Dödsstraffrapport 2010

death sentences
and executions
2010

amnesty international is a global movement of more than 3 million supporters,
members and activists in more than 150 countries and territories who campaign
to end grave abuses of human rights.
our vision is for every person to enjoy all the rights enshrined in the universal
declaration of human Rights and other international human rights standards.
We are independent of any government, political ideology, economic interest or
religion and are funded mainly by our membership and public donations.

First published in 2011 by
amnesty international Ltd
Peter Benenson house
1 easton street
London Wc1x 0dW
united Kingdom

© amnesty international 2011

index: act 50/001/2011 english
original language: english
Printed by amnesty international,
international secretariat, united Kingdom

all rights reserved. this publication is copyright, but may
be reproduced by any method without fee for advocacy,
campaigning and teaching purposes, but not for resale.
the copyright holders request that all such use be registered
with them for impact assessment purposes. For copying in
any other circumstances, or for reuse in other publications,
or for translation or adaptation, prior written permission must
be obtained from the publishers, and a fee may be payable.
to request permission, or for any other inquiries, please
contact copyright@amnesty.org

Cover and back page photo: a video produced by amnesty
international France shows wax models slowly melting as they
depict several methods of execution. Posters with stills from
the video were displayed in the Paris metro to mark the World
day against the death Penalty in october 2010.
© tBWa/Paris

amnesty.org

CONTENTS
Foreword ......................................................................................................................3

The use of the death penalty in 2010: the global picture ..................................................5

Global numbers .........................................................................................................5

The global journey towards abolition of the death penalty...............................................6

Retentionist countries: violating international law and standards.....................................9

Regional overviews ......................................................................................................14

Americas ................................................................................................................14

Asia-Pacific.............................................................................................................17

Europe and Central Asia ...........................................................................................24

Middle East and North Africa ....................................................................................25

Sub-Saharan Africa..................................................................................................34

Annex I: Reported death sentences and executions in 2010 ............................................41

Annex II: Abolitionist and Retentionist Countries ............................................................44

Annex III: Ratification of international treaties ...............................................................46

Annex IV: Voting results of UN General Assembly Resolution 65/206, adopted on 21
December 2010 .........................................................................................................48

Endnotes ...................................................................................................................50

KEY

The figures presented in this report are the largest that can safely be drawn from our
research, although we emphasise that the true figures are significantly higher. Some states
intentionally conceal death penalty proceedings; others do not keep or make available figures
on the numbers of death sentences and executions.

Where “+” is indicated after a country and it is preceded by a number, it means that the
figure Amnesty International has calculated is a minimum figure. Where “+” is indicated
after a country and is not preceded by a number, it indicates that there were executions or
death sentences (at least more than one) in that country but it was not possible to obtain any
figures.

Death sentences and executions in 2010 3

FOREWORD
Soon after its creation in 1961, Amnesty International began sending appeals to prevent the
execution of prisoners of conscience. Over time, our work on the death penalty expanded.
Recognising this punishment as cruel, inhuman and degrading, and an affront to the right to
life, Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases, without exception. We
oppose it regardless of the nature of the crime, the characteristics of the offender, or the
method used by the state to kill the prisoner.

The organization began its global campaign against the death penalty in 1977. At that time
only 16 countries had abolished capital punishment. More than thirty years later, 139
countries have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. Fifty-eight countries are now
classified as retentionist and far fewer use it.

In fact the progress made towards abolition of the death penalty during the past ten years
alone is enormous, with more than 30 countries becoming abolitionist in law or in practice.
This positive trend continued in 2010.

We started the year by celebrating with our members in AI Mongolia when, on 14 January,
President Elbegdorj announced an official suspension of the implementation of death
sentences, a first step in a country where the death penalty is classified as a state secret, and
details of its use there are concealed. In December, the UN General Assembly adopted its
third resolution on a moratorium on the use of the death penalty, with more UN member
states supporting the resolution than ever before. The resolution was adopted by 109 votes in
favour, 41 against with 35 abstentions.

Bhutan, Kiribati, Maldives, Mongolia and Togo changed their vote from 2008 and supported
the call for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty. Comoros, Dominica, Nigeria,
Solomon Islands and Thailand moved from opposition to the moratorium in 2008 to
abstention in 2010. Critically, the Russian Federation and Madagascar joined as co-sponsors.
The number of votes against the resolution noticeably decreased in 2010.

Despite this progress and positive momentum, there is still much work to do before we reach
our goal of total abolition. Those countries that retain the death penalty defend their position
by claiming that they use it only as allowed under international law, and only for the most
serious crimes and after procedures that meet international fair trial standards. However,
their actions blatantly contradict these claims.

In most countries where support for the death penalty is still strong, capital punishment
continues to be imposed after unfair trials and often based on confessions extracted through
torture. In most countries the death penalty is used disproportionately against the poor,
minorities and members of racial, ethnic and religious communities. In numerous countries
death sentences are handed down for offences that are not violent and do not meet the
threshold of “most serious crimes” - such as economic crimes, sorcery, apostasy and drug-
related offences or sexual relations between consenting adults.

