A Decade Without Executions: Rights Organisations Congratulate Indonesia on Achieving De Facto Abolition Status and Calls for Death Penalty Abolition to be Formalised

July 29, 2026July 29, 2026communications34b384bb2c

A Decade Without Executions: Rights Organisations Congratulate Indonesia on Achieving De Facto Abolition Status and Calls for Death Penalty Abolition to be Formalised

28 July 2026, Statements

Ten Years Without Executions

We, the undersigned organisations, congratulate President Prabowo Subianto and the Government of Indonesia for reaching the milestone of 10 years without executions. On 29 July 2016, Humphrey Jefferson Ejike Eleweke (Nigeria), Michael Titus Igweh (Nigeria), Freddy Budiman (Indonesia) and Seck Osmane (Senegal) were executed for drug-related crimes. Since then, there have been no further executions of those on death row in Indonesia, although death sentences have still been handed down. This is in line with a global trend towards abolition, with close to three-quarters of countries having now abolished the death penalty in law or practice.

This anniversary signifies that the United Nations will now consider Indonesia a de facto abolitionist country. The Government of Indonesia is to be congratulated on this significant milestone. In 2023, Indonesia revised their Criminal Code, reflecting a cautious, structured approach to capital sentencing by reserving it to be used only as a ‘last resort’. Further, this punishment is imposed with a 10-year probationary period which takes into account the defendant’s remorse and their good behaviour. Demonstrating Indonesia’s belief in rehabilitation, the government repatriated 11 foreign nationals to their home countries, six of whom were on death row at the time of their release.

Globally, 54 countries remain retentionist. Of this number, 14 are in the Asia-Pacific. The region accounts for the highest number of executions by far. Indonesia’s sustained moratorium on executions and recent reforms have strengthened its position in regional efforts toward death-penalty reform.

Significant Concerns Remain

Indonesia’s achievement must nevertheless be viewed alongside the continued imposition of capital punishment by its courts and other related issues. According to Amnesty International, in 2025, there were 68 new death sentences, including 56 for drug offences and 12 for murder. As of October 2025, the Ministry of Law and Human Rights in Indonesia reported around 500 persons on death row.

Article 6(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Safeguard No.1 of the UN Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, adopted through the UN Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50, stipulate that the use of the death penalty is to be restricted to only “the most serious crimes”. The UN Human Rights Committee emphasises that “the most serious crimes” are to be read restrictively and apply only to exceptionally grave offences that involve “intentional killing”. Accordingly, crimes such as drug offences, while serious in nature, “can never serve the basis, within the framework of article 6” for a sentence of death to be imposed. The UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions echoes this sentiment, stating that “the death penalty may not be imposed for drug-related offences”. Thus, the death penalty for drug offences undoubtedly breaches international law.

Moreover, the Indonesian government and parliament are now discussing the Bill on the Procedure for the Implementation of the Death Penalty, proposed as a replacement of the 1964 Execution Law. The bill establishes a framework where executions may be carried out if commutation fails and there are no more legal avenues available to persons on death row. The latest draft of the bill still contains problematic articles, especially the lack of monitoring and redress mechanisms during the process of execution.

Human Rights Defenders Must Be Protected

Finally, the Indonesian government must take further steps to protect human rights defenders and ensure they can operate without fear for their safety. On 12 March 2026, Andrie Yunus, an activist with the rights group KontraS, was subject to an acid attack in Jakarta after recording a podcast which detailed the militarisation of civil and political affairs in Indonesia. This targeted attack, which caused “severe and permanent injuries requiring long-term treatment”, occurred despite “the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders affirmation that everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, to promote and strive for the protection and realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms”.

There are also still many legal barriers that might impact the work of human rights defenders in Indonesia. The Criminal Code contains articles that might limit the work of human right defenders in calling out government, such as public defamation articles to governmental institutions or to the President/Vice-President. There have been indications that the government is preparing a new law to combat disinformation and foreign propaganda. Depending on how terms like ‘disinformation’ and ‘foreign propaganda’ are defined, such an effort might exacerbate the suppression of free speech.

We call on Indonesia to ensure that they are abiding by their international obligations stipulated in the ICCPR, especially to “ensure effective protection for individuals exercising their rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful advocacy”. Failing to do so undermines the progress Indonesia has made in human rights. We encourage all countries to prevent such attacks from occurring in order to safeguard democratic institutions and ensure justice and accountability.

Our Call to Indonesia

We congratulate the Government of Indonesia on reaching 10 years without an execution. This milestone should become the foundation for decisive and irreversible progress towards full abolition. To be genuinely abolitionist, Indonesia must move beyond a de facto status and remove the death penalty from its laws and practice.

We call on Indonesia to:

Formally abolish the death penalty in law and remove it as a sentencing option for all offences, especially those not amounting to the ‘most serious crimes’ under international law, interpreted as crimes of extreme gravity involving intentional killing.
Formalise the moratorium pending abolition by adopting an official and legally binding moratorium on all executions and on the imposition of new death sentences.
Ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, to ensure its permanent abolition.
Review and commute existing death sentences, with particular priority given to individuals who have spent more than 10 years on death row.
Ensure protection and an enabling environment for human rights defenders to continue their work.
Support the global movement towards abolition by voting in favour of future United Nations General Assembly resolutions calling for a universal moratorium on executions and Human Rights Council Resolutions concerning the question of the death penalty.

This statement is co-signed by:

Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN)
Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat (LBHM)
The Commission for Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS)
Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR)
Capital Punishment Justice Project (CPJP)
Odhikar (Bangladesh)
Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET)
Maldivian Democracy Network (MDN)
Transitional Justice Working Group (TJWG)
Together Against the Death Penalty (ECPM)
Julian Wagner Memorial Fund (JWMF)
Coalition Against the Death Penalty (CADP)
Student Actions for Transformative jUstice (SATU)
Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP)
Redemption Pakistan
World Coalition Against the Death Penalty (WCADP)
Justice Project Pakistan (JPP)

ADPAN Welcomes Cambodia’s Decision to Accede to International Anti-Death Penalty Treaty, Preventing its Return

July 15, 2026July 15, 2026communications34b384bb2c

ADPAN Welcomes Cambodia's Decision to Accede to International Anti-Death Penalty Treaty, Preventing its Return

15 July 2026, Statements

Apart from the Philippines, Cambodia is the only other country in the region to have fully abolished the death penalty. The prohibition was formally written into both the 1989 Constitution of the State of Cambodia and subsequently Article 32 of the 1993 Constitution of Cambodia. According to the Ministry of Justice, the constitutional ban reflects Cambodia’s commitment to the right to life and human dignity.

These principles align with international law and are deeply rooted in the country’s tragic history. The injustices and heinous crimes that caused the loss of millions of lives during the Khmer Rouge has influenced the country’s commitment to abolition. This stance was also demonstrated during the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), where figures like Kaing Guek Eav (Duch) were sentenced to life imprisonment rather than death.

