Казнь Нагаентран К. Дхармалингам

На этом индийском имени имя К. Дхармалингам является отронимом , и этот человек должен упомянуть данным именем , Нагантран .

Нагаентран К.
Нагаентран перед арестом в Сингапуре
Рожденный	13 сентября 1988 года Ипох , Перак , Малайзия
Умер	27 April 2022 (aged 33) Changi Prison, Singapore
Cause of death	Execution by hanging
Criminal status	Executed
Conviction(s)	Drug trafficking
Criminal penalty	Death (x3)

Nagaenthan A/L K. Dharmalingam (13 сентября 1988 г. - 27 апреля 2022 года) был малазийским торговцем наркотиками , который был осужден за торговлю 42,72 грамма героина в апреле 2009 года после въезда в Сингапур из Малайзии на контрольно -пропускном пункте Woodlands с пакетом героина, привязанного к его малу Полем Нагаентран признался в совершении преступления, но дал заявления, утверждающие, что ему было приказано совершить преступление из принуждения со стороны вдохновителя, который напал на него и угрожал убить его подругу и его семью. Он также утверждал, что сделал это, чтобы получить деньги, чтобы погасить свои долги, прежде чем он впоследствии отрицал какое -либо знание содержания своего пакета.

Нагаентран был приговорен к смертной казни в , повешая ноябре 2010 года. Однако его казнь была приостановлена ​​из -за моратория, представленного на все подвешивания в Сингапуре в ожидании судебных изменений обязательных законов о смертной казни, который рассматривал и одобрил наводящее заключение с или или без кантины для торговцев наркотиками, которые были курьерами или имели психические заболевания. Несмотря на многочисленные апелляции Нагаентран, он был оценен как не имеющий права на переосмысление, потому что он был признан существенно не умственно или интеллектуально инвалидом , что также подтвердилось психиатрами, призванными его адвокатами.

Nagaenthran also lost his appeal for clemency, and he was finally scheduled to hang on 10 November 2021 after spending 11 years on death row. However, due to both a last-minute appeal and a COVID-19 infection, Nagaenthran's execution was suspended for five months, until the dismissal of his appeal on 29 March 2022. After this, Nagaenthran was hanged at Changi Prison on 27 April 2022; he was 33.

Prior to Nagaenthran's execution, his case attracted international attention, with many activists and foreign organizations asking for Singapore to commute Nagaenthran's death sentence to life imprisonment due to his alleged low IQ and overall, to abolish the death penalty while condemning Singapore for its use of the death penalty on drug traffickers. The government of Singapore, in response to these pleas, asserted that Nagaenthran was not substantially mentally or intellectually impaired and hence there was no basis for the government to intervene and commute Nagaenthran's death sentence.

Background and early life

Nagaenthran a/l K. Dharmalingam, an ethnic Indian Malaysian and native of Ipoh, was born on 13 September 1988. He was the second of four children and had two younger brothers (one of them named Navinkumar) and an elder sister Sharmila. His father died sometime during Nagaenthran's death row imprisonment in Singapore.

According to the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network's video interview of Nagaenthran's mother Panchalai Supermaniam, she often went out for work and had to entrust Nagaenthran and his siblings to the care of the children's grandmother and their relatives during his childhood. After Nagaenthran got older, Panchalai would be the one taking care of him but she did not speak to him much due to her work. Nagaenthran completed his five-year secondary school education at age 17 and he went to work at a factory.

Later, Nagaenthran decided to go to Singapore to find employment, against the wishes of his family, especially his mother who did not want him to leave his hometown for a distant place. Nagaenthran found a job as a security guard in Singapore and would regularly visit his family in Ipoh. According to his sister, he last returned to Malaysia and visited his family in 2008 during Deepavali, and that was the last time he stepped foot in his hometown before his arrest for drug trafficking.

Arrest and trial

The Woodlands Checkpoint, where Nagaenthran was caught importing heroin as he entered Singapore from Malaysia.

On 22 April 2009, 20-year-old Nagaenthran was arrested by the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) officers when he was travelling from Malaysia to Singapore through the Woodlands Checkpoint. During a search of Nagaenthran and his belongings, the police discovered a bundle strapped to Nagaenthran's thigh, and the bundle contained a total amount of 42.72 g of diamorphine (pure heroin). A friend and travelling partner of Nagaenthran, named Kumarsen, was also arrested but later released. Upon his arrest, Nagaenthran admitted to his interrogators that he knew he was carrying drugs and it was for a Chinese friend, whom he called "King", who strapped the drugs to his thigh so that no one would find it. Nagaenthran also claimed that he needed money to pay off his debts and his father's heart surgery fees, which was why he committed the crime.

Later, Nagaenthran retracted his confession and denied having knowledge of the contents of the bundle of drugs found on him. He also later claimed that King had earlier assaulted him and threatened to kill his girlfriend should he not comply with King's demands to transport the drugs. Nevertheless, due to his arrest and the amount of heroin having exceeded the lower limit for the death penalty, 15 g, Nagaenthran was charged with capital drug trafficking, which, if found guilty, is punishable by death.

Nagaenthran was tried and found guilty on 22 November 2010 of drug trafficking and sentenced to death by hanging. The High Court's judge Chan Seng Onn did not accept Nagaenthran's defence that he was under duress at the time he committed the crime, and ruled that Nagaenthran should assume full responsibility of his criminal conduct, since he did so to discharge his debts. His appeal was dismissed on 27 July 2011 by the Court of Appeal's three judges Chan Sek Keong, V. K. Rajah and Andrew Phang.

Appeals for re-sentencing

Legal changes and re-sentencing application

A year after Nagaenthran's appeal was dismissed, Singapore decided to amend its death penalty laws in July 2012, which designated a moratorium on all 35 executions in Singapore, including Nagaenthran's. The amendments, which took effect in January 2013, empowered all judges in Singapore with the discretion to sentence a drug trafficker to life imprisonment with caning not less than 15 strokes instead of death if he was merely a courier, on the condition that the public prosecutor issues the offender a certificate of substantive assistance — for helping the narcotics police to disrupt drug trafficking activities. Another alternative condition to receive life imprisonment was diminished responsibility; had any mental illnesses been diagnosed and found to have substantially impaired one's mental faculties, the offender would have been ineligible for the death sentence and caning would also not be given.

When the new death penalty laws took effect in January 2013, Nagaenthran applied for re-sentencing on account of clinical intellectual disability and mental illness, and his case was sent back to the original trial judge Chan Seng Onn for review in the High Court. However, a psychiatric report concluded that Nagaenthran had neither of the above. He was also not issued a certificate of substantive assistance by the CNB, since he did not substantively assist them in disrupting the drug trafficking activities. Despite this, on 24 February 2015, Nagaenthran brought forward the application and tried to ask for mercy based on the conditions of an intellectual disability, low IQ, impaired executive functioning and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, which would have made him ineligible for the death penalty.

High Court reviews

In 2017, the High Court dismissed Nagaenthran's re-sentencing application. Four psychiatric and psychological experts, including one called by the defence, agreed that Nagaenthran was not intellectually disabled. The High Court also found that Nagaenthran had repeatedly changed "his account of his education qualifications, ostensibly to reflect lower educational qualifications each time he was interviewed". The High Court found that Nagaenthran showed that he was "capable of manipulation and evasion" during his offence, as Nagaenthran tried to dissuade Central Narcotics Bureau officers from searching him at the checkpoint by stating that he was "working in security", playing into the "social perception of the trustworthiness of security officers."

In 2018, the High Court dismissed another appeal of Nagaenthran's case.