Index: ACT 50/001/2011 Amnesty International March 2011

4 Death sentences and executions in 2010

While the use of the death penalty is not explicitly prohibited in international law, retentionst
states frequently ignore the fact that both human rights law and UN human rights bodies
have consistently held that abolition should be the objective. For example, the International
Criminal Court – charged with bringing to justice those accused of the worst crimes – war
crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide – cannot impose the death penalty.

So the work continues. Amnesty International works against the death penalty through
engaging AI members and activists to take actions, collaborating with partners in the global
abolitionist movement, through advocacy targeting authorities around the world, by taking up
the cases of individuals at risk of imminent execution, and by collecting data and publishing
annual figures on the use of the death penalty.

Death Sentences and Executions in 2010 summarizes the major developments in 2010. We
gathered information from various sources including official statistics (where available), non-
governmental and inter-governmental organizations, human rights defenders, the media and
field research. The figures presented are those that we can confirm through our research,
although we emphasize that the true figures are significantly higher.

Amnesty International publishes this report in order to provide a resource for those seeking a
global picture on the use of the death penalty, but also as a means to draw attention to this
affront to human dignity.

As we approach our 50th year we are renewing our commitment to work for total abolition of
the death penalty by inviting members – old and new – to mark our anniversary by taking
action on the death penalty, and to become part of the global movement seeking a world free
of this most cruel, inhumane and degrading punishment.

Salil Shetty

Secretary General

Amnesty International March 2011 Index: ACT 50/001/2011


THE USE OF THE DEATH PENALTY IN
2010: THE GLOBAL PICTURE
GLOBAL NUMBERS
At least 23 countries were known to have carried out judicial executions in 2010. This is four
more than 2009, when Amnesty International recorded the lowest number of executing countries
since the organisation began monitoring death penalty figures. 1

There were no reported executions in Afghanistan, Indonesia, Mongolia, Pakistan, Saint Kitts
and Nevis and United Arab Emirates, although these countries were known to have carried out
executions up to 2008 or 2009. However, after a hiatus, Belarus, Bahrain, Equatorial Guinea,
the Palestinian Authority2, Somalia and Taiwan all carried out at least one execution in 2010.

At least 527 executions were carried out in 2010. This figure does not include the thousands
of executions that were believed to be carried out in China last year. Last year Amnesty
International decided not to publish minimum figures for the use of the death penalty in
China, where such statistics are considered to be state secrets. Instead Amnesty International
has challenged the Chinese authorities to publish figures for the number of people sentenced
to death and executed each year to confirm their claims that there has been a reduction in
the use of the death penalty in the country.

REPORTED EXECUTIONS IN 2010
Bahrain (1), Bangladesh (9+), Belarus (2), Botswana (1), China (1000s), Egypt (4), Equatorial Guinea (4), Iran
(252+), Iraq (1+), Japan (2), Libya (18+), Malaysia (1+), North Korea (60+), the Palestinian Authority (5),
Saudi Arabia (27+), Singapore (+), Somalia (8+), Sudan (6+), Syria (17+), Taiwan (4), United States of
America (46), Vietnam (+), Yemen (53+).

At least 2024 new death sentences were known to have been imposed in 67 countries in
2010. This is a minimum figure which is the safest that can be inferred from our research.

REPORTED DEATH SENTENCES IN 2010
Afghanistan (100 +), Algeria (130+), Bahamas (5+), Bahrain (1), Bangladesh (32+), Barbados (1), Belarus (3),
Benin (1+), Brunei Darussalam (+), Burkina Faso (1+), Cameroon (+), China (+), Central African Republic (14),
Chad (1), Democratic Republic of Congo (+), Egypt (185), Equatorial Guinea (4), Ethiopia (5+), Gambia (13),
Ghana (17), Guatemala (1), Guyana (1+), India (105+), Indonesia (7+), Iran (+), Iraq (279+), Jamaica (4), Japan
(14), Jordan (9), Kenya (5+), Kuwait (3+), Laos (4), Liberia (11), Lebanon (12+), Libya (+), Madagascar (2+),
Malaysia (114+), Malawi (2), Maldives (1), Mali (14+), Mauritania (16+), Morocco/Western Sahara (4), Myanmar
(2), Nigeria (151+), North Korea (+), Palestinian Authority (11+), Pakistan (365), Saudi Arabia (34+), Sierra
Leone (1), Singapore (8+), Somalia (8+), South Korea (4), Sri Lanka (+), Sudan (10+), Syria (10+), Tanzania
(5+),Taiwan (9), Thailand (7+), Trinidad and Tobago (+), Tunisia (22+), Uganda (5+), United Arab Emirates
(28+), United States of America (110+), Vietnam (34+), Yemen (27+), Zimbabwe (8), Zambia (35).

At least 17,833 were under sentence of death worldwide at the end of 2010, which is a minimum
from the addition of the partial figures available.