Choosing justice over retribution has reinforced Cambodia’s rejection of capital punishment—both then and for the future. Furthermore, ADPAN emphasises that in any justice system, the risk of judicial error makes the death penalty inherently dangerous; unlike life imprisonment, an execution is entirely irreversible.

Cambodia’s Journey towards Ratification of the ICCPR

Cambodia has demonstrated its commitment to abolishing the death penalty by voting in favor of seven UN General Assembly resolutions for a moratorium since 2007. During its 2014 Universal Periodic Review (UPR) by the UN Human Rights Council, Cambodia initially accepted recommendations to ratify the Second Optional Protocol, but later noted them, stating they required inter-ministerial review to ensure they aligned with national and regional realities.

During its 2019 and 2024 UPR, however, Cambodia officially accepted the recommendations to ratify the Protocol.

Our Call to Action

At a time when several Southeast Asian neighbors continue to carry out executions or resist reform, Cambodia can become a leader in the regional abolition of capital punishment. To underline Cambodia’s decision to ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR and its 36-year streak without the death penalty, we urge the government to:

swiftly sign, ratify and finalise the formal approval process through the National Assembly and the Senate, and deposit the instrument of ratification with the UN Secretary-General to legally lock in this commitment under international law.
use its unique standing to advocate for similar death penalty moratoriums and abolitions among its regional neighbors.

2026 WORLD DRUG DAY: OVER 60 ORGANISATIONS URGE URGE UNODC AND CND TO TAKE URGENT ACTIONS TO END UNLAWFUL USE OF THE DEATH PENALTY FOR DRUG-RELATED OFFENSES

June 26, 2026June 26, 2026communications34b384bb2c

2026 WORLD DRUG DAY: OVER 60 ORGANISATIONS URGE URGE UNODC AND CND TO TAKE URGENT ACTIONS TO END UNLAWFUL USE OF THE DEATH PENALTY FOR DRUG-RELATED OFFENSES

25 June 2026, Statements

On the occasion of the 2026 International Day against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking (World Drug Day) and the Support Don’t Punish Global Day of Action on 26 June, 63 national, regional and international organisations call on the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) and its Member States to unequivocally condemn the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences and to uphold international human rights obligations, including by adopting concrete measures to restrict the use of the death penalty with a view to its full abolition. We further urge UNODC to ensure that none of its technical assistance, capacity-building, or support to drug law enforcement in retentionist States risk contributing, directly or indirectly, to the investigation, prosecution, conviction or sentencing of individuals to death for drug-related offences.

At a time when executions for drug-related offences are reaching unprecedented levels, continued silence and inaction from UNODC and CND, the UN bodies mandated to guide the development and implementation of international drug policy, are untenable. We urge UNODC and CND to take a clear stance against this inhuman practice that contributes to the perpetuation of human rights violations in the name of drug control and to a systemic lack of transparency and accountability.

Our organisations oppose the death penalty unconditionally and continue to call on all states that retain the death penalty to fully abolish it as a matter of urgency.

THE DEATH PENALTY FOR DRUG-RELATED OFFENCES: RECORD-HIGH EXECUTIONS

The death penalty is retained for drug-related offences in at least 35 countries, and it is mostly imposed in relation to the cultivation, manufacturing, trafficking or importing/exporting of controlled substances.

Official information on the use of the death penalty is not publicly available for many countries; and only a limited number of state authorities globally respond to requests for information – often not providing disaggregated data by crime. In the absence of full transparency on the part of states, it is impossible to know the full extent of the resort to this cruel punishment, including for drug-related offences.

However, independent research by civil society shows a sharp rise in drug-related executions in recent years, with such cases accounting for over 40% of all executions worldwide and reaching 46% in 2025. Reported separately by Amnesty International and Harm Reduction International, more than 1,200 people executed in 2025 are for drug-related offences, marking a significant increase compared to 2024 and the highest number recorded to date. This finding underscores the growing role of drug control as a driver of capital punishment globally and in many countries.

Amnesty International and Harm Reduction International recorded drug-related executions in five countries: China, where official sources confirmed drug-related executions, but for which neither organisation was able to present a total figure due to state censorship and lack of transparency; Iran, where almost half the executions recorded during the year were for drug-related offences; Kuwait, which also expanded applicability of the death penalty for drug offences in 2025; Saudi Arabia, where 240 executions for drug-related offences were recorded, doubling the corresponding total for 2024; and Singapore, where 15 out of 17 executions were drug related, also doubling the 2024 figure. Both organisations believe that it is likely that drug-related executions were carried out in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) and Viet Nam, but could not confirm it, again due to restrictive state practices.

Civil society independent monitoring has also documented hundreds of new death sentences imposed for drug-related offences in at least 16 countries in 2025: Bangladesh, China, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Laos, Libya, Malaysia, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Viet Nam, and Yemen. In addition to these, Harm Reduction International recorded death sentences for drug-related offences in North Korea and Thailand.

At least 2,450 people are estimated to be on death row for drug offences in 22 countries at the end of 2025; though actual figures are likely to be significantly higher.

Throughout the year, the authorities of Algeria, Kuwait, and the Maldives also drove legislative efforts to expand the scope of the death penalty for drug-related crimes. Positive steps to reduce the scope of the death penalty for these offences were taken in Viet Nam, where the death penalty was abolished for eight offences including drug transportation. In April 2026, the Ministry of Public Security proposed further amendments to the Penal Code to reduce the scope of the death penalty.

Recent developments in other countries suggest that, with sustained political will, a significant decrease in the global resort to the death penalty for drug-related offences is possible. In Malaysia, the repeal of the mandatory death penalty in July 2023, prompted a review of existing death sentences by the Federal Court and Court of Appeal, resulting in the commutation of more than 1,000 death sentences. Official figures show a further decline in the number of death sentences imposed by High Courts during 2025, with the overall total (15) decreasing by one third compared to 2024, when 24 new death sentences were imposed. The number of drug-related offences declined by two, from nine to seven. Once, again, Malaysia’s higher courts did not uphold any new death sentences for such offences during 2025. In July 2023, Pakistan repealed the death penalty for drug-related offences; the first country to do so in over a decade.

These changes not only represent significant steps towards aligning national laws with restrictions on the use of the death penalty set out under international law and standards but also reflect a shift away from highly punitive approaches to drugs, of which the death penalty has been the most extreme example.

A CLEAR VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND DRUG CONTROL LAW AND STANDARDS

International human rights law and standards restrict the use of the death penalty to the “most serious crimes”, which do not include drug-related offences. Article 6(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Safeguard No.1 of the UN Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, adopted through UN Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50, provide that the imposition of the death penalty must be restricted to the “most serious crimes”. The UN Human Rights Committee has stated that “The term ‘The most serious crimes’ must be read restrictively and appertain only to crimes of extreme gravity, involving intentional killing. Crimes not resulting directly and intentionally in death, such as […] drug and sexual offences, although serious in nature, can never serve as the basis, within the framework of article 6, for the imposition of the death penalty. […].” Among other UN mandates, the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has similarly stated that “The death penalty may not be imposed for drug-related offences. In its 2023 report to the UN Human Rights Council, the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights highlighted that “[d]rug-related offences can never serve as the basis for the imposition of the death penalty”.  