Court of Appeal review

After the High Court dismissed Nagaenthran's appeal for re-sentencing, Nagaenthran, through his lawyer Eugene Thuraisingam, filed two separate appeals to ask for the Court of Appeal to commute his sentence under the newly enacted death penalty laws, but the five-judge Court of Appeal dismissed both appeals on 27 May 2019. The Court of Appeal said that there were numerous inconsistencies in Nagaenthran's account of his crime, which made it hard to rely on his defence given that they affected his credibility. The five judges - Sundaresh Menon, Belinda Ang, Andrew Phang, Judith Prakash, and Chao Hick Tin - held that Nagaenthran may have a low IQ, but his mental responsibility for his offence was not substantially impaired. He was able to plan and organise on simpler terms, and was relatively adept at living independently.

Besides, Nagaenthran had known that it was unlawful for him to import heroin, and hid the drugs to avoid detection. He was also prone to being manipulative and evasive, as shown from his initial attempts to avoid being searched before the narcotics officers arrested him in 2009. Additionally, he was earlier found to have done this with the intention of paying off some of his debts, and his actions were deliberate, calculated and purposeful, which was "the working of a criminal mind" and was able to weigh the benefits and risks, and the concept of right or wrong. Hence, Nagaenthran lost his final bid to be re-sentenced.

Clemency petition and first public attention

Nagaenthran later appealed to the President of Singapore Halimah Yacob for clemency, which would have commuted his sentence to life imprisonment if successful, but his plea was rejected on 1 June 2020, which finalized his death sentence. The last time clemency was granted in Singapore was in 1998, when 19-year-old Mathavakannan Kalimuthu was pardoned from execution despite being sentenced to hang for murdering a gangster in 1996. Mathavakannan was paroled and released in 2012 after serving 16 years of his life sentence due to good behaviour.

During the time Nagaenthran was appealing for clemency, his case attracted international attention and many who opposed the death penalty asked Singapore to spare Nagaenthran's life; Nagaenthran's mother Panchalai Supermaniam (aged 57 in 2019) and family also joined in the efforts to plead for mercy. In a 2019 news report, Malaysian human rights lawyer N Surendran denounced Singapore for unfairly subjecting a mentally disabled man to a death sentence, and he, together with Nagaenthran's new lawyer M Ravi argued that there was no fair trial for Nagaenthran since his defence's psychiatric evidence was allegedly not fully considered compared to the reports of the prosecution's psychiatrists.

Singapore's law minister K Shanmugam, in light of prior accusations that Singapore was unfairly mistreating Malaysian drug traffickers (due to the increasing number of Malaysians being executed for drug trafficking), argued that there is no inequality in treating foreigners and locals under the law for drug trafficking. He said the majority of Singaporeans favour the death penalty and it would be good for both sides if drug traffickers were caught by Malaysian authorities, as the offenders could be dealt with according to Malaysia's laws and not have to worry about Singapore's capital punishment. Shanmugam emphasised that there should be no special treatment for Malaysian death row prisoners as it would undermine the integrity of Singapore's law.

Death warrant and stay of execution

Confirmation of execution date

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic in Singapore since January 2020, there was an informal moratorium on executions, including Nagaenthran's execution, possibly out of fear of spreading infections in Singapore's Changi Prison, where all death row inmates, including Nagaenthran, were held. This allowed Nagaenthran to live for at least one more year after his failed clemency appeal.

On 28 October 2021, in Nagaenthran's hometown in Ipoh, Nagaenthran's family received a letter (dated 26 October 2021) from the Singapore Prison Service (SPS), which informed them that Nagaenthran's execution date was scheduled on 10 November 2021. SPS also stated they will facilitate and help explain the travelling arrangements to any of Nagaenthran's family members on the necessary procedures on quarantine and COVID-19 tests, as well as allowing the family to have extended daily visits with a prolonged duration of a few hours and a maximum of five visitors per visit to curb possible risks of COVID-19 infection within the prison walls, due to Singapore's worsening rate of local transmission within the community (affected by the mutated Delta variant).

At the time Nagaenthran's death warrant was finalized, the last execution to be conducted in Singapore was on 22 November 2019, when 36-year-old Abd Helmi Ab Halim was executed for trafficking over 16g of heroin in 2015 despite appeals from Malaysia to commute his sentence.

Opposition to execution

Upon receiving news of the death warrant, Malaysian lawyers and both international and local anti-death penalty activists - including World Coalition Against the Death Penalty, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, United Nations Commission on Human Rights, and FIDH - tried to appeal to the Singapore government for clemency, reiterating that Nagaenthran was mentally disabled and should not be hanged for his crime since he could not understand what he was going through, as well as insisting on his innocence. An online petition was made to plead to President Halimah Yacob to spare the Malaysian's life, garnering more than 102,000 signatures. There is an intention to bring forward the matter to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against Singapore for not conforming with the international norms to not practice the death penalty. There are also concerns that Nagaenthran's execution might violate international human rights and law, which rules that any mentally unfit capital offenders should not be executed. In the United States, Divisions of Social Justice of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) called Nagaenthran's case a "flagrant breach" of human rights. Aside from this, there were repeated calls from these human rights groups to pressurise Singapore to abolish the death penalty.

Public figures like Singaporean rapper-musician Subhas Nair and British billionaire Richard Branson, as well as more than 200 friends and family members of other death row convicts (including those executed prior) like Angelia Pranthaman (sister of condemned drug trafficker Pannir Selvam Pranthaman) and the relatives of executed killer Kho Jabing, also asked for Singapore to show mercy on Nagaenthran. Protests were made outside Malaysia's Parliament at Kuala Lumpur for more efforts from the Malaysian government to stop the execution.

Nagaenthran's sister Sarmila Dharmalingam said she and her siblings had been delaying the news of their brother's execution from their mother, and did not provide any reasons why she had to travel to Singapore. They only told her five days after the letter arrived at Ipoh, and Nagaenthran's mother took the news badly. There were also diplomats sent by the Malaysian embassy to provide consular support for Nagaenthran's family, who arrived in Singapore with the help and funding of abolitionist advocate Kirsten Han and her activist group. Within a short span of two days, Han and her fellow activists managed to raise more than $14,000 for flights, quarantine hotel rooms and other arrangements, including a funeral, on behalf of Nagaenthran's family. This allowed Nagaenthran's mother to fly to Singapore to see her son for the first time in three years.

One of Nagaenthran's brothers Navinkumar Dharmalingam told activist Kokila Annamalai that when he visited his brother in prison, he observed that his brother seemed to be completely disoriented compared to the last time they visited him. He said his brother was incoherent, smiled irrelevantly at times and unable to make any eye contact, and he did not seem to clearly remember some of the people he knew except for his mother, whom Nagaenthran entrusted to his brother's care during their visit. An unnamed death row convict who lived in a neighbouring cell next to Nagaenthran reportedly told Navinkumar that Nagaenthran was introverted and often kept to himself at times, and in fact, he has not spoken to anyone in over a year. Nagaenthran's lawyer M Ravi, who observed his client acting like a "five-year-old child", feared that Nagaenthran may not be aware of his death and the 11-year period he spent on death row may have had a deteriorating effect on his mental health. Amnesty International's researcher of Singapore, Rachel Chhoa-Howard, commented on the court verdicts of Naganethran's case where they dismissed his reports of diminished responsibility, "Taking people's lives is a cruel act in itself but to hang a person convicted merely of carrying drugs, amid chilling testimony that he might not even fully understand what is happening to him, is despicable."

The execution date, six days after the annual Hindu festival Deepavali (which Nagaenthran and his family celebrated annually), was criticised; the family said that they could not celebrate the festival. A man was arrested on 4 November 2021 for posting a poster advocating against Nagaenthran's death sentence at a train in Kuala Lumpur, which was classified as an illegal act of public provocation.

