their visit and during the promulgation of the sentences. Officials of the Philippine Consulate General in Guangzhou will likewise accompany the Batain family during their visitation,” the DFA said in a statement.

‘Keep on hoping’

But at Malacañang, spokesman Edwin Lacierda said, “We should keep on hoping” until the sentences are carried out.

“Hoping that similar to the last instance that happened before, when we felt that all hope was lost, China decided to postpone the execution. But we are still hoping within the realization that we are limited by what we can do. So we will leave it up to the Chinese authorities but, again, while the execution has not been carried out, we will still hope,” Lacierda said.

China had originally set the execution of the three last Feb. 21 and 22 but decided to give them a reprieve following a visit from Binay.

Lacierda also disclosed that the President ordered Binay and Justice Secretary Leila de Lima to look into cases of overseas Filipino workers involved in drug trafficking and find out how and why they managed to leave the country undetected by airport scanners.

Lacierda said the thrust right now was to establish greater coordination between China and the Philippines to prevent Filipino travelers from being used as drug mules.

“My understanding is that the 70-plus Filipinos in China who are on death row have had commutation of sentence. In other words, within two years of good behavior they will no longer be executed. This was discussed between the President, Vice President Binay and me after the Cabinet meeting last Monday,” Lacierda said.

He said concerned agencies like the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration and the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration should make sure that OFWs are protected from drug syndicates.

Binay’s tack

Binay, for his part, told Beijing that the three Filipinos, particularly Villanueva, should be spared from execution because they can help Chinese authorities track down and prosecute the leaders of big crime syndicates.

Binay told the Chinese president that Villanueva, based on her affidavit, named her recruiter Mapet Cortez or Tita Cacayan as the source of the illegal drugs she carried to China.

“In light of that testimony, which we believe is very material to the prosecution of Cortez (aka Cacayan), and our effort to break the back of the illegal drug traffic from the Philippines, I appeal to the Chinese government to help us keep Villanueva and the two others alive to enable us to establish beyond any reasonable doubt whether at least one or two or all three of them are mere unwitting couriers, while the real principals are still at large in the Philippines,” Binay said.

In her sworn statement, Villanueva said Cortez recruited her for a job in Xiamen and provided her with an empty suitcase that she used for her travel to China. Cortez is in the custody of the National Bureau of Investigation.

Villanueva claimed she was not aware that the suitcase contained heroin. She said Cortez “knowingly tricked” her into smuggling the illegal drugs.

“It is my fervent hope that Your Excellency will see in this appeal a sincere effort on our part, who hold the highest regard for China and its criminal justice system, to make sure that the truly guilty are punished and those who merely happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time and are defrauded or forced to commit crime by the real criminals are given a second chance, according to your own policy of combining leniency with rigidity in the implementation of your criminal laws,” Binay said.

“I am honored to write at this time, to reiterate, first of all, my profound gratitude to the People’s Republic of China for its decision, on the occasion of my visit to Beijing on 18-19 February 2011, to stay the execution of Sally Ordinario-Villanueva, Ramon Credo and Elizabeth Batain, who had been convicted of drug trafficking, and finally to appeal for the continued suspension of their execution, in light of the discovery by Philippine authorities of certain evidence which could help us break wide open the illegal drug traffic into China from the Philippines,” Binay said.

“It is my further hope that our two governments and peoples would continue to work as closely together as possible in providing our region and the world the most humane expression of justice for all. Please accept, Excellency, renewed assurances of my highest consideration and esteem,” Binay said.

“We’re aware of the efforts undertaken by the Vice President and we’re grateful to the Vice President for his continuing effort on behalf of our three nationals in China. And the DFA continues to work with the Vice President and our consulate officials on this matter,” Malaya said.

But for some lawyers, Villanueva’s sworn affidavit executed last March 26 before Philippine Vice Consul Ambrosio Brian Enciso III in Xiamen City, China had come too late.

“We cannot be sure what legal effect the affidavit may have although we remain hopeful it does,” said Isabela Rep. Giorgidi Aggabao, a lawyer and province mate of Villanueva.

Former Justice secretary Silvestre Bello III said there was nothing in the affidavit that could justify a review of the case. “The affidavit should have been made before the final decision and when there was still enough time for the government to make an appeal,” he said.

In Tuguegarao City, Cagayan, Regional Prosecutor Rommel Baligod said, “Experience has shown us that the Chinese government is unforgiving when it comes to drugs.”

Acceptance, hope

Sen. Loren Legarda said the government should just respect the decision of China if it decides to continue with the executions today.

“It’s their law,” Legarda said.

“So we should not be a nation just pleading to other nations not to execute our nationals. Let’s not deploy them (workers). Let’s not allow them to be sold and to be trafficked,” Legarda said.