The UN Drug Conventions – the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961), the Convention on Psychotropic Substances (1971) and the Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (1988) – do not make any reference to capital punishment, while several UN human rights and drug control bodies have reiterated the total opposition to the death penalty, including for drug-related offences. The UN task team on the implementation of the Common Position on Drugs has reiterated in unequivocal terms that the application of the death penalty for drug-related offences does not respect the spirit of the international drug control conventions and has the potential to become an obstacle to effective cross-border and international cooperation against drug trafficking. The International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) has also noted that “States’ actions that violate human rights in the name of drug control policy are inconsistent with the international drug control conventions”; and has called on States that still retain this punishment for drug-related offences to consider abolishing it for such offences and commuting death sentences that have already been imposed. More broadly, the INCB has stressed that respect for human rights is a prerequisite for the implementation of the international drug control conventions, and that measures adopted with the purported aim of furthering drug policy that are inconsistent with universally recognized human rights norms are a violation of the international drug control conventions.

However, the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences remains a contentious issue at the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, preventing this body from taking a formal position on this important matter. While UNODC representatives have on occasions recalled the UN’s unconditional opposition to the death penalty, advocacy and advances towards abolition have not been included in programmatic documents of the Office. The continued and unequivocal public condemnation by UNODC of the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences would be critical, in the long term, to change the perception of this issue and foster a context for discussions that puts the protection of human rights at the core of international and national drug control policies.

WORLD DRUG DAY AND THE DEATH PENALTY

The International Day against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, or World Drug Day, is an initiative designed to encourage international cooperation to address the risks and harms of drugs. Yet, in many countries, it has instead become an occasion to showcase and legitimiZe punitive drug control measures, with governments using the day to amplify “iron-fist on drug crime” stances. The authorities of Iran, for example, reaffirmed on World Drug Day their strong resolve to act as “the flag bearer of the global fight against narco-traffickers and death dealers”. In China, courts, including the Supreme People’s Court, use this day as a regular hook to issue judicial guidelines on how to apply the death penalty for drug related offences.

These narratives risk being reinforced by UNODC’s long-standing role in funding and providing technical support to narcotic-control programmes in countries that retain the death penalty for drug-related offences without sufficient safeguards to ensure that these operations do not risk contributing to the imposition of death sentences.

The World Drug Day – and the global mobilisation taking place as part of the Support. Don’t Punish campaign – offer a timely opportunity for UNODC to confront these harms and set the abolition of the death penalty as a key priority in its work. The launch of the annual World Drug Report on 26 June, provides a public platform for the Office to condemn the use of the death penalty as a tool of drug control, and to recommend specific measures that retentionist countries can adopt to bring domestic drug policies in line with international law and standards; and to signal UNODC’s commitment to prioritise abolition of the death penalty in all of its work.

The co-signatories reiterate their call on all international drug control mechanisms, including the CND and UNODC, to consistently incorporate human rights standards into their work, including in connection with the World Drug Day. In particular, we reiterate our call on the CND to establish a standing item in its agenda to address the human rights impacts of drug policies; and on UNODC to:

ensure that human rights are part of its constant monitoring work, including through the inclusion in the World Drug Report of a specific chapter on human rights, and of updated information on use of the death penalty for drug-related offences,
incorporate an explicit commitment to promote abolition of the death penalty (both generally and for drug-related offences specifically) in its forthcoming strategy; and
ensure that its cooperation with retentionist countries does not risk contributing to the use of the death penalty, in line with UN policy.

This statement is co-signed by:

Abdorrahman Boroumand Center for Human Rights in Iran
ACAT-Liberia
Africa Network of People who Use Drugs [AfricaNPUD]
AIVL – Australia, Pacific
Amnesty International
Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) – Malaysia and Philippines / Asia Pacific
Capital Punishment Justice Project (CPJP), Australia
Center for Legal Support and Inmates’ Rehabilitation (CELSIR)
Center of Legal and Social Studies (CELS) – Argentina
Coalition of Somali Human Rights Defenders (CSHRD)
Colegio de Abogados y Abogadas de Puerto Rico
Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide (CCDPW)
CrimeInfo, Japan
Dejusticia, Colombia
Doctors for Drug Policy Reform (D4DPR)
Drug Policy Alliance, USA
Drug Policy Australia
Drug Science, United Kingdom
ELEMENTA – Colombia and Mexico
Together against the death penalty (ECPM)
European Saudi Organization for Human Rights (ESOHR)
Fédération Addiction – France
Forum Droghe – Italy
Groupement romand d’études des addictions (GREA), Switzerland
Hands off Cain
Harm Reduction Australia
Harm Reduction International
HAYAT, Malaysia
Instituto RIA, AC, Mexico
IHRNGO (Iran Human Rights)
International Drug Policy Consortium – Global
Italian Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty – Italy
Italian Federation for Human Rights (FIDU) – Italy
Japan Advocacy Network for Drug Policy
Journey of Hope…From Violence to Healing
Legalize NL, Amsterdam
Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat, Indonesia
lifespark – movement against the death penalty, Switzerland
My Brain My Choice, Germany
New York NGO Committee on Drugs (NYNGOC) – Global
Redemption Pakistan – Pakistan
Schildower Kreis, Germany
StoptheDrugWar.org (US)
SPINN: Suar Perempuan Lingkar Napza Nusantara, Indonesia
The French Collective for the Liberation of Mumia Abu Jamal
The Rights Practice, United Kingdom
Transform Drug Policy Foundation, UK
Youth RISE International
Correlation-European Harm Reduction Network
Safer Youth Norway
Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA)
German Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (GCADP)
Scottish Drugs Forum
Recovering Nepal
Richmond Fellowship Nepal
RESET – Drug Policy and Human Rights – Argentina
Humaania päihdepolitiikkaa ry – Finland
LDH (Ligue des droits de l’Homme/droits humains) – France
Akzept e.V. Bundesverband für akzeptierende Drogenarbeit und humane Drogenpolitik –Germany
HIV Legal Network/Réseau juridique VIH – Canada
Death Penalty Focus (DPF), USA
Rótin (The Root), Iceland
World Coalition Against the Death Penalty– Global
Kurdpa Human Rights Organization

Two Decades Later: The Philippines Celebrates the 20th Anniversary of Death Penalty Abolition

June 24, 2026June 24, 2026communications34b384bb2c

Two Decades Later: The Philippines Celebrates the 20th Anniversary of Death Penalty Abolition

24 June 2026, Statements

MANILA – Today marks 20 years since the Philippines abolished the death penalty, a historic milestone for the nation as the first Southeast Asian country to legally end capital punishment and ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the international treaty abolishing the death penalty in the world. The Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) commends this enduring achievement and urges the Philippines to maintain its unwavering commitment to the spirit of abolition despite attempts to reintroduce capital punishment.