Government's response and further pleas for mercy

Changi Prison Complex, where Nagaenthran was held on death row

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) later released a statement in view of the increasing pressure to spare Nagaenthran's life. They stated that he was accorded full due process under the law and was represented by legal counsel throughout. They also reiterated the main points of the final court verdict in relation to Nagaenthran's case, stating that Nagaenthran did not commit the act under duress, and was not substantially mentally impaired to the extent of being ineligible for execution, and he clearly understood the magnitude of his actions, hence there was no necessity to review his case since his avenues of appeal were all exhausted. The amount of heroin which Nagaenthran trafficked in Singapore is equivalent to about 3,560 straws of heroin and it would be sufficient to feed the addiction of about 510 abusers for a week. His execution date remained as scheduled on 10 November 2021, as confirmed by the MHA.

Singapore also emphasised that the death penalty is the reason why it has one of the lowest crime rates globally, and the practice is necessary to clamp down on drug crimes that can destroy thousands of lives potentially if not strictly regulated and deterred. MHA said the penalties, including the death penalty, for the illegal trafficking, importation or exportation of drugs are made clear at Singapore's borders, to warn traffickers and syndicates of the harsh penalties they potentially face. The Singapore authorities also revealed that they have also set execution dates ahead for some other death row inmates (who were all not named) who also exhausted all their avenues of appeal.

On 31 October 2021, Malaysian lawyer Mahajoth Singh had launched a one-man protest against the execution of Nagaenthran in front of the High Commission of the Republic of Singapore in Kuala Lumpur.

Malaysian lawyer N Surendran continued to ask for mercy on Nagaenthran's life, stating that there was no justification to execute Nagaenthran based on his mental disability in view of the government of Singapore's response to public pressure. Lawyers for Liberty from Malaysia condemned the Singapore government for their response to the pleas of mercy and ignorance of Nagaenthran's mental faculties. Prime Minister of Malaysia Ismail Sabri Yaakob appealed to Singapore's prime minister Lee Hsien Loong to review Nagaenthran's case and revoke his death sentence. Ismail stated he, as a lawyer, respects Singapore's law and does not want to interfere but he hoped that the authorities can give Nagaenthran a chance to review his case. Similarly, Saifuddin Abdullah, Malaysia's foreign minister, appealed to his Singaporean counterpart Vivian Balakrishnan to give their authorities a discretion in deciding clemency for Nagaenthran's case, but overall he maintained Malaysia's respect for Singapore's law. The European Union, which prohibits the death penalty among its member nations, also joined in to pressure Singapore to pardon Nagaenthran from the gallows.

Last-minute appeal and COVID-19 infection

A last-minute appeal was heard on 8 November, two days before Nagaenthran was due to hang, and M Ravi argued the appeal at the High Court. The whole appeal itself was dismissed by the High Court, as the judge See Kee Oon made it clear that the case has exhausted all its avenues of appeal since 2019 and hence there is no legal basis to not execute Nagaenthran based on allegations that his mental state has deteriorated during his time on death row and thus made him ineligible for execution, because there is no evidence present to the courts about these claims. There is also no medical basis to support the claim that Nagaenthran's mental age is below 18 years old since this was based on his lawyer's opinion. M Ravi has no medical expertise and met the Malaysian only once and interacted with him for just 26 minutes on 2 November 2021, six days before the appeal hearing. Justice See was also not convinced by Ravi's arguments regarding international law violations because of capital punishment, as he stated there is no legal basis for international law to take precedence over domestic law, concluding the appeal by stating that the law should take its course since Nagaenthran had already been accorded full due process and exhausted his appeals. An appeal to the Court of Appeal was also heard on 9 November 2021. The rushed schedule to close up on Nagaenthran's last-minute appeal process was criticised by lawyer N. Surendran as a denial of due legal process for Nagaenthran.

During the appeal hearing at the High Court, the testimonies of the prison officers who knew Nagaenthran were presented in court disputed the supposed mentally ill behaviour of Nagaenthran. A senior prison officer who had befriended Nagaenthran for the past three years had not seen any abnormal behaviour from Nagaenthran, who was able to request religious counselling after being told that he would be hanged in the near future. Another prison officer said Nagaenthran had no problem communicating with the prison officers in English, Malay and Tamil, making requests and responding to instructions. Not only did he ask for religious counselling and a DVD player to play religious songs, Nagaenthran was also able to request for phone calls to his family members and for them to visit him, as well as selecting whichever prison officers who could help fulfill his needs during the final days prior to his execution. The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) earlier requested to Nagaenthran's lawyer to allow them to disclose the latest psychiatric records detailing Nagaenthran's mental state, but Ravi objected to the disclosure.

On 9 November, the day of the appeal at the Court of Appeal, Malaysia's Communications and Multimedia minister Annuar Musa expressed to Singapore his hope that they could reconsider Nagaenthran's case and spare his life. At the same time, the human rights experts of the United Nations also pushed for Singapore to spare Nagaenthran's life.

However, on 9 November 2021, it was reported that Nagaenthran had tested positive for COVID-19 just 12 minutes after he arrived at the Court of Appeal for his appeal hearing, and thus the execution on 10 November would not proceed as scheduled. Both Ravi and the prosecutor Wong Woon Kwong were informed of this by one of the judges in a courtroom packed with both local and international media and activists. His appeal was also delayed to allow Nagaenthran time to recover before proceeding with the appeal process. The appeal was heard by three judges: Andrew Phang, Judith Prakash and Kannan Ramesh.

The next day on 10 November, the original date of Nagaenthran's execution, the Singapore Prison Service revealed that prior to his appearance in court, Nagaenthran did not report any symptoms and was initially tested negative by the ART test before the results of the PCR test confirmed Nagaenthran's COVID-19 infection. It was also revealed that Nagaenthran chose not to vaccinate himself from COVID-19, even though more than 90% of the prison staff and 90% of the prisoners were fully vaccinated from the virus. Several prison officers and some of Nagaenthran's fellow prisoners at the death row cells of Changi Prison's Institution A1 were also subsequently tested positive, and the affected death row cells were undergoing lockdown to avoid the infection from spreading. Nagaenthran and the people he interacted with were isolated to avoid spreading infection to more people and be given medical treatment in the meantime. There would also be measures taken to ensure regular testing of both prison staff and inmates for COVID-19. In addition to 54 supervising prison officers, a total of 169 prisoners from the prison, including those on death row, were confirmed to be infected as of 12 November 2021.

Further death penalty debate and Singapore's response

The case has brought light to the issue of the death penalty in Malaysia. While many human rights groups pushed for abolition of the death penalty, most Malaysians believed that the death penalty should remain for serious crimes like murder and certain offences of corruption other than drug trafficking, and support for the death penalty remains high in Malaysia despite the decreasing numbers of new death sentences given by the courts. Legal professionals and enforcement, including some lawyers and police officers, commented that there should be some powers of discretion given to the judges to impose life imprisonment in some capital cases instead of death with respect to its mitigating circumstances, but they generally felt that the death penalty is overall still relevant to use against drug trafficking and murder and other offences, given the rampant rate of drug offences committed in Malaysia. Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul Aziz, who was debating the Budget 2022 in Dewan Rakyat, brought up the case of Nagaenthran and hopes that Malaysia can review its death penalty laws for drug traffickers in Malaysia, given that it also executed many drug offenders while appealing for mercy on its citizens in other countries, which was inconsistent with their stance towards drug convicts in and out of Malaysia.

