We, the undersigned organisations, are gravely concerned about a debate held in Tonga’s Parliament late last month, which suggests the country may be considering extending the death penalty to drug-related offences. News reports and a press release from the Parliament of Tonga reported that the debate was held on 28 May 2024 in the Fale Alea ‘O Tonga Chambers, Tonga’s Legislative Assembly. 

While the debate participants rejected this proposal by a strong margin of 38 to 8, the consideration of the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences is both unsettling and cause for great concern. As the last state in the Pacific to retain the death penalty in law, Tonga is classified by Amnesty International as ‘abolitionist in practice’, having not imposed a death sentence or carried out an execution since 1982.   

Historically, the death penalty in Tonga has acted as a discretionary punishment for the crimes of murder or treason, and has been carried out by hanging. The Tongan parliament has successfully defeated two attempts to introduce the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences, the first in 2004 and the second in 2021. It is regrettable that the parliament has now hosted a public debate on capital punishment as a deterrent for drug-related offences. Sponsored by the Speaker, Lord Fakafānua, the Office of the Legislative Assembly of Tonga noted this marked the first public debate they have hosted. With the Government of Tonga maintaining that the country ‘faces increasing challenges related to illicit drug offences’, King Tupou VI is reported to have urged parliamentarians to find solutions.  

Within Tonga, critics of the proposal that such “solutions” could be achieved through extending the death penalty to drug offences have expressed concerns that this approach would disproportionately affect people living in poverty and those who lack power and control over their own circumstances. Director of the Tongan Women and Children’s Crisis Centre, Ofa Guttenbeil-Likiliki told ABC Pacific that human rights groups in Tonga have been calling on the government for two decades to repeal the death penalty due to its disproportionate effects on the nation’s most vulnerable people. 

Citing existing issues with life imprisonment being a mandatory punishment in Tonga for drug trafficking, Guttenbeil-Likiliki called for drug-related crimes and trafficking to be dealt with through strategic national reforms rather than extending and relying on the death penalty. We encourage the Government of Tonga to turn to the growing body of evidence-based drug policy that is grounded in human rights and harm reduction principles to address their concerns.

The global trend towards abolition of the death penalty is clear. On 15 December 2022, a record 125 countries voted for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty at the UN General Assembly. Rather than explore opportunities to extend the death penalty, the Government of Tonga should consider joining this global trend and adopt both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its Second Optional Protocol, which is specifically aimed at the abolition of the death penalty.

Further, international law and standards make it clear that, even in countries where the death penalty is currently retained, ‘[d]rug-related offences can never serve as the basis for the imposition of the death penalty.’ Rather than taking the regressive step of expanding the death penalty, we call on the Government of Tonga to seek alternate methods to combat drug-related crimes, grounded in evidence and human rights, and to fully abolish this cruel punishment. 

Organisations signed:

• Amnesty International
• Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN)
• Capital Punishment Justice Project (CPJP), Australia
• Harm Reduction International
• Julian Wagner Memorial Fund (JWMF), Australia
• Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA)
• World Coalition Against the Death Penalty (WCADP)

We, the undersigned organisations, are deeply concerned to learn of the conviction and death sentence imposed upon Ms Lesedi Molapisi by a Bangladesh court on 27 May 2024. 

In 2022, Ms Molapisi, a national of Botswana, was arrested at Bangladesh’s Hazrat Shahjalal International Airport after she was found in possession of 3.145 kilograms of heroin. On 27 May 2024, she was convicted by a Dhaka court of drug smuggling and sentenced to death. 

A death sentence passed by a court can be commuted by the government under Sections 401 and 402 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and under Article 49 of the Constitution. As a first step, we call upon Bangladesh to immediately commute Ms Molapisi’s sentence, as a death sentence for a non-violent crime demonstrates a blatant disregard of international law and standards. As a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which has been consistently interpreted as restricting the use of the death penalty to ‘crimes of extreme gravity involving intentional killing’, Bangladesh is prohibited from using the death penalty for drug related offences. The International Narcotics Control Board has also noted that the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences is in breach of the UN Drug Conventions and a violation of international human rights law. We urge the authorities of Bangladesh to take swift steps to repeal the death penalty for these offences, pending full abolition of this cruel punishment.

