ID :
16313
Tue, 08/19/2008 - 00:53
Auther :
Shortlink :
https://www.oananews.org//node/16313
The shortlink copeid
News Focus: GOVT URGED NOT TO MEET AMROZI ET AL's REQUEST FOR EXECUTION BY OTHER THAN FIRING SQUAD
Jakarta, Aug 18 (ANTARA) - The government has been urged not to grant the request of the death-row Bali I bombers Amrozi et al to have them executed on the basis of Islamic syariah (law).
"We can not fulfil the request of Amrozi, Imam Samudra and Ali Gufron, because the law in this country must be upheld", Deputy Chairman of the House's Commission III Suripto said after opening ae futsal cup tournament in the commemoration of the 63rd anniversary of Indonesian independence, here, on Monday.
According to him, Amrozi et al's request was impossible to meet and ran counter to the law in Indonesia.
"Amrozi's request could be met if this country has adopted Islamic law (syariah)," he said, adding that the reference used by Amrozi et al was based on Islamic law which is different from this country's positive law.
In the meantime, Said Nizar. SH.MML, a legal observer who is also a lecturer at the Hasanuddin University said Amrozi et al's request for being executed by beheading, instead of by a firing squad, was only a technical matter.
The reason behind their request for execution not by a firing squad was their fear for a torture, he said through a phone call on Sunday.
Since they knew that their execution is imminent, Amrozi, Imam Samudra and Mukhlas had been insisting that their execution be carried out by beheading, according to Islamic shariah.
An execution by firing squad as stipulated in the law in Indonesia is feared to contain torture because if the first shot missed the heart or not effective, the firing squad will aim at the head of the condemned.
According to Nizar, if this is what they fear, the firing squad could fire all at the same time aiming at the condemned's heart, head or other parts of the body so that the condemned would not suffer too much.
"So it is not necessary for Amrozi et all to ask for an execution by beheading, it is only a matter of technicality. If their request is granted, the government would have to prepare facilities like in France which is too costly," he said.
In addition, this country has no a beheading executioner like in Saudi Arabia, as such executioner should be trained first to do the job which needs some time, Nizar said, adding however it is for the government to decide.
Nizar did not see an execution by firing squad is against the Constitution as perceived by the Muslim lawyers team.
Earlier Amrozi et al filed a request to the Constitutional Court (MK) for a judicial review of the Law on the ways and procedures of an execution as the law contradicts the 1945 Constitution, one of their lawyers said.
The request has already been officially filed with the Constitutional Court by a member of the Muslim Lawyers Team (TPM), Wirawan Adnan. The Request for a judicial review was made as the law was against Article 28i point 1 of the 1945 Constitution.
"The Law on Procedures of an execution cannot be used as the basis for an execution as it was made by the Gotong Royong House of Representatives (DPR GR) while the DPR GR was set up not through a popular election but through presidential appointments," he said referring to the parliament during President Soekarno's regime.
Therefore, he said, the law had not been made through the proper procedures and its substance also violated Article 281 point 1 of the 1945 Constitution.
Article 28i point 1 of the 1945 Constitution says that the right to live, the right not to be maltreated, the right to have a freedom of expression, the right to embrace any religion, the right not to be enslaved, the right to be recognized as an individual before the law, and the right not to be prosecuted retroactively, are human rights that cannot be belittled under whatever circumstances.
"Execution by firing squad is maltreatment so the law is no longer needed," he said.
According to Adnan, the law also stipulated that a firing squad must aim at the prisoner's heart, and - if the prisoner is still alive, fire again at the prisoner's temples. "This means the the law is inhuman and against Article 28i point 1 of the 1945 Constitution. An execution by lethal injection is more human," he said.
Thus, he said, the execution of Amrozi et al (who were sentenced to death for their role in the 2002 Bali bombings) should be postponed pending a decision of the Constitutional Court on the judicial review of the Law on the procedures of an execution.
He said if the prosecution's office goes ahead with the execution of Amrozi et al, technically there would be no problem, but legally there would be a problem of legitimacy, he said.