In light of the growing pressure by the United Nations (UN) to pardon Nagaenthran, Singapore's representative to the UN and Ambassador Umej Bhatia responded and highlighted that the courts in Singapore has already made it clear in their verdicts that Nagaenthran may have borderline intellectual functioning but he did not have mild intellectual disability, and they also gave their strictest due consideration to determine the eligibility of Nagaenthran's condition for execution, and even Nagaenthran's personal psychiatrist has also agreed that the Malaysian had no intellectual disability. With regards to the UN's accusations that Singapore had violated international law by imposing death sentences on drug offenders who committed "non-serious" crimes by international standards, Singapore stated there was no international consensus on the death penalty or what was the threshold of "serious crimes", and every country has the sovereign right to decide on its use of the death penalty and the types of capital offences they defined under the law.

When facing the UN's other allegations that the fate of a drug offender were decided by the prosecution of Singapore and the unfairness towards Nagaenthran's family with a long list of strict rules of COVID-19 travel regulations, Singapore rebutted it by stating that the prosecution's decisions are independent of the government and they are still liable for review of their decisions, which Nagaenthran has already appealed for before the courts found no error after reviewing the prosecution's decisions. The COVID-19 travel restrictions and rules were not discriminatory towards Nagaenthran's family, as they were all similar to the ones which apply to all travellers entering Singapore from Malaysia during this period, and were made to address the present pandemic situation in Singapore, and the authorities made efforts to contact the family to allow them to understand the travel regulations and facilitate their stay in Singapore.

On 12 November 2021, Singapore's Ministry of Foreign Affairs also revealed that the ministers in Singapore, including Prime Minister of Singapore Lee Hsien Loong and Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, had responded to their respective Malaysian counterparts that Nagaenthran was being accorded full due process under the law and was not intellectually disabled as confirmed by the courts and psychiatric assessments, hence there should be no intervention in his case. In response to the government's statements, Malaysia's human rights lawyer N. Surendran and Lawyers for Liberty claimed that the Singapore government was fabricating their stand that Nagaenthran was accorded full due process, stating that the courts had not given Nagaenthran a full due court process by not taking into consideration of his intellectual and mental impairment or making accommodation to address them during the court proceedings. Human Rights Watch's senior disability rights expert Emina Ćerimović commented on Nagaenthran's case, "The inhumanity shown by the Singaporean authorities in Nagaenthran's case is truly shocking." Ćerimović also added, "The government's determination to execute a man with an intellectual disability for importing a small amount of drugs is disproportionate and cruel, and deserves global condemnation."

Further appeals from Malaysia and other parties

The Malaysian Bar, together with the Advocates Association of Sarawak and the Sabah Law Society, also activated their efforts to appeal to the Singapore government for clemency to lower Nagaenthran's death sentence to life imprisonment, and they cited that they maintain their respect for Singapore's laws but implored the city-state, on the basis of compassion and humanity, to assess Nagaenthran's mental state to see if he is mentally competent to be hanged due to their concerns of the possible psychological impact that his 11-year death row period had on him. Both Nagaenthran's family and lawyer M Ravi expressed on 18 November that they will sue Singapore's attorney general Lucien Wong for negligence and willful disregard of human life by the judicial system. Wong sent a letter to Ravi, stating that Ravi's other allegations against the legal system in Nagaenthran's case amounted to "contempt of court" and he should retract them and apologise by a deadline of 22 November. However, Ravi has stated that he will not retract his statements or apologise to the attorney general.

On 23 November 2021, Yang di-Pertuan Agong from Malaysia reportedly wrote to the President of Singapore, hoping that clemency could be given to Nagaenthran.

On 26 November 2021, the Court of Appeal of Singapore was to give its verdict regarding Nagaenthran's final appeal four days later on 30 November. However, the court date was postponed to sometime in January 2022, according to activist Angelia Pranthaman, whose brother Pannir Selvam was on death row for drug offences. She appealed to Singapore to spare the lives of both Nagaenthran and her brother and commute their death sentences. However, Nagaenthran's lawyer M Ravi, who requested the adjournment, stated there was no definite date confirmed as the courts did not inform him of a new court hearing date. The adjournment was a result of Ravi's suspension from his legal duties in view of his relapse from bipolar disorder.

On 3 December 2021, the President of Singapore Halimah Yacob replied to the Agong's clemency letter, firmly stating that Nagaenthran was being 'accorded full due process under the law' and thus refused to grant clemency to Nagaenthran.

The next court date for Nagaenthran's appeal was set for 24 January 2022. The case would be heard by a five-judge panel comprising Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, Judges of Appeal Andrew Phang, Judith Prakash and Belinda Ang, and Senior Judge Chao Hick Tin. Nagaenthran's lawyer M Ravi was also replaced by Violet Netto. As Nagaenthran's appeal hearing was drawing near, concerned members of the international community, including British actor Stephen Fry, continued to appeal to Singapore to spare the 33-year-old Malaysian from the gallows.

Final appeals and second death warrant

Last court hearing

The Supreme Court of Singapore, where Nagaenthran's final appeal was heard by its higher division – known as the Court of Appeal.

On 24 January 2022, Netto sought an adjournment of the appeal, and it was granted by the courts. The appeal was eventually heard on 1 March 2022, in which Netto argued for Nagaenthran to be subjected to psychiatric assessment prior to his execution to assess whether he should be considered mentally fit to undergo his hanging. Netto also tried to admit the reports of two foreign psychologists as evidence to support Nagaenthran's case. However, the judges stated that the last-minute drip-feeding of evidence were tantamount to an abuse of the court process. Deputy Public Prosecutor Wong Woon Kwong described the appeal as a "continuation of a very cynical attempt to abuse the process of the court" and criticized Netto for seeking to suppress the prison's independent medical records. The judgement was reserved, and while awaiting the verdict, the rights groups continually sought clemency for Nagaenthran, who still remained at Changi Prison awaiting his fate.

Four weeks later, on 29 March 2022, the five-judge Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, and they issued harsh words of condemnation and criticism towards Netto and M. Ravi for abusing the court process. As he delivered the verdict on behalf of the judges, Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon pointed out that the appeal was filed based on inadmissible evidence and Ravi's own "self-serving" speculation that Nagaenthran has a mental age below 18 years old; there was no evidence to show any deterioration of Nagaenthran's mental faculties during his 13-year stay on Changi Prison's death row. The Court, relying on the findings of the trial court, accepted that Nagaenthran possessed borderline intellectual functioning but not mild intellectual disability. The two foreign psychologists' evidence was rejected as they did not personally assess Nagaenthran.

Chief Justice Menon further pointed out that the Attorney-General's Chambers had intended to enter psychiatric and medical reports from check-ups done on Nagaenthran in 2021 as evidence in court, but Nagaenthran's lawyers objected on the grounds of medical confidentiality, preventing the reports from being used as evidence. Menon questioned how Nagaenthran could withhold evidence regarding his medical condition after "having called his medical condition into question". Menon inferred that Nagaenthran was "seeking to prevent the court from accessing that evidence because he knows or believes it would undermine his case".

Menon reprimanded the lawyers for mounting a baseless legal challenge against Nagaenthran's death penalty, which he described as "without merit" and an attempt to escape from death and defer his imminent execution. He also reiterated that it was improper to engage in or encourage last-minute attempts to reopen any concluded appeals without a reasonable basis, and as long as the capital punishment was imposed legally in the specified circumstances, it is intolerable for a defence counsel to repeatedly launch hopeless appeals and bring the justice system into disrepute.

Menon also stated in the appeal verdict:

In our judgment, these proceedings constitute a blatant and egregious abuse of the court's processes. They have been conducted with the seeming aim of unjustifiably delaying the carrying into effect of the sentence imposed on the appellant.