Bangladesh remains a staunch proponent of the death penalty, imposing it in flagrant violation of international standards. In 2018, Bangladesh enacted the Narcotics Act 2018 (which replaced the earlier Narcotics Act 1990), allowing the imposition of death sentences for several non-violent drug offences. In 2023, at least 390 persons were sentenced to death and five executions were carried out. A further 111 death sentences were imposed in the first three months of 2024. Amnesty International has identified Bangladesh as imposing such sentences in disregard of fair trial standards, including in absentia trials. Executions carried out pursuant to death sentences imposed in violation of fair trial rights amount to arbitrary killing, violating the right to life. 

At present, more than 2,400 people are known to be on death row in Bangladesh. Concerns have been raised as to the conditions under which Bangladesh’s death row prisoners are kept, citing overcrowding, unsanitary and unhygienic conditions, torture, and solitary confinement. The death row phenomenon, a likely consequence of prolonged periods of detention in harsh conditions on Bangladesh’s death row, has also been linked to the absolute prohibition of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In January 2024, the imposition of the death penalty was challenged before the Supreme Court as being contrary to the Constitution and international law. In May 2024, the High Court Division of the Supreme Court in Dhaka found the solitary confinement of death row prisoners who are yet to exhaust their legal appeals to be unconstitutional, ordering that all such prisoners must be moved to general prison populations within two years.

The global community is in clear support of steps towards the abolition of the death penalty, as demonstrated by the 112 countries that are fully abolitionist and more than two-thirds (144) of countries that are abolitionist in law and practice. The government of Bangladesh should abolish the death penalty in relation to drug offences and commute the sentences of those currently on death row for drug offences, as first important steps. Further, the government should ensure that every person charged with a death eligible offence has meaningful access to justice through adequate funding for competent legal representation, including funding to obtain expert evidence as required. Moreso, they should follow the global trend towards abolition of the death penalty, starting by declaring a moratorium on executions.

Signed: 

Amnesty International
Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN)
Capital Punishment Justice Project
DITSHWANELO – The Botswana Centre for Human Rights
Eleos Justice – Monash University 
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
Odhikar 

5 June 2024

We are greatly concerned by the news that the Government of Singapore has issued at least four execution notices since 12 April 2024, all cases in relation to drug offending. Transformative Justice Collective, a member of the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network, reports that in two of these four cases, the execution was stayed at the last minute. This leaves two people on death row at imminent risk of execution. The mental anguish persons on death row and their families experience in circumstances where execution warrants are issued is unimaginable.

Of particular concern is that it appears that all of these individuals have had execution warrants issued whilst being party to a pending Court application. The lack of transparency in relation to the use of the death penalty in Singapore, also means that it is unclear what procedural steps took place which led to the execution warrants being issued, and continuing to be issued, whilst a Court proceeding is on foot.

Safeguard no.8 of the UN Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, adopted by two UN bodies in 1984 without a vote, states that “[c]apital punishment shall not be carried out pending any appeal or other recourse procedure or other proceeding relating to pardon or commutation of the sentence”.1In the narrow circumstances in which the death penalty may be imposed under international law – which do not include drug trafficking – the criminal justice system should allow a robust testing of the individuals’ right of review up and until, the gallows.

If the reports that Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) have sought to expedite the hearings of the Court application on foot are correct, the decision-making process behind AGC’s position ought to be transparent, given the seriousness of the nature of these proceedings. Expediting cases through the judicial process undermines the ability to properly prepare and run a case, especially when the penalty is death. We therefore appeal to the AGC to ensure that the fair trial rights of all persons on death row are upheld.

In December 2022, 125 countries voted for a resolution on a moratorium on the use of the death penalty at the United Nations General Assembly. We reiterate that the notion of national sovereignty cannot be used to undermine or negate the State’s obligation to protect the right to life. Death sentences that violate international fair trial standards are a violation of the right to life. Despite international law clearly restricting the death penalty to the ‘most serious crimes’ understood as intentional killing2, Singapore remains one of only a handful of countries that continue to execute individuals for drug offences. We join the call of the Transformative Justice Collective that the State of Singapore must halt these executions and declare a moratorium on its use of capital punishment as first steps.

Signed: 

1. Amnesty International 
2. Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network 
3. Capital Punishment Justice Project 
4. Coalition Against the Death Penalty 
5. ECPM (Together against the death penalty) 
6. Eleos Justice, Monash University 
7. Harm Reduction International 
8. Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat (Community Legal Aid Institute) 9. MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) 
9. Odhikar 
10. Redemption Pakistan 
11. Reprieve 
12. Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty 
13. The Advocates for Human Rights 
14. Think Centre 
15. Transformative Justice Collective 
16. World Coalition Against the Death Penalty 

Dated: 30 April 2024 

1 Adopted without a vote by the UN Economic and Social Council in its resolution 1984/50 of 25 May 1984; and endorsed by the UN General Assembly, without a vote, in resolution 39/118 of 14 December 1984.