She said the government should strengthen the country’s anti-drug trafficking law and not just wait for another Filipino to be arrested and convicted abroad.

Aurora Rep. Juan Edgardo Angara said he does not expect Chinese leaders to “change their minds” and stop the executions.

“Let it be a lesson to us and Philippine leaders, a long overdue call to focus on job creation at home. This, after all, is the only possible explanation why many agree to be drug mules,” Angara said.

Quezon City Rep. Winston Castelo said he believes the government has exhausted all diplomatic efforts in trying to save the Filipino drug mules.

“This is a stern warning to Filipinos trying to smuggle drugs abroad (on) the consequences they will face,” Castelo said. “Officials involved should suffer the same fate.”

“We can only do so much in terms of representing them in their legal case. But if our own authorities were being strict in our own borders, these people would not have reached foreign shores with their packages,” Zambales Rep. Milagros Magsaysay said.

Deputy Speaker and Quezon Rep. Lorenzo Tañada III also said he believes the government has done enough to try to save the three Filipinos.

“But there is nothing wrong going the extra mile in trying to save them. If you want other countries to respect our laws and sovereignty, we should also respect their laws and sovereignty,” Tañada said.

Ang Kasangga party-list Rep. Teodorico Haresco said prayers can do wonders but the nation should also be prepared for the worst.

“The important thing is we learn from this and nothing of this sort happens again. Because if these things happen again, especially the use of gullible Filipinos as drug mules, then we would lose not only lives but respect,” Haresco said.

“We are knocking on all doors. We are trying to storm heavens for a change in their fate of what will happen to them. We still don’t know. I think the best weapon we can still think of, so far, is still prayers,” said Fr. Edwin Corros, executive secretary of CBCP-Episcopal Commission on Migrants and Itinerant People.

“The Philippines does not ask the Chinese government to bend its laws on the issue, only appeals for the sake of friendship and humanitarian reasons,” Francis Chua, president of the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry said in a statement.

“PCCI joins the public sentiments in hope for possible change in the decision on the execution of the three workers on death row,” he said.

“We have been reminding our Filipino workers against becoming drug couriers of international drug syndicates and the case of the three Filipinos should serve as warning to them,” Labor department spokesman Nicon Fameronag said

Recently, Tamil Nadu State Assembly passed a resolution, recommending commuting of the death sentence to the three assassins of India’s former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to life imprisonment. This has shocked the entire nation. All the right thinking people, including people in Tamil Nadu, condemned this resolution. Now the Jammu & Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has tweeted whether the national response will be as muted if J&K Assembly passed a resolution recommending for the commutation of Afzal Guru’s death sentence also.

Image via Wikipedia

BJP’s double standards

Omar has a point. He has hit at the bull’s eye. He has nailed the coffin. Even before the J&K Assembly passed such a resolution or even contemplated passing it, BJP has expressed its opposition to it. But the same BJP was silent on the Tamil Nadu Assembly resolution. Why? Was it not double standards?

BJP needs Jayalalithaa’s support to come to power in Delhi

One reason for the BJP’s double standards is that it does not want to spoil its relationship with the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa or her principal opponent and the DMK President Karunanidhi. BJP senses that the days of the Congress government are numbered with one scam after another breaking out. The Central government and the Congress Party are totally discredited. In the 2014 elections (or in the elections if it comes much before schedule), BJP is sensing victory. But it will not be a single handed victory. BJP can come to power only with the support of other political parties, particularly the regional parties. Therefore, there is advantage in keeping silent on the Tamil Nadu Assembly resolution for it. In the event of BJP emerging as the largest single party in the Parliamentary elections, the BJP may need the help of either Jayalalithaa or Karunanidhi to catapult itself into power.

BJP has no stakes in Kashmir

No such advantage will accrue to the BJP if it keeps silent on any similar resolution by the J&K Assembly. This is because Omar Abdullah’s National Conference Party or his opponents like Mehbooba Mufti of People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and Hurriyat leaders are not expected to go for an alliance with the BJP. Therefore, BJP has no stakes in opposing the J&K Assembly resolution tooth and nail, if it comes about.

Rajiv assassins are Hindus, Afzal and Kasab are Muslims

Second reason is of course religious polarisation. The three assassins of Rajiv Gandhi, namely Santhan, Murugan and Perarivalan are all Hindus whereas Afzal Guru is a Muslim. BJP has built its political platform on strong anti Muslim sentiments and especially singling out Islamic terrorism as the reason for all evils gripping the nation. Therefore it will view it as a great opportunity to politically sensitise the matter if J&K Assembly passes a resolution in favour of Afzal Guru. BJP’s political fortunes depend on it.