Having lost his final chance to have his death sentence commuted, 33-year-old Nagaenthran was set for imminent execution. Nagaenthran's family were reportedly devastated and shocked to hear the appeal's dismissal.

Second clemency appeal and outcome

In the aftermath of the appeal's dismissal, many civil groups still tried to appeal to Singapore to commute Nagaenthran's sentence and show him mercy. Maya Foa, director of UK-based anti-death penalty group Reprieve, made a statement to Singapore's President Halimah Yacob, "We urge  President Halimah Yacob to listen to the cries for mercy within Singapore and around the world, from the United Nations to global business leaders, and spare the life of this vulnerable man." Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) also accused the government of Singapore for violating international law and they also claimed that by sentencing Nagaenthran to death, Singapore had failed to abide by the conditions of prohibiting the killing of intellectually disabled persons. Together with M Ravi, LFL asked the Malaysian government to bring forward Nagaenthran's case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The Global Commission on Drug Policy, citing the case of Nagaenthran, stated that the death penalty was an inappropriate response to any offences, including drug-related crimes. A protest was also made on 3 April 2022 at Hong Lim Park against the government's use of the death penalty in light of Nagaenthran's failed appeal. Besides, the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) was urged to intervene in Nagaenthran's case and other death penalty issues from Singapore, as well as advocate for the abolition of the death penalty in the ASEAN member nations.

While some netizens felt that Nagaenthran should be spared from the gallows and the death penalty should be removed, others agreed with and supported the judges' standing that Nagaenthran clearly knew the magnitude and consequences of his crime and stated he should face execution for his crime. Earlier in the same month Nagaenthran lost his appeal, a 2021 survey result was publicly revealed and it showed that more than 80% of Singaporeans believed that the death penalty should remain in Singapore due to its deterrent effect and relevance in fighting crime.

M Ravi told the reporters that due to the complete exhaustion of avenues of appeal on Malaysia's part, no more appeals would be lodged and the execution could take place in days, but he continued to express his support for Nagaenthran's life to be spared. The concern that Nagaenthran's execution would take place soon was further intensified when 68-year-old Changi Prison inmate Abdul Kahar bin Othman, a Singaporean drug convict, was confirmed to be executed at dawn on 30 March 2022, making Abdul Kahar the first person to be hanged in Singapore during the COVID-19 pandemic.

On 16 April 2022, rights advocate Kokila Annamalai revealed in a Malaysian newspaper that a second clemency appeal submitted by Nagaenthran's family and supporters was rejected by the President of Singapore on 31 March 2022. Having personally witnessed the tender, loving moments between Nagaenthran and his family members during their prison visits and court session, Annamalai shared her sadness towards Nagaenthran for his imminent fate and she stated that there should be more to be done regarding the issue of capital punishment in Singapore, and criticised Singapore for a lack of mercy on Nagaenthran. The Guardian and Malaysian newspapers also confirmed that Nagaenthran's death sentence was upheld by the dismissal of his second clemency plea, and Ravi criticised the decision to reject clemency on Nagaenthran.

Second death warrant

On 20 April 2022, the Singapore Prison Service (SPS) informed Nagaenthran's mother that her son's execution was rescheduled to take place on 27 April 2022, and that extended daily visits would be facilitated for the family until the eve of his execution. This announcement led to requests for the Malaysian government to delay Nagaenthran's execution by taking the case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Upon receiving her son's second death warrant, Nagaenthran's mother Panchalai Supermaniam appeared on Facebook in a video clip, in which she made a public apology on behalf of her son, and she begged for mercy on behalf of Nagaenthran's life.

By then, Amnesty International also filed a petition to seek clemency on behalf of Nagaenthran, and the petition itself garnered more than 8,000 signatures. Rights activist Kokila Annamalai was set to organise a candlelight vigil on behalf of Nagaenthran at Hong Lim Park on 25 April 2022, and Nagaenthran's family and three siblings prepared to travel to Singapore to visit him in Changi Prison. British billionaire Richard Branson and British actor Stephen Fry, who both earlier appealed for mercy on Nagaenthran's life, once again went to social media to reiterate their pleas for Nagaenthran's sentence be commuted. Additionally, in his appeal for mercy on behalf of Nagaenthran, Branson described the death penalty as a "horrible blotch" on the reputation of Singapore as a huge financial hub. Human rights groups also asked Singapore to transfer Nagaenthran to a Malaysian prison on a prisoner exchange programme to allow him to be executed in Malaysia instead of Singapore.

The protests against Nagaenthran's execution grew fiercer as the death warrant of Datchinamurthy Kataiah, another Malaysian drug convict on death row, was also finalized and his execution date scheduled on 29 April 2022, two days after Nagaenthran's execution date. The vigil was held as scheduled, with several public figures like rapper Subhas Nair, opposition politician Paul Tambyah and writer Alfian Sa'at attending the vigil. Some Singaporeans showed up out of sympathy for Nagaenthran and Datchinamurthy, while others joined only to find out more about the concept of the death penalty in Singapore.

Nagaenthran's family were unable to attend the vigil since the law prohibits the participation of foreigners in local protests, but on behalf of the family, Nagaenthran's cousin Thenmoli Sunniah stated that the family would not give up their hope for Nagaenthran's case, since they planned to file another legal application to the courts. Datchinamurthy's family similarly stood by Nagaenthran's family to show support for the vigil and protest against the two men's executions. It was also revealed that both Datchinamurthy and Nagaenthran were close friends while staying next to each other in neighbouring cells at the death row section of Changi Prison, and both men's mothers bonded due to their loss and common goal to save their sons from execution.

Sebaran Kasih, a non-governmental organisation, appealed for all political and business leaders to bring forward diplomatic measures to intervene in Nagaenthran's case, and they cited the 2010 cases of Cheong Chun Yin and Pang Siew Fum to question why Nagaenthran cannot be eligible for life imprisonment like both Cheong and Pang since their cases were similar in terms of their circumstances. Cheong and Pang were both initially sentenced to death for drug trafficking in 2010 before the 2013 law reforms allowed them to have their sentences commuted to life, the former due to him being a certified courier and the latter due to her mental illness. A protest was made by Malaysian activists, lawyers and members of the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC) outside the Singapore High Commission in Malaysia to show opposition to Nagaenthran's execution. However, as a result of this protest, the Royal Malaysia Police sent out officers to take three lawyers into custody for questioning regarding their roles in the protest.

The United Nations Human Rights Office also issued an official statement, in which they showed opposition to the Singapore government's decision to proceed with the executions of both Nagaenthran and Datchinamurthy due to their concern that Singapore may conduct more executions in the near future with the increasing phenomenon of death warrants issued for drug convicts on death row, and they urged Singapore to reconsider their drug laws and use of the death penalty in the city state.

Lawsuit against Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon

On 25 April 2022, Nagaenthran's mother Panchalai Supermaniam filed a lawsuit against Sundaresh Menon, the current Chief Justice of Singapore, as a final attempt to help her son escape the gallows. In the lawsuit, which she made with the help of family members, activists and friends, she alleged that Menon was the same attorney general who, prior to his appointment as Chief Justice, prosecuted Nagaenthran and secured his conviction, which she claimed was a move that "blatantly" deprived her son's rights to a fair trial. However, Panchalai did not have a lawyer to represent her in filing the application since none of the lawyers in Singapore were willing to represent her for fear of any reprisals from the court, as the courts would often issue hefty fines and other penalties for any legal applications filed without merit. Hence, Panchalai would be representing herself in the hearing, which was set for the next day and also the day before Nagaenthran's execution.