2 General Comment No. 36 (2018) on Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, on the Right to Life, paragraph 39, p13

The undersigned organizations express their grave concern for the lives of minor  defendants particularly the two young men, Yousif Al-Manasif and Ali Al-Mubaiouq, who  are at imminent risk of execution in Saudi Arabia following confirmed information that  the Specialized Criminal Court of Appeal (SCCA) has upheld their death sentences.  Their cases were therefore referred to the Supreme Court which will render a final  judgment. Approximately a year ago, the Supreme Court upheld final death sentences  against Ali al-Subaiti. In addition, final death sentences had been approved by the  Supreme Court about a year ago for both Abdullah Al-Derazi and Jalal Al-Labad. The  Supreme Court is considered the final judicial stage before execution, which occurs  after the king’s signature. 

Considering Saudi Arabia’s past practices, it is difficult to predict the exact time frame  between case referral to the Supreme Court, its approval, and execution. Previous  cases indicate that the lives of the minors sentenced by “discretionary punishment” (taazir), are at imminent risk of execution.  

As it is expected that there will be cases of minors that have not been identified, with the  latest developments, the situation of minors who have been monitored by organizations  to have received death sentences: 

• Jalal Al-Labad and Abdullah Al-Derazi: The sentence has been approved by the  Supreme Court and execution can occur at any moment after the king’s  signature. 
• Yousif Al-Manasif and Ali Al-Mubaiouq, Ali Al-Subaiti: The sentence is currently  before the Supreme Court. 
• Jawad Qureiris: The sentence is before the specialized criminal appellate court. ● Mahdi Al-Mohsen: A preliminary sentence from the specialized criminal court.

The Saudi Arabia authorities subjected the young men to human rights violations while  in detention, including enforced disappearance, solitary confinement for months, and  various forms of torture. The risk of execution is exacerbated by the fact that the  judiciary in Saudi Arabia is not independent and is thereby unable to protect individuals  against arbitrary death sentences. Individuals who are charged for acts related to their  peaceful activism, are usually sentenced on the basis of the Counterterrorism law and  torture-trainted confessions are used as sole evidence for their conviction.  

The undersigned organizations point out that the approval of new death sentences  against individuals who are sentenced for acts committed as minors, contradicts Saudi  Arabia’s narrative that it has halted juvenile death sentences. For instance, in a  statement announcing the promulgation of Royal Decree No. 46274, the Saudi Human  Rights Commission mentioned that the death penalty against such individuals and  against minors would be annulled. Saudi Arabia has reiterated this announcement on  multiple occasions before the Human Rights Council and in other international human  rights foras.This potential executions would entail a flagrant violation of Saudi Arabia’s international obligations, given that Saudi Arabia is a state party to the Convention on  the Rights of the Child, which clearly prohibits the death penalty against minors. 

Despite this announcement, Saudi Arabia executed the minor Mustafa Al-Darwish in  June 2021 and continued issuing and approving similar death sentences. Instead of  halting executions, the government has resorted to cryptic and unsubstantiated  responses to communications from UN special rapporteurs regarding their cases. 

Since the beginning of 2024, Saudi Arabia has executed 47 individuals. 12 of these  sentences were issued by the Specialized Criminal Court. The Ministry of Interior did  not specify the nature of the sentences issued against them, but they are likely taazir sentences. 

The undersigned organizations believe that the approval of new death sentences  against minors exposes the reality of Saudi Arabia’s successive promises regarding the  death penalty in general and the death penalty against minors in particular. It is  impossible to envisage reforms or changes without immediately halting arbitrary death  sentences, especially against minors on charges that are not considered the most  serious, and after unfair trials.

Undersigned organizations;  

1. ACAT-Belgium (Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture)

The Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) and the Coalition Against the Death Penalty  (CADP) express our grief over the execution of two Filipinos in China on charges of drug  trafficking. 

We join the bereaved families to offer condolences to family members executed and are  grateful for the Philippine Government’s efforts to exhaust appeals for commuting the  punishment. In due time and without identifying the identities of the two individuals, it is  important to stress the lessons that can inform our work to end capital punishment and foster  transparency.  