First Southeast Asian Country to Abolish the Death Penalty

On 24 June 2006, Republic No. Act 9346, or An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of the Death Penalty in the Philippines, was enacted, abolishing the death penalty in the Philippines. A year later, the country signed on to the Second Optional Protocol. The abolition of the death penalty not only protected the country’s most vulnerable citizens from irreversible judicial errors, but also granted the Philippines the moral authority to successfully advocate for the lives of Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) facing death row abroad, a recent example being Mary Jane Veloso, a human trafficking victim who narrowly escaped execution in Indonesia.

The Philippines first abolished the death penalty in 1987, setting a historic precedent as the first Asian country to do so. However, it was reintroduced in 1993 for 46 different offenses during President Fidel Ramos’s administration in an attempt to mitigate the rising crime rates in the country. Following a brief resumption of capital punishment in 1999, former President Estrada instituted an execution moratorium in 2000, which was then continued by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo who signed the law and commuted all death sentences to life imprisonment.

What has Happened Since?

Despite a long history of abolition, the Philippines has faced repeated legislative attempts to reinstate the death penalty, often fueled by populist rhetoric and “tough on crime” agendas especially under President Rodrigo Duterte’s tenure and his “war on drugs” campaign. In 2017, a bill to reintroduce the death penalty for serious drug-related offenses was passed in the House of Representatives, but stalled in the Senate. Following this, there were several other efforts to reintroduce capital punishment, despite local resistance by human rights groups and citizens.

Duterte’s campaign did not stop at the legislative level, he spearheaded a brutal crackdown that involved extrajudicial killings upon alleged “criminals” and those involved in the drug trade, majority of them being from poor and marginalised communities. The exact number of lives lost between 2016 and 2022 is unknown: Philippine police cite up to 7,000 deaths, while the International Criminal Court (ICC), Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch (HRW) estimate fatalities to be as high as 30,000.

ADPAN views these attempts to restore capital punishment as inextricably linked to the climate of impunity seen during the “War on Drugs.” State-sanctioned violence, whether through judicial execution or extrajudicial killing, fails to address the root causes of crime.

In 2018, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) conducted a first-of-its-kind national survey showing that only 33% or less of Filipinos favoured the death penalty for illegal drug offenses. This groundbreaking study served as a critical counterargument to official claims regarding the popularity of capital punishment in the country.

The “War on Drugs” also received worldwide scrutiny due to the country’s status as a state-party to the ICCPR. Notable interventions include a 2016 open letter from the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN Human Rights Committee’s adoption of General Comment No. 36 in 2018, which legally solidifies that states-parties to the ICCPR cannot reinstate capital punishment. This global consensus was further underscored in July 2019 when the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution dedicated to the promotion and protection of human rights in the Philippines.

What is Happening Now?

Although drug-related fatalities have decreased under the current administration of President Ferdinand ‘Bongbong’ Marcos Jr., human rights monitors report that state-sanctioned and vigilante killings continue to claim lives. However, the tangible value of the Philippines’ 2006 abolition continues to bear fruit in the present day. Following her late-2024 repatriation from Indonesia, Mary Jane Veloso remains detained at the Correctional Institution for Women in Manila. While civil society and legal groups urgently appeal to the President to grant her executive clemency on humanitarian grounds, her safety from the death penalty underscores the importance and need for abolition. Her case also serves as a reminder that maintaining abolition domestically grants the state the moral authority needed to aggressively protect and defend overseas Filipinos facing capital punishment in foreign jurisdictions.

As we look ahead, ADPAN reiterates that true justice is built on accountability, human rights, and the rule of law—not state-sanctioned violence.

Our Call to Action

On this 20th anniversary, we call upon:

The Marcos Administration to meaningfully address the legacy of the recent drug war, including holding all perpetrators to account and introducing transitional and restorative justice mechanisms;
The Marcos Administration and Congress to reject any and all future legislative attempts at the reinstatement of the death penalty and institute meaningful justice reform that addresses the root causes of crime without resorting to execution;
Having pioneered the path of abolition in the region, the Philippines as a state to mobilise and influence other states across the Asia-Pacific and the world to abolish the death penalty, along with other like-minded states in the region; and
The Marcos Administration, through the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Department of Migrant Workers, and other relevant agencies, to strengthen legal, consular, and diplomatic assistance for Filipinos abroad facing capital charges or death sentences, and to treat their protection as part of the Philippines’ principled commitment to abolition at home and abroad.

We thus urge the Philippines to embrace its role as a regional leader, actively advocating for global abolition and firmly upholding the Philippines’ standing as a beacon of human rights in Southeast Asia.

BANGLADESH: Ensure Justice, Reparation for Victims, and Guarantees of Non-Recurrence of Enforced Disappearances

June 3, 2026June 3, 2026communications34b384bb2c

BANGLADESH: Ensure Justice, Reparation for Victims, and Guarantees of Non-Recurrence of Enforced Disappearances

A Joint Statement on the Occasion of the International Week of the Disappeared 2026

26 May 2026, Statements

We, the undersigned organizations, urge the Government of Bangladesh to ensure truth, justice, and reparation for victims and their families and guarantees of non-recurrence of enforced disappearances in observance of the International Week of the Disappeared.

In Bangladesh, enforced disappearance was systematically used as a tool of state repression during the 15-and-a-half-year rule of the Awami League government. During this period, secret and unlawful detention facilities operated across the country. Opposition leaders, activists, dissenters, and individuals labeled as “militants” were arbitrarily detained in facilities such as the Joint Interrogation Centre of the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence and the Taskforce Interrogation Centre of the Rapid Action Battalion. Detainees were frequently subjected to torture and other forms of ill-treatment. Many were later charged under fabricated cases using laws such as the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2009, the Arms Act, 1878 and the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. These practices contributed to a broader system of repression targeting political opposition and critical voices.

On 5 August 2024, a mass, popular uprising led by students resulted in the fall of the Awami League government. Subsequently, the interim government formed a Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances, which documented over 1,600 cases. Of these, 251 individuals remain missing, while 1,282 resurfaced after periods of enforced disappearance and illegal detention. More than 60% of the victims were found to have known political affiliations. The Commission also documented several cases involving cross-border renditions to India.

A key cause of the persistence of enforced disappearances in Bangladesh has been a permissive political and institutional framework. Security-driven narratives helped normalize unlawful practices and effectively embed them within governance structures. These violations were closely linked to the widespread and systematic practice of torture, with victims subjected to prolonged physical and psychological abuse. A culture of impunity became deeply entrenched, with the criminal justice system manipulated to legitimize repression and shield perpetrators. Survivors faced intimidation and were reluctant to come forward.

Bangladesh acceded to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED) on 29 August 2024. Prior to this, no specific domestic law criminalized enforced disappearance. In response to its international obligations, the interim government promulgated the Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Redress Ordinance, 2025, and the National Human Rights Commission Ordinance, 2025 to criminalize enforced disappearance and to strengthen the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) respectively.