Congress will lose the elections if it goes soft on Afzal or Kasab

Now Omar will understand the difference. Okay, for a moment let us forget about the BJP’s stand or attitude to this matter and concentrate on the general public opinion in India. If Afzal Guru is granted a commutation from death sentence to life imprisonment, the general public will feel that the Congress Party is soft on Islamic terrorism just for the sake of garnering Muslim votes. This will turn the majority Hindu public against the ruling party in the coming Parliamentary elections and will be one more contributory factor to unseat it from power. Granting a commutation to the Rajiv Gandhi assassins will also be viewed similarly, but with a lesser degree of importance.

LTTE did not kill innocent people, Islamic terrorists aim only at innocent people

What is the difference? This is because the LTTE was involved in only one time killing of an important Indian leader on Indian soil. After this, the LTTE never repeated such acts on Indian soil, though it killed many people in Sri Lanka. Even in the case of Rajiv Gandhi assassination, the LTTE did not aim to kill the innocent people in Tamil Nadu. On the other hand Islamic terrorists are again and again killing many innocent Indians because of their religious bigotry. Indian public have suffered for many years and are still suffering because of the Islamic terrorism. In fact, Islamic terrorists like Laskar-e-Toiba concentrate in killing only innocent public in shopping areas, bus stands, railway stations and other public places. They never aim to kill the Prime Minister or the Chief Minister or any other political bigwig. Therefore, there is a strong public opinion on the part of the Indians and particularly by the majority Hindu population, who are by and large peace loving, to view strongly any leniency shown to the Islamic terrorists who were caught by the police. Therefore, a soft corner shown by the government towards terrorists like Afzal Guru and Kasab will land the government and the ruling party in a big soup. On the other hand, execution of these hard core criminals will lift the fortunes of the Central government and the Congress Party and may result in electoral gains for them. In other words, an execution of Afzal Guru and Kasab before the Parliamentary elections is capable of giving a good advantage to the ruling Congress Party and compensating its loss of image because of the scams. This may help the Congress to come back to power for the third time in a row as the principal opposition BJP is also in disarray with war of words among its top leaders.

Omar is not a fool

In addition, media will also blow up any leniency shown by the government to the Islamic terrorists. Omar knows all these things. He is not a fool. But still he has deliberately tweeted this question just to probe others.

To my Mum and Dad,

 These are going to comprise my last words. It has been two years, a long time since my arrest. Two years since I’ve been in this prison. During this time I have discovered a good deal more about people now and especially the enormousness and wonder of family ties.

 I thank you from the bottom of my heart for the hardship you went through, to bestow me up and furnish for me for over 20 years. Every parent consumes high desires for their children and I acknowledge I have thwarted you. I know my brother won’t do as I did and that he bequeaths to provide for you in a way that I didn’t. Please don’t grieve when I’m gone. I know I’m going to heaven. I repent too much and cried too much. This is just an impermanent parting and I know we’ll meet again. Be happy for me.

 Everybody finishes his or her travel in life one day, nobody can avoid that. It is just a substance of the way we walk of life the journey. I’m going to die soon. And this is the result of choices I made. I can’t charge myself now. We can’t fault anyone else. Please don’t blame yourselves too. If anything, I am really the one to put all the blame. I never heeded to any of the advice you brought about me. I profoundly repent treating you badly. I know we contended more than we should have. I want to thank you now for making up there for me despite all he pain I know I’ve caused.

 I’ve been a burden to you for so long and even after I’m gone I need to bother you to take care of the funeral. I have brought hurt to you and expanded your burden. And I have given you nothing you could be proud of. Instead, I brought you and my brother’s disgrace. I owe you so much but I will not be able to repay it.  I really don’t know what else to say except to wish you wellness. I am going and I shall take along whatever disappointment the family has with me. I leave behind all my wishes hoping that you will forgive me for not being a filial son.

 Please take care.

This letter is written by a 29 years old man two days before his execution. He will be hanged because he was caught of selling slabs of heroin to a drug dealer. He appealed after convicted but rejected and sentenced to death.

It was a very long time ago when he composed a letter to his parents. Perhaps, once he was just 6 years old. He can’t remember much. Only now he recalled saying everything his heart wants to utter before. Only now before he will die.

 

Should mandatory sterilization be considered for sex offenders? Since there are only 4 purposes in which a punishment is carried out, we can do away with protracted and otiose discussion by going straight into considering them.

1)      1) Rehabilitation

Incarceration works the same way as to how detention applies to an insolent kid. They will be forcefully given the time to self-reflect on their actions or omissions. With that in mind, it makes no sense for a judge to adjure a punishment that is irreversible. Bear in mind that sex offenders include sexual offenses which varies from trivial crimes which are exonerative to serious cases such as child rape. In law, morality, and also economically, it would be best to give offenders of the former category the chance to expiate their guilt.