We urge the governments of both China and the Philippines to be more transparent in  providing information about the status of persons on death row, the charges they are facing,  and the conditions they are in. Every opportunity should be given for the prisoners or their  loved ones to seek legal counsel, or for lawyers to step forward to aid families who are often  overwhelmed and at a loss, or do not have enough resources to engage adequate legal  representation. Timely information about persons on death row is also crucial in harnessing  support to call for reprieves, commutations of stays of execution. Any refusal or impediment  to such measures severely undermines the fairness and legitimacy of a state’s criminal justice  system.  

Public information can also be used to educate and mobilise members of the public to work  towards more effective solutions to address problems in our societies. Cases that are  shrouded in secrecy, away from public scrutiny, do not offer opportunities for us to better  understand how people end up getting involved with drugs or drug-related offences in the first  place. If our collective goal is to prevent crime and work towards improved well-being in our  communities, unaccountable and secret executions will do little to help us achieve our desired  ends.  

We also urge the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) to work more effectively to  emphasise their own pronouncements, particularly the one stressing that “international drug  control conventions… cannot be used to justify the use of the death penalty for drug-related  offenses alone… It may also impede international cooperation to fight drug trafficking… But  the use of the death penalty cannot provide durable solutions or protect people“. We urge the  UNODC to strengthen human rights-based approaches to drug control and urge member  States to uphold their obligations under international human rights law.

We note that the death penalty for drug offences does not meet the international law criterion  of ‘most serious crime’ threshold for the use of the death penalty. In any event, ADPAN urges  States to take steps to limit its scope and use so they can ultimately join the majority of the  global community in abolishing the death penalty in all its forms. 

The Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) commemorates the 21st World Day against the Death Penalty with the message “An Irreversible Torture”. 

2023 marks a significant turning point for the death penalty in the Asia Pacific. In April, Malaysia abolished the mandatory death penalty. This follows the introduction of the ‘probationary’ death penalty in Indonesia and the abolition of the death penalty in Papua New Guinea in January 2022. 

While progress is made across the region, staunch retentionist states within the Asia Pacific took the initiative to strengthen their advocacy to support the retention of the death penalty with a new attempt to introduce the ‘sovereignty clause’ into existing resolution on the question of the death penalty at the United Nations. The sovereignty clause is advocated on the false premise that denies the accepted definition of ‘the most serious crimes’ and other principles under international law. The sovereignty clause advocated is merely a façade for the license to kill for these states. 

There are no circumstances in which the death penalty can be justified or can be applied without violating human rights. Documented executions and death penalty trials across the region consistently highlight recurring violations of the right to fair trial, prohibition of torture, discrimination against persons with disabilities and gender discrimination. 

Prolonged detention on death row has proven to have a significant impact on persons on death row, and it also inflicts significant social and economic harm upon their families and friends. Even when a person is eventually granted a reprisal or clemency, the experience and torture inflicted by the death penalty will continue to haunt them for the remainder of their life. 

Criminal justice ought to be centered around remedying harm caused and rehabilitating individuals convicted of criminal offences. The death penalty serves neither purpose. The claimed effect of deterrence has consistently been debunked by academic studies and surveys conducted across Asia-Pacific and around the world. The only proven capability of the death penalty is its capacity to inflict further harm on society without addressing the root causes of serious crimes.

ADPAN and our allies call for the imposition of a global moratorium on executions and for states to adopt policies towards the eventual abolition of the death penalty. The death penalty is an archaic punishment that ought to be consigned to history and should not be a part of Asia-Pacific’s roadmap to the future. 

This week Singapore intends to execute a 56-year-old Singaporean Malay man  convicted of trafficking approximately 50g of diamorphine (heroin) and Saridewi  Djamani, a 45-year-old Singaporean woman convicted of trafficking approximately 30g  of diamorphine (heroin). It has been almost twenty years since Singapore last  executed a woman. If these executions proceed, Singapore will have executed 15  people for drug offences since 30 March 2022, an average of one execution every  month.  

International law restricts the death penalty to the ‘most serious crimes’ understood as  intentional killing: executions for drug offences clearly fail to meet the ‘most serious  crimes’ criterion under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights  (ICCPR). Singapore is among a handful of countries that have executed (China, Iran  and Saudi Arabia) or are likely to have executed (Vietnam and North Korea) individuals  for drug offences in 2022 (see reports of Amnesty International and Harm Reduction  International).  