However, following the 13th National Parliamentary Election, the newly elected Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP)-led government, despite securing a two-thirds majority, decided not to enact these ordinances into law, rendering them void. Despite assurances from the government regarding the enactment of stronger legislation, recently proposed draft laws on enforced disappearance and the NHRC would significantly weaken institutional independence, oversight, and effectiveness. Under these proposals, the NHRC would be unable to investigate serious human rights violations, including enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings, and would be limited to requesting reports from the government—mirroring the limitations of the 2009 NHRC Act. This marks a regression from the 2025 ordinance, which granted the Commission authority to directly investigate security forces.

Both draft laws appear to be diluted versions of the 2025 ordinances and risk undermining accountability mechanisms. Failure to enact the Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Redress Ordinance, 2025 into law constitutes a grave injustice to victims and contradicts the spirit of the July mass uprising. It also contradicts a key provision of the ICPPED requiring states parties to enact domestic laws in line with the treaty. Further, both the 2025 ordinance and the new draft legislation include the death penalty as a sentencing option, and extending the death penalty under this legislation would conflict with Bangladesh’s obligations under Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

To date, families of those who remain missing have not been provided with official disappearance certificates, preventing them from accessing bank accounts or managing the property of the victims. Many families continue to live in uncertainty, while many survivors who have returned face ongoing harassment through fabricated legal cases and prolonged court proceedings.

Although the interim government initiated steps toward justice, including investigations by the Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances and the International Crimes Tribunal, progress has significantly slowed since the installation of the elected government in February 2026. Victims and their families continue to endure profound psychological distress and uncertainty.

We consider the failure to enact the 2025 Ordinances and the proposal of weaker legislation to be serious setbacks that undermine victims’ rights and contradict the BNP’s commitments in the July National Charter 2025 to “ensure justice for all victims” of disappearances, killings, and torture. We reiterate that truth, justice, and reparation are essential to restoring the rule of law and preventing recurrence.

We call on the Government of Bangladesh to:

Enact comprehensive legislation criminalizing enforced disappearance, following meaningful and inclusive public consultations, in line with the ICPPED, and exclude the death penalty as a sentencing option.
Ensure access to justice and comprehensive reparation, including full compensation, satisfaction, rehabilitation, and psychosocial support for victims and affected relatives as well as guarantees of non-repetition. Those reparation measures should be adopted with the participation of victims and civil society.
Provide legal recognition of the status of missing persons and protection to victims’ families, enabling families to access bank accounts and manage movable and immovable property, and official documentation.
Withdraw all fabricated cases against victims of enforced disappearance and release those wrongfully detained, including individuals convicted on the basis of coerced confessions or torture.
Conduct prompt, impartial, and independent investigations into all cases of enforced disappearance and prosecute those responsible with strict adherence to international fair trial standards and regardless of their institutional or political affiliation through appropriate judicial mechanisms, ensuring that no form of impunity is granted.
Enact comprehensive legislation to strengthen the independence and mandate of the NHRC, following meaningful and inclusive public consultations, including by enabling the NHRC to investigate allegations against state actors, including security forces.
Establish transparent diplomatic engagement with India to determine the whereabouts of any Bangladeshi nationals who may have been transferred or detained across borders following enforced disappearance.

Signed by:

Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN)
ARTICLE 19
Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD)
Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
Capital Punishment Justice Project
CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
Fortify Rights
Human Rights Watch
International Coalition Against Enforced Disappearances (ICAED)
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
Odhikar
Omega Research Foundation
Robert & Ethel Kennedy Human Rights Center
World Organisation against Torture (OMCT)

Universal Periodic Review: UN member states urged to act on Singapore’s use of the death penalty

May 11, 2026May 11, 2026communications34b384bb2c

Universal Periodic Review: UN member states urged to act on Singapore's use of the death penalty

Joint Press Statement

8 May 2026, Statements

Ahead of Singapore’s fourth Universal Periodic Review (UPR) on 12 May 2026, the undersigned organisations call on member states to urge Singapore to end its use of the death penalty and bring its laws and practices into line with international human rights law and standards. We also call on the Government of Singapore to immediately establish a moratorium on executions and commute all death sentences with a view to the full abolition of the death penalty.

Several of the undersigned organisations, together with other civil society partners, made a detailed stakeholder submission to the UPR process on 10 October 2025 documenting Singapore’s use of the death penalty. In the intervening seven months, Singapore has carried out a further 14 executions, bringing the total since its previous UPR in May 2021 to 51 executions – 49 men and two women, of whom 48 were executed for drug-related offences.

Singapore’s national report, submitted for its upcoming UPR, makes no reference to the death penalty, capital punishment, or executions. As outlined in the UN’s own compilation of information prepared ahead of this review, multiple UN treaty body committees have long called on Singapore to establish a moratorium on executions and move towards abolition of the death penalty. The absence of any engagement with these calls in Singapore’s national report is deeply concerning.

Executions for drug-related offences

Singapore has executed nine men so far in 2026, all for drug-related offences. Seventeen people were executed in 2025 – the highest number since 2003 – including 15 for drug-related offences, five of whom were Malaysian nationals. One of those executed in 2025 was a woman, believed to be the last woman on death row in Singapore. This trajectory is deeply alarming and reflects an intensifying reliance on capital punishment.

Singapore’s continued use of the death penalty for drug-related offences is a clear violation of international human rights law and standards, which clarify that the death penalty may only be imposed for the ‘most serious crimes’. UN human rights bodies have consistently defined those as crimes of extreme gravity involving intentional killing, and reiterated that drug-related offences never meet this threshold. Singapore is one of only a small number of countries in the world that continues to execute people for drug-related offences, alongside China, Iran, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia.

Violations of international law and standards

Legal presumptions of trafficking, possession, and knowledge under the Misuse of Drugs Act shift the burden of proof onto defendants in capital cases, in violation of the presumption of innocence – a peremptory norm of customary international law – and other fair trial guarantees.

The mandatory death penalty, which removes judicial discretion to consider the individual circumstances of an offence or an offender, is inherently arbitrary and violates international law. All 51 people executed since Singapore’s previous UPR were sentenced under this regime.

The certificate of substantive assistance mechanism under Section 33B of the Misuse of Drugs Act introduces a narrow exception to the mandatory death penalty – but only where the Public Prosecutor chooses to issue one. This places what should be a sentencing decision in the hands of a party to the proceedings rather than the judiciary, undermining the separation of powers, the independence of the courts, and the right to a fair trial.

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) expressed concern that Malay persons are disproportionately represented among those sentenced to the mandatory death penalty under the Misuse of Drugs Act, and has called on Singapore to apply a moratorium on the death penalty with a view to abolition. CERD further noted that “associating drug trafficking issues with certain ethnic minority groups, particularly Malays, may exacerbate prejudice and intolerance towards them.”

By removing individualised consideration, mandatory sentencing regimes exacerbate structural and systemic biases within the criminal justice system, denying judges the ability to remedy their disproportionate impacts.