On 26 April 2022, the day before Nagaenthran's execution, the Court of Appeal dismissed Nagaenthran's mother's lawsuit. The three-judge panel, consisting of Supreme Court judge Belinda Ang, and two Judges of Appeal Andrew Phang and Judith Prakash, overall found the application to be "devoid of merit". Justice Phang, who delivered the verdict, described in his own words that "no court in the world would allow an applicant to prolong matters ad infinitum" by filing applications that were baseless and without merit. He also stated: "There must come a time when the last word of the court is the last word." Justice Phang added that Nagaenthran did not raise this allegation in his previous appeal the month before, which made the application look like a "calculated attempt" to downplay the finality of the court process.

Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Wong Woon Kwong harshly criticized Nagaenthran's mother for filing a meritless lawsuit, and he stated that CJ Menon was not involved in any of the decisions pertaining to Nagaenthran's prosecution, hence the lawsuit was a sign of the continuation of abuse of the court process by Nagaenthran through the involvement of external parties. DPP Wong also urged the court to compel Nagaenthran's mother to disclose the identities of those who played a part in submitting the lawsuit, so as to "stem the continued attacks on the fundamental administration of justice."

After the dismissal of this lawsuit, Nagaenthran, who accepted the verdict, made a final request to the Court of Appeal, being quoted as saying: "I'd like to make a last-minute request to spend some time with my family members. I'm placing this request so I can hold my family members' hands. Here in court, Your Honour, I would like to hold my family members' hands, not in prison. May I please have permission to hold their hands here?"

After making the request, the three judges allowed Nagaenthran to spend two hours together with his family in the Supreme Court building and he was given permission to hold their hands one final time. As the time was up, Nagaenthran reportedly shared a tearful farewell with his family before he was brought back to Changi Prison, where his execution would take place.

Upon the news of his lawsuit's rejection, a small vigil was held by activists in Malaysia on the night before his execution. Fifty people attended the event, and there were two Malaysian lawyers being probed by the police for taking part in the vigil. Lawyers for Liberty also accused the Singapore authorities of "harassing" and "intimidating" Nagaenthran's mother into revealing the names of those who assisted her into filing the lawsuit, claiming the intention of such aid were made out of compassion for a helpless mother desperate to save her child.

Execution

Через тринадцать лет после его ареста за торговлю наркотиками 27 апреля 2022 года, примерно на рассвете, Нагаентран был повешен в тюрьму Чанги . He was the second death row prisoner to be executed in Singapore after Abdul Kahar Othman, who was the first to be hanged after the end of Singapore's two-year moratorium due to the COVID-19 pandemic in Singapore. Нагаентран был пятым малазийским торговцем наркотиками, который был повешен в Сингапуре с 2016 года.

По словам 22-летнего брата Нагантранского Навинкумара, его семья собирала тело своего брата и возвращал его в свой родной город в Ипохе для подготовки к похоронам. 36-летняя сестра Нагаентран Шармила сказала, что семья была опечалена и шокирована их потерей, И они были недовольны последним приговором Нагаентран, несмотря на то, что он смирился со своей смертью. Ожидалось, что похороны состоятся 29 апреля 2022 года, через два дня после казни Нагаентран. В Сингапуре был проведен след в Сингапуре до того, как тело было возвращено в Малайзию, на нем присутствовали более ста человек, включая правозащитников, членов семьи и представителей общественности. Сестра Нагаентран рассказала, что после похорон останки Нагаентран будут отдохнули на индуистском кладбище в Бунтоне , Ипох . Более 200 членов семьи и друзей присутствовали на похоронах. Как сообщается, Шармила не позволила единому политику присутствовать на похоронах, утверждая, что они приходят только для рекламы, но не предложили помощи, в то время как Нагаентран находился в камере смертников.

В 2022 году в Сингапуре было официально проведено в Сингапуре, в общей сложности одиннадцать казни, в том числе Нагаентран.

Последствия

Критика исполнения

Директор Овервеня Майя Фоа критиковал казнь и назвал Нагаентран «жертвой трагического выкидыша правосудия». М Рави выразил соболезнования семье и сказал, что продолжит бороться за отмену смертной казни в Сингапуре. Активист Кирстен Хан также выразил свои соболезнования, опубликовав фотографию Нагаентран в своей любимой одежде, которая была последней фотографией, сделанной до его смерти. Правительство Малайзии также получило призывы от соответствующих сторон об отмене смертной казни в свете казни Нагаентран, когда PKR лидер и заместитель начальника Джимми Пуа -Ви, описывающий его как неактуальное наказание из -за того, что оно не является эффективным в уменьшении преступления. Wisma Putra также выразила свои соболезнования семье Нагаентран и предоставила им консульскую поддержку.

Кроме того, британский миллиардер Ричард Брэнсон , который ранее обращался к помилованию по делу Нагаентран, выразил свои соболезнования семье Нагаентран, и он выразил свое разочарование в Сингапуре из -за его «неумолимого механизма смерти», так как она оставила «нет места для приличия, достойного, сострадания, сострадания», « или милосердие ", когда он послал Нагаентран к виселице, несмотря на растущую оппозицию его казни. Азиатская сеть Asia Anti-Death (ADPAN) осудила казнь и заявила, что казнь Нагаентран является нарушением международного права со стороны правительства Сингапура. Режиссер Эрвин Ван дер Борхт из Amnesty International прокомментировал, что казнь Нагаентран был «позорным актом», который «безжалостно осуществлялся» правительством Сингапура, несмотря на широко распространенный международный протест и протесты.

Австралийский адвокат по правам человека Джулиан МакМахон , который ранее представлял торговцев наркотиками Эндрю Чан и Мюран Сукумаран из « Бали девять» (казнен в 2015 году, уволяющий команду в Индонезии) и Ван Туонг Нгуен (казнен в 2005 году, повешенным в Сингапуре), выступил против Ван. Выпуск смертной казни в свете казни Нагаентран. МакМахон заявил, что, по его мнению, смертная казнь была неэффективной в предотвращении торговли наркотиками, учитывая, что правонарушители, с которыми сталкивались, были лишь бегунами, но не королями, и он добавил, что было шокирующим видеть, что смертная казнь используется для относительно «не». Серьезные «преступления, такие как торговля наркотиками.

Другой австралийский адвокат Морри Бейлс также критиковал использование смертной казни в Сингапуре и Японии в свете казни Нагаентран в Сингапуре для торговли наркотиками, а также казнь Японии трех убийц в предыдущем году. Бейлс заявил, что претензии на смертную казнь как эффективного сдерживания были сильно противоречат опыту многих других стран, и он заявил, что висят простого мула, как Нагаентран, не сможет достичь концов справедливости, поскольку вдохновитель и наркотики не сможет достичь концов справедливости, поскольку вдохновитель Лорд, который нанял Нагаентран для доставки наркотиков, не был привлечен к ответственности. Бейлс также заявил своими словами: «Свидетели, присяжные и суды совершают ошибки, но когда -то осуществленная смертная казнь необратима». Случай Нагаентран также обратил внимание на прошлые случаи, когда австралийцы казнены за преступления на наркотики в странах Юго -Восточной Азии (например, казнь Барлоу и Чемберс в Малайзии, Ван Туонг Нгуен в Сингапуре, а также Эндрю Чан и Миран Сукумаран Бали девять в Индонезии) и публичной оппозиции Австралии против смертной казни.