In an interview in September 2022, Law Minister K. Shanmugam confirmed that  Singapore’s harsh policy on drugs is not resulting in the arrest of the so-called  ‘Kingpins’: “Are we only catching the small guys and not the big guys? It’s a non question because, you know, the big guys don’t come into Singapore for good  reasons”. In July 2022, eight United Nations Special Procedures experts observed that  “A disproportionate number of minority persons were being sentenced to the  mandatory death penalty in Singapore”. In sum, instead of disrupting drug cartels, as  it often claims to be the objective, the Government of Singapore deliberately retains  capital drug laws that, in practice, operate to punish low-level traffickers and couriers,  who are typically recruited from marginalised groups with intersecting vulnerabilities. 

In December 2022, 125 countries voted for a moratorium on the death penalty at the  United Nations. In June 2022, Thailand removed marijuana and hemp (that is below  0.2% THC) from its narcotics list. In April 2023, Malaysia’s parliament voted to abolish  the mandatory death penalty, a law that took effect in July 2023, including for drug  trafficking. The Government of Singapore is out of step with the global trend by  continuing with this cruel and abhorrent practice.  

The notion of national sovereignty cannot be used to undermine or negate the State’s  obligation to protect the right to life. We strongly urge the Government of Singapore to  immediately halt these scheduled executions. Instead, Singapore should pursue  effective measures to humanely address the complex problem of drug trafficking in the  country, particularly in the absence of any evidence that the death penalty is a uniquely  effective deterrent for those who commit drug offences.  

We also call on the UN Office on Drugs and Crime to take concrete actions to urge  States to dispel the misguided notion that capital punishment is allowed under the UN  Drug Conventions.  

We call on the international community, particularly States who have abolished the  death penalty in law or practice, to help halt this inhumane, ineffective and  discriminatory practice in Singapore.  

Signed:  

Amnesty International  
Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network, Malaysia  
Capital Punishment Justice Project, Australia  
Coalition Against the Death Penalty, Philippines  
Eleos Justice, Faculty of Law, Monash University, Australia 
Ensemble contre la peine de mort (ECPM), France 
Harm Reduction International, United Kingdom 
Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat (LBHM), Indonesia 
Odhikar, Bangladesh  
Transformative Justice Collective, Singapore

The Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) congratulates Merri Utami, her family, and their  dedicated lawyers from Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat Legal Aid Institute (LBHM) for their  tenacious fight to release Merri Utami from her death sentence. On 27 February 2023, President  Joko Widodo granted Merri Utami’s clemency application, commuting her sentence from death to  life imprisonment. This is the first grant of clemency President Joko Widodo gave to drugs offences  since he became President of Indonesia in 2014.  

Merri Utami was sentenced to death by Tangerang District Court in November 2001 for drug  offences. It is clear she was a victim of a syndicate of illicit drugs trafficking whose role and weight  of the sentence was unfairly equated with the ring leaders. In July 2016, Merri Utami was taken  from the Tangerang Women’s Prison to an isolation cell in Nusakambangan prison for an execution.  While placed in a solitary confinement, the Supreme Court rejected her Judicial Review (PK)  application. LBHM then applied for clemency on 26 July 2016 to President Joko Widodo while Merri  Utami was being prepared for an execution. A few days later, the Prosecutor’s Office declared that Merri Utami’s execution was postponed.  

Since this postponement, Merri Utami had been waiting for a response from the President for over  5 years, and she has been in prison for almost 22 years. For Merri Utami, the death sentence has  impacted her psychologically due to the prolonged and uncertain period while awaiting an  imminent execution under harsh conditions of confinement. 

ADPAN welcomes the grant of clemency by President Widodo to Merri Utami and encourages the  government to consider other petitions before it. As a victim of trafficking in persons, Merri Utami  should have been protected, not sentenced to death. Unfortunately, Merri Utami is just one of  many persons on death rows globally because they were trafficked and forced into criminal activity.  We urge other governments to follow the lead of President Widodo and grant clemency to those  who similarly deserve protection, rather than the most extreme and permanent punishment.  

While we welcome this presidential pardon, we also urge President Widodo and the Indonesian  Minister of Law to thoroughly reconsider Merri Utami’s life sentence to be commuted to lesser  sentence. If undertaken, the commutation will eventually lead to her release consistent with the  criminal law, since she has exceeded more than the maximum imprisonment if 20 years. 

Ultimately, ADPAN maintains that the death penalty is cruel and inhumane practice that has no  place in any criminal justice system. We call on the Government of Indonesia to consider taking  meaningful steps towards abolition of the death penalty, in line with the clear global trend.