Executions carried out while court proceedings are ongoing

In recent years, Singapore has executed individuals while related court proceedings – including civil applications and professional conduct complaints – were still pending. Most recently, this includes the execution of Lingkesvaran Rajendaren, a Malaysian man executed on 11 February 2026 after the Supreme Court rejected two appeals as he sought judicial review of claims of unfair proceedings at trial and ill-treatment while he was on death row. Several of the undersigned organisations condemned the Supreme Court’s reasoning as:

“a chilling indication of the determination of the authorities of Singapore to pursue executions at all costs, and a disregard of international human rights law and standards… reflect[ing] the cumulative impact of legislative and policy steps taken by the government since 2024 to curtail execution notice periods, as well as to further restrict the grounds for applications to stay executions.”

The Government has adopted a policy position that only proceedings directly affecting the legality of a conviction or sentence constitute ‘relevant’ proceedings capable of staying an execution. This approach is inconsistent with UN safeguards designed to protect people facing the death penalty, which provide that capital punishment shall not be carried out while any appeal, recourse procedure, or proceeding relating to pardon or commutation is pending.

In practice, this policy has meant that people have been executed before their own testimony could be heard in ongoing proceedings. Pannir Selvam Pranthaman was executed on 8 October 2025 while a complaint he filed against his former lawyer to the Law Society of Singapore remained unresolved – a complaint that the Law Council of Australia warned may have compromised his right to challenge his conviction and sentence. At least two other people were executed in similar circumstances, with complaints against the same lawyer pending at the time of their executions and their testimony never preserved.

Access to justice issues

The Post-appeal Applications in Capital Cases Act 2022 (PACC Act) has further narrowed the legal avenues available to people on death row. Since coming into effect in June 2024, post-appeal applications have been almost uniformly dismissed without oral hearings.

Amendments to the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act in late 2024 extended contempt of court liability to lay persons who assist those on death row in preparing legal applications, deterring family members, civil society organisations, and others from providing such support.

The reduction of execution notification periods to as few as four or five days for individuals who have previously received a stay – a practice upheld by the Ministry of Home Affairs – further constrains the ability of people on death row to exercise their legal rights in the final days of their lives. It can also force such people to choose between spending those last days with family or launching a final court proceeding.

Executing persons living with disabilities

Singapore has executed individuals assessed by psychiatrists to have intellectual and psychosocial disabilities. Despite ratifying the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in 2013, Singapore has not incorporated it into domestic law. As a result, people with disabilities face execution without any legally enforceable right to the procedural accommodations the CRPD requires, rendering any such deprivations of life potentially arbitrary. Singapore’s courts have confirmed that CRPD protections do not apply absent domestic legislative implementation.

The CRPD Committee, in its concluding observations on Singapore, has explicitly called on the Government to abolish the death penalty for persons with intellectual disabilities, psychosocial disabilities, and autistic persons, and to immediately cease imposing and carrying out the death penalty in such cases.

Restrictions on freedom of expression and harassment of human rights defenders

At its third UPR in 2021, Singapore accepted recommendations to ensure that its laws and policies on freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association comply with international human rights standards. The prosecution of an activist under the Public Order Act for peacefully attending candlelight vigils near Changi Prison – with the case heard as recently as April 2026 – sits uneasily with those commitments.

Singapore has systematically used laws and administrative processes to intimidate human rights defenders and suppress legitimate advocacy about the death penalty. The Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act 2019 (POFMA) “provides excessive powers to the government and has been used to target activists and critics”, including civil society organisations and human rights defenders who raise concerns about the use of the death penalty. The Transformative Justice Collective (TJC) – a Singapore-based organisation that supports people on death row and their families, and raises public awareness about capital punishment – has received seven POFMA correction directions since 2023, five within a five-month period in 2024, and was subsequently issued a two-year ‘Declared Online Location’ order requiring it to display notices on all its platforms stating that its content had communicated multiple falsehoods. In January 2025, TJC and three of its members were summoned for criminal investigation under POFMA. In October 2024, the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network, then based in Malaysia, received correction directions regarding posts about Singapore’s use of the death penalty, demonstrating POFMA’s purported extraterritorial reach.

Beyond POFMA, the then Minister for Law and Home Affairs publicly named five anti-death penalty advocates and organisations in Parliament in May 2024, including placing a human rights defender’s personal email address on the parliamentary record.

The cumulative effect of these actions has created a chilling effect on public discourse about the death penalty in Singapore that is incompatible with Singapore’s stated commitment to freedom of expression.

The undersigned organisations call on member states participating in Singapore’s Universal Periodic Review to recommend that Singapore:

impose an immediate moratorium on all executions with a view to full abolition of the death penalty, and commute all existing death sentences;
end its use of the death penalty for drug-related offences, in line with the ‘most serious crimes’ threshold under international human rights law;
abolish the mandatory death penalty and restore full judicial discretion in capital cases; and
end the use of laws and administrative processes to silence civil society organisations and human rights defenders who raise concerns about the use of the death penalty.

This statement is co-signed by:

Capital Punishment Justice Project
Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network
Australian Injecting and Illicit Drug Users League (AIVL)
ECPM (Together Against the Death Penalty)
Harm Reduction International
Julian Wagner Memorial Fund
The Advocates for Human Rights
The Australian Civil Society Committee on UN Drug Policy
World Coalition Against the Death Penalty

Maldives: Withdraw Proposed Death Penalty Bill

April 17, 2026April 23, 2026communications34b384bb2c

Maldives: Withdraw Proposed Death Penalty Bill

Proposed Law Could Result in Imminent Executions

Joint Press Statement
17 April 2026, Statements

(London, April 17, 2026) – The Maldives government should withdraw plans to introduce a bill to end the longstanding moratorium on the death penalty in the country, 10 Maldivian and international human rights organizations said today. The authorities should also seek to repeal recent amendments to the Drugs Act of 2011 that allow capital punishment for drug-related offenses, maintain the moratorium on executions, and move to fully abolish the death penalty.

The groups are Advocates for Human Rights, Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network, Capital Punishment Justice Project, ECPM: Together Against the Death Penalty, International Federation for Human Rights, Harm Reduction International, Human Rights Watch, Maldivian Democracy Network, Parliamentarians for Global Action, and the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty.

The proposed death penalty legislation would violate the Maldives’ international human rights obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Maldives acceded in 2006. It would also be contrary to United Nations General Assembly resolutions that call for respecting international standards that protect the rights of those facing the death penalty, progressively restricting its use, and reducing the number of offenses that are punishable by death. The human rights groups oppose the death penalty unconditionally, for all cases and under any circumstances.

During a media briefing on March 23, 2026, President Mohamed Muizzu announced that the government intended to submit a bill aimed at facilitating use of the death penalty to the national assembly, the People’s Majlis, during the current parliamentary session, scheduled to end in mid-May. The Attorney General’s Office is reportedly in the process of finalizing the draft legislation.

President Muizzu said that once the bill is ratified, capital punishment would be enforced without delay against convicted individuals who have already passed all stages of the judicial process in the Maldives.

These actions follow recent amendments to the Drugs Act, ratified on December 6, 2025, that expand capital punishment in the Maldives to include drug trafficking. Under the amendments, individuals convicted of trafficking large quantities of drugs, including more than 350 grams of cannabis, 250 grams of diamorphine, or 100 grams of any other Schedule 1 drug, into the country may now face capital punishment. The legislation also includes harsher penalties for trafficking smaller quantities of drugs, importing or exporting drugs, and facilitating the movement of controlled substances.