Случай казни Нагаентран привлек внимание к случаям девяти оставшихся малазийцев (в том числе Датчинамурти Катайя и Паннир Сельвам Прантхаман ) в Сингапуре, а также четверо других малазийцев повешены на торговлю наркотиками до исполнения Нагаентрана. Риск исполнения этих девяти малазийцев, несмотря на предполагаемые курьеры или якобы инвалиды, вызвал обеспокоенность активистам, которые выступили против смертной казни. Организация Объединенных Наций также раскритиковала Сингапур за исполнение Нагаентран и Абдула Кахара Отмана и заявила, что Сингапур должен навязать мораторий в качестве первого шага для отмены смертной казни, и призвал Сингапур не казнить Датчинамурти Катайя , который был третьим торговцем наркотиками, сталкивающимися с неизбежным исполнением в исполнении. Сингапур.

Правительственный ответ

В тот же день Нагаентран был казнен, палаты Генерального прокурора (AGC) сделали официальное заявление, в котором они решительно осудили обвинения и слухи, распространяемые по отношению к делу Нагаентрана, особенно тех, кто стремится к «соблюдениям» в отношении участия вождя Судья Сундареш Менон , в котором эти слухи ложно предложили любую форму предвзятости, сделанную Меноном в его решении в апелляции Нагаентран. AGC прокомментировал, что иск против Менона был седьмым судебным заявлением (не включающим апелляции) от имени Нагаентран, и они описали иск как «последнюю попытку злоупотреблять процессами суда и неоправданно задержать перенос в действие навязан на Нагаентран. "

AGC также упомянул, что до судебного разбирательства он был специально упомянут адвокату Нагантентана о назначении главного судьи Менона в качестве генерального прокурора во время судебного преследования Нагаентранского и самого Нагантрана, согласно совету его адвоката, не дал никаких возражений для Менона, чтобы председательствовать в суде Полем Тем не менее, эта информация, по -видимому, была «намеренно» отложена от матери Нагаентран, когда она выдвинула иск, поскольку мать Нагаентран подала заявление с помощью друзей и активистов, организации юридических работ явно не были исключительно работой Матери Нагаентрана. и и адрес электронной почты, и адрес электронной почты не принадлежали матери Нагаентран. Поэтому, по вышеупомянутым причинам, не было никаких оснований в подаче заявления. AGC ответил в официальном заявлении о том, что эти обвинения составляли «неуважение к суду», и подтвердил, что оно «серьезно относится к любому закону, который может представлять собой неуважение, и без колебаний принять соответствующие меры для защиты правосудия ".

28 апреля 2022 года, на следующий день после казни Нагаентран, как АГК, так и Центральное бюро наркотиков (CNB) сделали заявления о защите решения Сингапура повесить Нагаентран в свете международного осуждения Сингапура и исполнения. AGC подтвердил в своем заявлении о том, что Нагаентран был назначен справедливый судебный процесс и «исчерпал свои права на апелляцию и почти все другое средство в соответствии с законом в течение примерно 11 лет», в то время как CNB заявил в отдельном заявлении, что действия Нагентрана при совершении преступления заявили о действиях Нагентрана при совершении преступления. был «преднамеренным, целенаправленным и рассчитанным решением» и приводил в соответствие с соответствующими выводами суда, в которых все судьи согласились с тем, что «он знал, что делает» во время преступления.

CNB также заявил, что в психическом состоянии Нагаентрана слишком много дезинформации, и они подтвердили, что Нагаентран не был интеллектуально инвалидом во время его преступления, так как он пытался уклониться от властей, а также рассказал слишком много противоречивых сообщений о том, как и что привел к тому, что он совершил преступления. Правительство получила поддержку от многих, кто обсуждал дело.

29 апреля 2022 года было выявлено, что за три дня до казни Нагаентран премьер -министр Ли Сюнь Лунг и министр иностранных дел Вивиан Балакришнан ответили на их малазийские коллеги, что Нагантранс был полностью выполнен в соответствии с законом, когда они получили письмо правительства, что Нагаентуран был выполнен в полном объеме Чтобы рассмотреть дело Нагаентрана и приговор. Министр иностранных дел Малайзии Сайфуддин Абдулла ответил правительству Сингапура в заявлении, что они признали казнь Нагаентентана, и этот вопрос не повлияет на дипломатические связи между Малайзией и Сингапуром, поскольку они поддерживают свое уважение к правам суверенитета в Сингапуре с участием в собственной судебной системе, чтобы принять решение о своей судебной системе, с и законы.

В ответ на критику Организации Объединенных Наций в Сингапуре посол Умей Бхатия защищал решения правительства о исполнении Нагаентанрана и Абдула Кахара Отмана , а также их использование смертной казни в отношении наркотиков. Бхатия заявила, что все уголовные разбирательства в Сингапуре были проведены с надлежащей правовой процедурой перед «беспристрастной и независимой судебной системой», и смертная казнь будет передана любому подозреваемому, если их вина будет доказана в соответствии с законом. Он обратил внимание на многолетнюю репутацию сингапура за то, что он имел справедливую и беспристрастную систему уголовного правосудия, а также независимую и эффективную судебную власть. Бхатия опровергла, что в ответ на расовую дискриминацию не было никакой расовой дискриминации по поводу большого числа меньшинств в Сингапуре, и он процитировал, что все люди подвергались равным и справедливому обращению в соответствии с законами Сингапура, и им не было дано разные лечение на основе расы или национальности. Бхатия подтвердила, что не было необходимости навязывать мораторий, поскольку не было международного консенсуса против использования смертной казни «когда он навязывается в соответствии с надлежащей правовой процедурой», и добавил, что «явного определения» в соответствии с международным законодательством ». или международный консенсус в отношении того, что составляет «самые серьезные преступления». Бхатия закончил свое заявление, сославшись на то, что каждая страна имеет свое суверенное право определять свою собственную систему уголовного правосудия, учитывая ее собственные обстоятельства и в соответствии с его обязательствами международного права.

Что касается дела Нагаентран и злоупотребления судебными процессами, сделанными адвокатами Нагатентана, государственным министром по внутренним делам Мухаммед Файшал Ибрагим заявил, что они признали, что должны быть некоторые либеральные граждане, несущие страстные взгляды на капитал, но он повторил, что должны быть некоторые либеральные граждане. Основное уважение, придаваемое закону, и для людей было неприемлемо неоднократно разрабатывать апелляции в заключенном случае капитала без ощутимых доказательств. Он также сказал, что будут внесены законодательные изменения и переданы, чтобы отступить и выдать штрафы за каждое злоупотребление судебными процессами. Кроме того, Файшал также подчеркнул негативные последствия злоупотребления наркотиками и то, как это может не только разрушить жизнь злоупотребления наркотиками (и их близких), но и привести к преступлениям, совершенным подозреваемыми под влиянием наркотиков, ссылаясь на недавние дела марта 2022 года. Из атаки Buangkok Crescent Sword, атаки ножа Квинстауна двух человек и смертельной полиции, стреляющей из беглеца, владеющего ножом, в качестве примеров, подтверждающих его дело. Он заявил, что война с наркотиками будет продолжаться в Сингапуре, несмотря на растущее либеральное отношение некоторых молодых людей к употреблению наркотиков.

Хардталк интервью

в июне 2022 года Во время интервью BBC Hardtalk Шанмугам, которого ведущий и журналист спросил Стивен Сакен Сакер относительно смертной казни, заявил, что смертная казнь в Сингапуре была подходящим наказанием, принятым правительством для защиты сингапурцев и спасения жизней. Он также процитировал отчет Всемирной организации здравоохранения (ВОЗ) в 2021 году, в котором было показано, что за один год было связано 500 000 смертей, связанных со злоупотреблением наркотиками. Шанмугам добавил, что в 1990 -х годах Сингапур арестовал около 6000 человек в год за наркотики, но теперь это сократилось до 3000 человек в год.