We stand in solidarity with M. Ravi, a capital defence lawyer and human rights defender in Singapore with over twenty years of experience. On 21 March 2023, the Court of Three Judges imposed a five year suspension under s83(1)(b) of the Legal Profession Act 1986. M. Ravi was also ordered to pay the costs of the Law Society’s application. This is in the context of M. Ravi facing a number of disciplinary hearings and police investigations, having been personally fined over $70,000 Singapore dollars stemming from death penalty cases he has undertaken, most of which were run on a pro-bono basis. 

Suspending a capital defence lawyer in relation to their public comments, for the maximum possible length of time, from being unable to partake in their livelihood, sends a chilling message to capital defence lawyers in Singapore. As the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Judges and Lawyers Margaret Satterthwaite has stated in reference to M. Ravi’s suspension, “Lawyers, like everyone, are entitled to freedom of expression.” It has already been publicly noted that these lawyers have allegedly been afraid of taking on cases deemed to be ‘late-stage’ appeals for fear of cost sanctions. Since April 2022, there have been a number of cases where a person facing imminent execution has spent their final days appearing unrepresented, pleading for their lives. In August 2022, 24 persons on death row filed an unsuccessful joint Constitutional challenge on the point of lack of access to Counsel – all appeared unrepresented. 

We challenge the Courts’ contention that M. Ravi poses a “continuing danger” to the public confidence in the Singaporean judicial system. Rather, M. Ravi has demonstrated the key role that capital defence lawyers play in ensuring necessary access to justice at every stage of the criminal justice system for those facing irreversible punishment. This is important given the delayed access to counsel at the start of a police investigation due to structural hurdles that exist in Singapore, along with the recent imposition of laws that cause severe limitations on Post-Appeal Applications in capital cases. These developments threaten the right to a fair trial, with consequences of this issue leading straight to the question of the right to life. We cite the following examples to illustrate this point: 

1. Yong Vui Kong, whose life was spared in 2012 following the amendment to the Misuse of Drugs Act. This would not have been possible had M Ravi not filed a successful criminal motion after Yong’s appeal had been dismissed. 
2. In the case which is the subject matter of this suspension, M. Ravi successfully argued in a court motion after an unsuccessful appeal that Gobi a/l Avedian’s sentence to death be set aside. 
3. M. Ravi filed an urgent Application to Re-Open an Appeal for Syed Suhail just days before his scheduled execution resulting in the discovery that 13 prisoners – including 12 persons on death row – had collectively had 68 personal letters – including some letters to lawyers – leaked to the Attorney-Generals’ office by the Singapore Prison Service.

Without M. Ravi, Yong Vui Kong, Gobi a/l Avedian, Syed Suhail and a number of others would have been executed. 

The Court judgement (p132) refers to M. Ravi’s reliance on the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) – which Singapore is a signatory to – as being ‘misconceived’: 

“First, there was no evidence to suggest that his condition had contributed to his misconduct in this case. In fact, at the material time, Mr Ravi was practising under a conditional practising certificate which mandated, amongst other conditions, that Mr Ravi had to attend regular medical appointments to monitor his fitness to practise. Accordingly, there was no suggestion that Mr Ravi was labouring under his previous medical condition when he made the impugned remarks in October 2020, nor even at the point when he took on the Gobi proceedings in September 2019.“ 

The idea that a recognised chronic mental health condition can be ‘switched off’ and not have any relevance – particularly in the context of running a capital defence case – flies in the face of what we know of the experience of persons living with disabilities. We urge the Court to engage more meaningfully with the principles underlying the CRPD, which refers to disability as “an evolving concept and that disability results from the interaction between persons with impairments and attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinders their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others”. 

Striking off one of the few lawyers prepared to accept these cases is particularly concerning given the climate of harassment and intimidation already faced by those who oppose the death penalty; including detainment, questioning, threats and penalties. To bring into disrepute the concept of fearless advocacy which is the bedrock of legal representation in a robust judicial system, could be disastrous for the rule of law that underpins the Singapore legal system. 

We call on the Singapore authorities to halt its current spate of executions in line with the global trend towards abolition and to end the harassment of lawyers who dedicate their lives to defend those without a voice. 

Signed: 

1. Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network
   
2. Abdorrahman Boroumand Center 
3. Amnesty International Australia 
4. Australians Against Capital Punishment (Australia) 
5. Capital Punishment Justice Project (Australia) 
6. Ensemble contre la peine de mort (ECPM) 
7. Forum Asia 
8. Harm Reduction International 
9. Julian Wagner Memorial Fund (Australia) 
10. 10.Justice Project Pakistan 
11. Odhikar 
12. 12.Transformative Justice Collective