Prior to enacting new amendments to the Drugs Act, human rights groups in a joint letter urged the Maldives government and members of the People’s Majlis not to pursue such amendments or to expand provisions for the death penalty. The groups also said that the authorities should take prompt steps to abolish capital punishment and urgently commute all existing death sentences. 

Introducing the death penalty for a crime that was not previously punishable by death is contrary to the goal of abolishing the death penalty, as set out under article 6(6) of the ICCPR. Article 6 also states that countries that currently retain the death penalty in law should restrict its use to only “the most serious crimes,” which UN experts, including the

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, widely agree do not include drug-related offenses.

Since President Muizzu’s government first announced plans to reinstate the death penalty at the beginning of his presidency in December 2023, international and domestic human rights organizations have raised serious concerns, including at the country review of the Maldives during the 61st session of the UN Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review. The proposed law is of special concern due to the Maldivian judiciary’s history of corruption, politicization, and failure to provide justice and accountability for past crimes. 

The Maldives has had a moratorium on the death penalty since 1954. Carrying out executions would set the Maldives against regional and global trends that have seen 113 countries fully abolish the death penalty. When the UN General Assembly considered its most recent resolution on a death penalty moratorium in December 2024, 130 countries, more than two-thirds of all UN member states, voted in its favor.

Recent developments in several Asian countries suggest that there is momentum in the region to significantly decrease the resort to the death penalty. On June 25, 2025, Vietnam’s parliament voted to repeal the death penalty in the penal code for eight crimes, including drug transportation. In September 2024, Taiwan’s top court upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty but introduced greater restrictions, including strengthening due process rights.

In 2023, Pakistan repealed the death penalty for drug-related offenses. Malaysia, also in 2023, repealed the mandatory death penalty for all applicable offenses, including drug trafficking, murder, treason, and terrorism, and abolished the death penalty in full for seven others; these changes resulted in the commutation of more than 1,000 death sentences.

The Maldives government, recognizing the global goal of abolishing the death penalty and the violations of human rights inherently associated with its use, should withdraw plans to pursue the proposed death penalty law, the organizations said. Should the bill proceed to the People’s Majlis during this parliament session, lawmakers should reject the bill, take steps to abolish the death penalty for all crimes, and commute all existing death sentences.

Read the full statement here.

Death Penalty is Not the Answer to Ensuring Road Safety in Malaysia

April 15, 2026April 15, 2026communications34b384bb2c

Singapore: Halt Imminent Execution for Cannabis Trafficking

Presidential Clemency Would Avoid Irreversible Miscarriage of Justice

Joint Press Statement
15 April 2026, Statements

The Singaporean government should immediately halt the execution of Omar bin Yacob Bamadhaj, scheduled for April 16, 2026, for trafficking cannabis, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Capital Punishment Justice Project (CPJP), and Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) said today.

Singaporean authorities arrested Omar, a Singaporean national, now 41, on July 12, 2018, and a court later convicted him of importing just over one kilogram of cannabis, considered a Class A controlled drug under the 1973 Misuse of Drugs Act. After Singapore’s highest court dismissed his appeal in October 2021, he was sentenced to death in February 2022.

“The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhumane, and degrading punishment,” said Rachel Chhoa-Howard, Southeast Asia researcher at Amnesty International. “Singapore’s continued use of the death penalty for drug-related offenses is a violation of international human rights law and standards and places the city-state increasingly out of step with the rest of the world on this issue.”

On April 2, 2026, Omar’s family received a notice from the Singapore Prison Service that he would be executed two weeks later. His wife, Alexandra Maria, a German national, wrote a letter to the office of President Tharman Shanmugaratnam on April 12, appealing for clemency.

On July 12, 2018, Omar was found in possession of 1,009 grams of cannabis during a routine check at the Woodlands Checkpoint border crossing between Singapore and Malaysia and was arrested.

At the time of his arrest, he was living in Germany and was no longer a resident of Singapore. In her plea, his wife said that her husband had returned to Singapore to spend the holy month of Ramadan with his extended family. His wife, daughter Amal, and son Naqeeb were in Germany at the time. Due to their son’s health conditions requiring specialized medical treatment and their financial situation, the family has not been able to visit Omar in prison. Naqeeb passed away in November 2025 at age 11.

“Omar and his family have already endured unimaginable suffering since his incarceration in 2018,” said Karen Gomez-Dumpit, convenor at ADPAN. “Executing him now would only compound that pain and leave his daughter without ever truly knowing her father.”

Singapore’s criminal justice system provides for the death penalty for a range of offenses, including trafficking, importing, or exporting quantities of drugs above a certain threshold. International human rights law and standards say that countries that have not abolished the death penalty should reserve its use “only for the most serious crimes,” which United Nations experts, including the UN high commissioner for human rights, agree do not include drug-related offenses.

The judge in Omar’s case found that his involvement was limited to transporting drugs, but the prosecution did not provide him with a certificate confirming that he substantively assisted investigations to disrupt further drug trafficking activities. These two conditions are required under the Misuse of Drugs Act for defendants to qualify for sentencing discretion in drug trafficking cases. So, the judge had no option but to impose the mandatory death penalty.

Since January 1, 2026, Singapore has executed seven people, all for drug-related offenses. In 2025, the authorities executed fifteen people for drug-related offenses, seven more than the previous year.

The government also routinely uses overly broad and restrictive laws to silence anti-death penalty activists and human rights defenders, stifling informed public debate on the issue.

“While neighboring countries in Asia have taken important steps in recent years to reduce their reliance on capital punishment, Singapore appears committed to its continued use and ramping-up of executions, particularly for drug-related crimes,” said Jacinta Smith, chair at CPJP. “The Singaporean government’s stance on capital punishment reflects a total disregard for the right to life.”

There is precedent in Singapore for presidential clemency. On August 14, 2025, President Shanmugaratnam granted clemency to Tristan Tan Yi Rui, 33, who had been sentenced to death in 2023 for trafficking 337.6 grams of methamphetamine—also a Class A controlled drug—in 2018. His death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment.

At the time, the Home Affairs Ministry said that clemency had been recommended by Singapore’s Cabinet “because of the specific facts and circumstances of the case.”

In her letter to the president, Omar’s wife referred to the president’s decision in the Tan Yi Ru case as an “act of compassion and fairness [that] was seen by many around the world as a powerful sign of a justice system that is capable of recognising unique human circumstances and the possibility of redemption.” She also wrote: “Please give Amal, who is nine years old this year, the opportunity to experience the joy of reconnecting with her father, and not the irrevocable pain and regret of never having gotten to know him.”

“Concerned governments should urgently call on Singapore to immediately halt the execution of Omar bin Yacob Bamadhaj and commute his death sentence,” said Bryony Lau, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The Singaporean government should commute death sentences for everyone convicted only of drug-related offenses as a first step toward full abolition.”