Он заявил, что это показывает, что законы, развернутые Сингапуром по оборотам наркотиков, защищали жизнь многих местных жителей и поддерживают безопасное общество в Сингапуре. Обращаясь к вопросу Сакюра о морали, стоящей за казнью Нагаентентана, несмотря на его предполагаемую инвалидность, Шанмугам опровергли, что суды обнаружили, что Нагаентран не был интеллектуально инвалидом, что было подтверждено психиатрами, вызванными его адвокатами - и принял рассчитанное и калиброванное решение по привлечению к принесению психиатров. наркотики в Сингапур. Он также процитировал два случая казненных американцев с подобными IQ, такими как Нагаентран, чтобы показать, что между Нагаентран и двумя мужчинами не было разницы.

Утверждая, что Сакур должен сосредоточиться не на исполнении одного торговца торговцем, а на общей картине тяжелой ситуации с наркотиками в Юго -Восточной Азии (которая вызвала бесчисленные погибшие среди наркоманов в регионе), Шанмугам цитируется:

«Чтобы неправильно процитировать известную цитату, единственная висеть торговца наркотиками-это трагедия; миллион смертей от злоупотребления наркотиками-статистика. Это то, что это показывает».

Ответ о смертной казни Шанмугама во время интервью BBC был хорошо принят и поддерживался многими представителями общественности в социальных сетях.

Другие ответы

Оппозиционные партии в Сингапуре - Партия реформ , Народная энергетическая партия и Red Dot United - продолжили писать министру права К. Шанмугама из -за их опасений по поводу обвинений в климате страха среди адвокатов, перед лицом возможного правительственного репрессии, Отказ от того, чтобы представлять торговцев наркотиками в камере смертников, после случаев Нагаентран (через заявление его матери) и Датчинамурти, где оба должны были присутствовать без юрисконсульта. Три оппозиционных партия написали, что эти претензии были серьезными обвинениями, поскольку все в равной степени имеют право на право на юридическое представительство в соответствии с законодательством Сингапура, и они надеялись, что правительство может предпринять меры по подавлению этих утверждений из -за страха, что это может нанести ущерб репутации Сингапура.

На судебной конференции в мае 2022 года главный судья Сундареш Менон сослался на растущую тенденцию многочисленных необоснованных юридических заявлений, предпринятых многими заключенными против смертной казни, особенно дела Нагаентран, когда он выразил свою обеспокоенность по поводу явного злоупотребления судебными процессами. Он призвал всех адвокатов в Сингапуре не участвовать в таких процедурах, как независимо от обязанности адвокатов перед клиентом или по другим причинам, суды не могут содержать такое явное злоупотребление процессом, поскольку оно нарушало ответственность сотрудников юристов в суд.

Юридическое судебное разбирательство против бывшего адвоката Нагаентрана

10 мая 2022 года сообщалось, что фиолетовая нетто, адвокат, который представлял Нагаентран в своей второй апелляции в Апелляционный суд, была арестована и расследована за выступление в качестве адвоката и адвоката без действительного справочного сертификата как минимум в трех случаях. в том числе дело Нагаентран и последнюю апелляцию еще двух заключенных смертников Пауси Джефридин и Рослан Бакар. В соответствии с законом он был постановлен, что адвокаты должны подать заявку на получение сертификата на каждый практический год, который они действуют в качестве адвоката и адвоката, а сертификат Netto истек в то время, когда она представляла Нагаентерран. Для этого она потенциально столкнулась с максимальным приговором в шесть месяцев, штраф в размере 2500 долл. США , или оба, если они осуждены за выступление в качестве адвоката без действительного сертификата.

Мало того, что, М. Рави , адвокат по правам человека, который также представлял Нагаентран до сети, был подвергнут семи отдельным профессиональным дисциплинарным расследованиям, которые могут привести к тому, что он оштрафован, отстранен или отстранен от адвоката, в дополнение к трем разбирательствам о преуспевании а также ряд полицейских расследований на повторное злоупотребление судебными процессами в ходе дела Нагаентран. Рави также дали запрет на поездки, который ограничил его отправиться в Малайзию. и заявили, что Сингапур должен уважать права преступников на юридическое представительство, поскольку мать Нагантран и другой заключенный Датченамурти Катая В связи с этим вышеупомянутым разбирательством против бывших адвокатов Нагаентран, правозащитных организаций и малазийских адвокатов критиковали Сингапур за предполагаемое преследование адвокатов Отдельные случаи, без представительства юрисконсульта, чтобы спорить с их делами.

25 мая 2022 года Апелляционный суд опубликовал постановление суда, в котором они постановили, что Рави и Нетто выплачивают более 20 000 долл. США в виде расходов Генеральному прокурору (AGC) в качестве компенсации ненужным издержкам, понесенным судебными исками, обоим юристами. Сделано без солидных доказательств в деле Нагаенттрана; Рави должен был нести 75% от общей стоимости, в то время как оставшиеся 25% будут покрыты Netto. Было проведено небольшое мероприятие по государственному финансированию, чтобы собрать средства, чтобы помочь Рави и Нетто выпустить их штраф; Некоторые активисты критиковали Сингапур за наказание двух адвокатов за простое выполнение своих обязанностей для своего бывшего клиента. Кроме того, Рави, которому также необходимо заплатить 10 000 долл. США и 12 000 долл. США за еще два судебных процесса отдельно, оставались вызывающими и не содействующими, заявив, что он заплатил высокую цену в спасении жизни от смертной казни, несмотря на осуждение правительства о его ошибках.

Полицейский расследование активистов

27 июня 2022 года сообщалось, что несколько человек, в том числе активистов Кирстен Хан и Рокки Хоу, были расследованы полицией за незаконную организацию трех публичных собраний за пределами тюрьмы Чанги без разрешения полиции, чтобы показать свою оппозицию смертной казни и поддержки торговцев наркотиками Абдул Кахар Отман и Нагаентран до их казней 30 марта 2022 года и 27 апреля 2022 года соответственно. Хан и Хоу также попросили полицию представить свои шарнирные рубашки, а также в качестве доказательства для предстоящих полицейских расследований.

Переход пост-апелляционных заявлений в законопроект о случаях капитала

После исполнения Нагаентантрана в свете растущего уровня злоупотреблений судебных процессов, очевидно вызванных делом Нагаентран и последующими случаями, которые были изданы в процессе апелляций и помилования), правительство Сингапура решило пройти перед Новый закон, направленный на установление строгих правил, касающихся подачи заявлений после апелляционных апелляций, где только Апелляционный суд , высший суд Сингапура, может предоставить пребывание казни для заключенного в ожидании смертной казни в Сингапуре, а также слушать пост -Поджание приложений. Если у заключенного обнаружено, что он злоупотреблял судебными процессами, ему будет запрещено подавать заявление после апелляции, если нет новых доказательств. Один судья будет назначен для рассмотрения дел, прежде чем решить, следует ли отложить исполнение заключенного и утвердить его заявление после апелляции, прежде чем обычная группа из трех или пяти судей будет установлена, чтобы заслужить заявление в Апелляционном суде. Законопроект о приложениях после апелляционных заявлений в случае с капиталом был впервые составлен и принят 29 ноября 2022 года. Хотя этот закон был поддержан большинством, как лидер оппозиции Притама Сингха возникла критика , в Хьюман Райтс Вотч , что Сингапур сделал это, чтобы отключить шансы заключенных противостоять их исполнению и доступу к последним шансам справедливости.

Смотрите также

• Смертная казнь в Сингапуре
• Гоби Авенан
• Список крупных преступлений в Сингапуре
• Закон о неправильном употреблении наркотиков (Сингапур)