2)     2) Retribution

The idea of retribution is now anachronistic. While in the eyes of the society, certain type of offenders deserve to be punished, we rarely see written judgment passed with ratio or obiter which states retribution as one of the reasons. More and more countries are even abrogating death sentences. The law has a normative role to play in the society. It would be counter-productive for the law to allow such primitive reasoning to be a canker to society.

3)     3) Deterrence

This is probably the most common reason used by the prosecution to allow heavy sentences to be passed to a convict. Deterring a criminal from committing an odious crime will, more often than not, outweigh the importance of his individual interest. However, it is already status quo that most countries have heavy and punitive sentences for rapists. Would it be necessary for a rapist to be convicted for 20 years imprisonment, and permanently deprive him of his right to even, say, start a family once he has duly served his sentence? Some countries even implement whipping in addition to imprisonment. The psychological fear instilled in a convict through pain is far more effective than sterilization.

4)      4) Incapacitation

While many countries have already abrogated death sentences, many others still practice them. The reason is simple. There are certain crimes which are too heinous that the only permanent way to prevent it is to take away his life. However, it is a flawed analogy to equate sterilization to death sentence, thinking that they can prevent certain types of crime to ever happen again. It is no guarantee that sterilization can stop a recidivist from committing the same sexual offences. It could be a psychological phenomenon which cannot be dealt with physical deprivation. In other words, sterilization will bring permanent harm to those who want to expiate their crimes, but will be of no help to stop recidivists from committing those sexual offences.

Image via Wikipedia

Currently there are 15 states out of 50 without death penalty.  3.261 people are in death corridor waiting for execution.  The waiting time is around 15 years.

Death penalty

A large number of terrible crimes occur every day in the United States, and individuals who commit such crimes must be punished.  The way criminals should be punished and whether to use death penalty or not are a complex issue.  Those who support capital punishment claim that people would feel much safer if criminals were executed.  They believe criminals must pay the same way and they don’t have the right to live.  They also think that keeping criminals in jail is very costly and it is not fair prisoners live a comfortable life, with a guaranteed plate on the table, shelter and even internet access.  Tax payers should not be maintaining people who are responsible of horrible acts of violence. 

Most opposition to death penalty centers around flaws in the criminal justice.  There are many cases of innocent people who were executed.  Judicial system should improve and proper evidence and corroboration should be presented and analysed carefully before sentencing someone to death.  In addition, murderers should be punished with appropriate sentences, that way death penalty should not be necessary.  A life sentence should mean a life sentence without parole.

Effectiveness of capital punishment

Has capital punishment a deterrent effect?  All sorts of studies and research are brought up on both sides of the controversy.  People who support that assume that criminals may reconsider committing a crime under the assumption of losing their own life.  People fear death more than life prison.  Opponents believe that murders are normally unplanned and criminals act as a consequence of an impulse.  They don’t stop to think about a long-term possible consequence.  They cannot or don’t want to control their emotions as rational human beings and get carried away.  Abolitionists also claim that contrary to popular belief, crime rate goes up in states where there is capital punishment

This is a controversial debate where emotions play a big part and many claim that liberals are incoherent.  On one side they are against death penalty and on the other they are for abortion.  Taking human lifes is morally wrong in both cases.  But common sense and acting as real human beings should be the aim of a rational society.  Killing a criminal to make him pay is acting just like them.  Jails should be real jails and instead of a death sentence, murderers should spend their life behind bars giving something back to the society through hard labor.

Rising Gas Prices Causing Premature Ejaculation, Low Libido and Other Sexual Problems

Disturbing news,

Republican senator from Plymouth, Massachusetts

Rick Dickenton was sentenced to death after violent sodomy committed on three young boys from Boston.

Former governor was “caught in the act” last summer after the police and the FBI received anonymous phone call from New Jersey area.

Caller warned the police and the federal agents about the screams coming from the vicinity of urban villa that belongs to the Rick Dickenton.

Police action was fast and the evil doer was transferred to the prison that same day.

Trial was closed for public because of a sensitive matter involved as well the position of the accused politician.

This is the first time in history that one politician was sentenced to death.

State of Massachusetts does not use death penalty so poor republican senator has been transferred to the high security prison in the state of Virgina where his death penalty will be performed.

Former Republican governor last words in the court were: “I don’t have any regrets!”

Republican Anti-union Bill: 80 000 Protest in Wisconsin

Gaddafi Will Not be Removed From Power, Unless Western Governments Use Brute Force