Death Penalty is Not the Answer to Ensuring Road Safety in Malaysia

April 14, 2026April 14, 2026communications34b384bb2c

Death Penalty is Not the Answer to Ensuring Road Safety in Malaysia

Press Statement
14 April 2026, Statements

Malaysia was recently shaken with two driving under the influence (DUI) related accidents that took place in Klang and Segamat, resulting in the deaths of four people: a father and three members of a family. The former was caused by a driver who was reportedly under the influence of drugs and alcohol, while the latter by a driver who tested positive for methamphetamine. Both have since been charged with murder under Section 302 of the Penal Code, which carries the death penalty or imprisonment.

While ADPAN strongly condemns the irresponsible act of driving under the influence as it has the foreseeable risk of death, we reiterate that the death penalty cannot be imposed for drunk driving or driving under the influence as it violates international human rights standards. In addition, the imposition of the death penalty is not a uniquely effective deterrent to crime. Evidence-based safety reforms must be prioritised over reactionary capital punishment sentencing. The charges for fatal DUI accidents must also proportionately reflect their nature as reckless and negligent acts rather than intentional.

Not an Offence Punishable by Capital Punishment under International Human Rights Standards

Without intentional killing, positioning the cases as capital offenses violates Article 6(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which limits the death penalty to the ‘most serious crimes’, which means crimes involving intentional killings.

Malaysia already has existing strict penalties for driving under the influence under the Road Transport Act 1987, with first-time offenders facing up to RM30,000 in fines and imprisonment up to two years . For cases resulting in death, Section 44 provides for imprisonment of between 10 and 15 years and fines of up to RM100,000, with significantly higher penalties of up to 20 years’ imprisonment and RM150,000 in fines for repeat offenders.

An approach that considers mitigating circumstances and explores severe alternative punishments such as permanent license revocation and intensive rehabilitation may offer a more proportionate and effective deterrent. The public outrage that is surrounding these cases must not only lead to temporary, reactive consequences like the death penalty. True accountability requires a focus on prevention and systemic reform.

A Regressive Step in Malaysia’s Death Penalty Reform

Malaysia’s 2023 reforms marked a significant step towards narrowing capital punishment, including abolishing the mandatory death penalty and expanding judicial discretion. While 27 offences remain punishable by death, the overall direction has clearly been towards restriction and reform.

Malaysia has also maintained a de facto moratorium on executions since 2018 and has expressed support for the UN General Assembly moratorium on the death penalty.

Any step backwards from this progress would undermine Malaysia’s ongoing reform efforts, and place Malaysia to be in contradiction with its international stance and commitment.

Continuing Our Call for Road Safety Reform

Road safety reform should remain a priority in Malaysia. The Malaysian government has introduced measures to reduce road accidents, including mandatory defensive driving courses for traffic offenders or drivers with suspended licenses, speed-limit enforcement, and Automated Awareness Safety Systems, guided by MIROS’ holistic approach to road safety. While these initiatives alone are not enough, road safety must go beyond government mandates and become a shared social responsibility, fostering a culture where every driver understands the consequences of reckless behaviour.

However, the death penalty is not the answer. The following global examples show that accountability, prevention, and proportionate sanctions, not extreme, reactionary measures, are what truly save lives.

Japan reduced fatal DUI accidents from 1,276 to 216 per year between 2000 and 2016 through strict but proportionate penalties, proactive prevention, lowered BAC limits (0.03%), and holding passengers, businesses, and vehicle lenders accountable. Immediate license revocation, heavy fines, and social consequences serve as a visible deterrent.
Sweden limits BAC to 0.2 g/l and uses graduated sanctions, mandatory driver rehabilitation (SMADIT), and voluntary alcohol interlock programs. In 2025, Sweden reported just 208 road traffic deaths, one of the lowest annual totals in recent years, reflecting the impact of sustained road safety reforms and a culture of responsibility.
Canada has reduced alcohol-impaired driving incidents by over 15,000 between 2015 and 2022 through strict laws, mandatory screening, graduated sanctions, and interlock programs.

ADPAN stands in solidarity with the grieving families. We urge authorities in Malaysia to hold the offenders accountable with proportionate punishment, while calling for victim-centered justice through timely compensation, immediate support and accessible processes. Drunk driving kills, but the death penalty does not save lives. When we rely solely on harsh punishments like the death penalty, we are treating the symptom rather than the cause.

True justice honours the victims by preventing further tragedies, holding offenders accountable in proportionate ways, and strengthening the systems that protect us all.

ADPAN Condemns Acid Attack against Indonesian Human Rights Defender Andrie Yunus

March 16, 2026March 16, 2026communications34b384bb2c

ADPAN Condemns Acid Attack against Indonesian Human Rights Defender Andrie Yunus

PRESS STATEMENT

15 March 2026, Statements

The Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) condemns in the strongest sense possible the acid attack against human rights defender Andrie Yunus, the Deputy Coordinator for External Affairs of KontraS (Komisi untuk Orang Hilang dan Korban Tindak Kekerasan), that took place on 12 March 2026 in Central Jakarta, Indonesia. KontraS is a member of ADPAN and one of Indonesia’s leading human rights organisations. ADPAN stands in solidarity with Andrie, KontraS, our members in Indonesia, and Indonesian civil society. We extend our deepest support to Andrie and his family during this incredibly difficult time.

According to information received by ADPAN, Andrie was the victim of a targeted acid attack shortly after taping a podcast episode discussing the rise of militarism in Indonesia. Medical reports indicate the severity of the assault, with burns covering approximately 24% of his body. This act of violence has left him in critical condition, requiring extensive medical intervention and long-term recovery. KontraS has also reported that surveillance was observed at their office in Jakarta prior to the incident.

International law recognizes the vital role played by human rights defenders in promoting and protecting fundamental freedoms. The UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders affirms that everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, to promote and strive for the protection and realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The Declaration further requires states to take all necessary measures to ensure the protection of individuals against violence, threats, retaliation, discrimination, pressure, or any other arbitrary action arising from their legitimate human rights work.

We call on Indonesia to abide by its international legal obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. These obligations include the duty to ensure effective protection for individuals exercising their rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful advocacy. Indonesia must conduct a prompt, impartial, and effective investigation, hold the perpetrators accountable for the attack, and take appropriate measures to prevent similar acts of violence from recurring.

We also calls on Indonesian authorities to:

Ensure that Andrie Yunus receives appropriate medical treatment and all necessary support for his recovery;
Investigate the case thoroughly and bring the perpetrators to justice;
Take effective measures to protect human rights defenders and guarantee a safe environment for civil society in Indonesia to operate without fear of violence or intimidation; and
Demonstrate a clear commitment to transparency, accountability, and the protection of fundamental freedoms.

ADPAN urges the international community to closely monitor the developments and to support efforts to ensure accountability and protection for human rights defenders. Attacks against those who peacefully advocate for human rights must never be tolerated. The protection of human rights defenders is essential to safeguarding democratic institutions and ensuring that justice and accountability remain possible.

Contact:

Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN)

communications@adpan.org

ADPAN

Statements