Adnan also deplored the fact that until now he and other TPM members had not yet received a copy of the Supreme Court's letter of rejection of Amrozi et al's request for a judicial review of their death. Neither had the TPM been informed about the Supreme Court's session where the decision was made to reject Amrozi et al's judicial review request.
"We are Amrozi et al's defense counsels and as such should have been informed about the Supreme Court processes," he said.
"We can not fulfil the request of Amrozi, Imam Samudra and Ali Gufron, because the law in this country must be upheld", Deputy Chairman of the House's Commission III Suripto said after opening ae futsal cup tournament in the commemoration of the 63rd anniversary of Indonesian independence, here, on Monday.
According to him, Amrozi et al's request was impossible to meet and ran counter to the law in Indonesia.
"Amrozi's request could be met if this country has adopted Islamic law (syariah)," he said, adding that the reference used by Amrozi et al was based on Islamic law which is different from this country's positive law.
In the meantime, Said Nizar. SH.MML, a legal observer who is also a lecturer at the Hasanuddin University said Amrozi et al's request for being executed by beheading, instead of by a firing squad, was only a technical matter.
The reason behind their request for execution not by a firing squad was their fear for a torture, he said through a phone call on Sunday.
Since they knew that their execution is imminent, Amrozi, Imam Samudra and Mukhlas had been insisting that their execution be carried out by beheading, according to Islamic shariah.
An execution by firing squad as stipulated in the law in Indonesia is feared to contain torture because if the first shot missed the heart or not effective, the firing squad will aim at the head of the condemned.
According to Nizar, if this is what they fear, the firing squad could fire all at the same time aiming at the condemned's heart, head or other parts of the body so that the condemned would not suffer too much.
"So it is not necessary for Amrozi et all to ask for an execution by beheading, it is only a matter of technicality. If their request is granted, the government would have to prepare facilities like in France which is too costly," he said.
In addition, this country has no a beheading executioner like in Saudi Arabia, as such executioner should be trained first to do the job which needs some time, Nizar said, adding however it is for the government to decide.
Nizar did not see an execution by firing squad is against the Constitution as perceived by the Muslim lawyers team.
Earlier Amrozi et al filed a request to the Constitutional Court (MK) for a judicial review of the Law on the ways and procedures of an execution as the law contradicts the 1945 Constitution, one of their lawyers said.
The request has already been officially filed with the Constitutional Court by a member of the Muslim Lawyers Team (TPM), Wirawan Adnan. The Request for a judicial review was made as the law was against Article 28i point 1 of the 1945 Constitution.
"The Law on Procedures of an execution cannot be used as the basis for an execution as it was made by the Gotong Royong House of Representatives (DPR GR) while the DPR GR was set up not through a popular election but through presidential appointments," he said referring to the parliament during President Soekarno's regime.
Therefore, he said, the law had not been made through the proper procedures and its substance also violated Article 281 point 1 of the 1945 Constitution.
Article 28i point 1 of the 1945 Constitution says that the right to live, the right not to be maltreated, the right to have a freedom of expression, the right to embrace any religion, the right not to be enslaved, the right to be recognized as an individual before the law, and the right not to be prosecuted retroactively, are human rights that cannot be belittled under whatever circumstances.
"Execution by firing squad is maltreatment so the law is no longer needed," he said.
According to Adnan, the law also stipulated that a firing squad must aim at the prisoner's heart, and - if the prisoner is still alive, fire again at the prisoner's temples. "This means the the law is inhuman and against Article 28i point 1 of the 1945 Constitution. An execution by lethal injection is more human," he said.
Thus, he said, the execution of Amrozi et al (who were sentenced to death for their role in the 2002 Bali bombings) should be postponed pending a decision of the Constitutional Court on the judicial review of the Law on the procedures of an execution.
He said if the prosecution's office goes ahead with the execution of Amrozi et al, technically there would be no problem, but legally there would be a problem of legitimacy, he said.
Adnan also deplored the fact that until now he and other TPM members had not yet received a copy of the Supreme Court's letter of rejection of Amrozi et al's request for a judicial review of their death. Neither had the TPM been informed about the Supreme Court's session where the decision was made to reject Amrozi et al's judicial review request.
"We are Amrozi et al's defense counsels and as such should have been informed about the Supreme Court processes," he said.