The following methods of executions were used in 2010: beheading (Saudi Arabia), electrocution
(USA), hanging (Bangladesh, Botswana, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Malaysia, North Korea,
Singapore, Sudan, Syria), lethal injection (China, USA), shooting (Bahrain, Belarus, China,
Equatorial Guinea, North Korea, Palestinian Authority, Somalia, Taiwan, USA, Vietnam, Yemen).

There were no reports of judicial executions carried out by stoning, although new death
sentences by stoning were reportedly imposed in Iran, the Bauchi state of Nigeria and
Pakistan. At least 10 women and four men remained under sentence of death by stoning in
Iran at the end of the year.

Public judicial executions were known to have been carried out in Iran, North Korea and
Saudi Arabia.

Official figures on the use of the death penalty in 2010 were available only in a small number of
countries. In Belarus, China and Mongolia the death penalty continued to be classified as a “state
secret”. Little information was available for Malaysia, North Korea and Singapore. In Vietnam,
publishing figures on the use of the death penalty is prohibited by law. In several countries –
including Belarus, Botswana, Egypt and Japan – death row inmates are not informed of their
forthcoming execution, nor are their families or lawyers. In Belarus, Botswana and Vietnam the
bodies of the executed prisoners are not returned to their families for burial.

The following countries were known to have pardoned or commuted death sentences in
2010: Algeria, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Cuba, Egypt, India, Kuwait, Libya, Malaysia, Nigeria,
Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, USA, Vietnam, Yemen and
Zambia. One person was exonerated from death row in the USA.

THE GLOBAL JOURNEY TOWARDS ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY
At the end of 2010 the global trend towards abolition of the death penalty could not have
been clearer. While in the mid-1990s 40 countries on average were known to carry out
executions each year, during the first years of this century executions were reported in 30
countries on average. Most recently, 25 countries reportedly executed prisoners in 2008
while 19 countries – the lowest number ever recorded by Amnesty International – did so in
2009. In 2010, 23 countries were known to have carried out executions. The number of
countries that are abolitionist in law or practice has substantially increased over the past
decade, rising from 108 in 2001 to 139 in recent years.

Global trend towards abolition and intergovernmental organizations

Four countries in the G20 executed in 2010: China, Japan, Saudi Arabia and the USA.
36 of the 53 Member States of the African Union are abolitionist in law or practice.
Four of the 54 Member States of the Commonwealth executed in 2010: Bangladesh, Botswana, Malaysia
and Singapore. More than 11,000 people remain on death row in Commonwealth countries.
3 of the 10 Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations executed in 2010.
21 of the 192 Member States of the UN carried out executions in 2010.

One more country, Gabon removed the death penalty from its legislation in 2010 and at the



end of year bills abolishing the death penalty were pending in the parliaments of Lebanon,
Mali, Mongolia, South Korea. The draft of the new Iranian Penal Code, which had been
submitted to the Council of Guardians in 2009, was still awaiting consideration at the end of
2010. The draft reportedly did not include stoning sentences at the time of submission.

A draft law to ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR) was being considered by the Mongolian Parliament in late 2010. On
6 December, Kyrgyzstan acceded to the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, aiming at
the abolition of the death penalty, becoming the Protocol’s 73rd State Party.

Two countries that had already abolished capital punishment enshrined the rejection of
capital punishment in their constitutions. The 1992 Angolan Constitution had already
prohibited the death penalty and in 2010 this was reinforced in Article 59 of the new
Constitution. On 14 April 2010 the Parliament of Djibouti adopted an amendment to the
Constitution to abolish the death penalty.

Even in countries where the support for the death penalty remains strong, positive steps
towards restricting the use of the death penalty were recorded in 2010. The mandatory
imposition of the death penalty with no consideration of the defendant’s personal
circumstances or the circumstances of the particular offence was ruled unconstitutional in
Bangladesh on 20 March. In a landmark judgement, the Court of Appeal of Kenya ruled on
30 July that the mandatory death penalty for murder was “inconsistent with the spirit and
letter of the constitution”. In October 2010 the Parliament of Guyana adopted a new law
abolishing the mandatory imposition of the death penalty for murder. On 10 March the
Human Rights Committee concluded that Zambia violated its international human rights
obligations as a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by
mandatorily imposing a death sentence in Munguwambuto Kabwe Peter Mwamba v. Zambia.
The Human Rights Committee has repeatedly stated that the automatic and mandatory
imposition of the death penalty constitutes an arbitrary deprivation of life, in violation of
article 6, paragraph 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in
circumstances where the death penalty is imposed without any possibility of taking into
account the defendant's personal circumstances or the circumstances of the particular
offence. The Human Rights Committee also found that Zambia has violated the defendant’s
right to a fair trial and the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment for the inhuman treatment caused by the failure to meet
the fair trial guarantees in Munguwambuto Kabwe Peter Mwamba’s case.3

On 21 December 2010 the plenary session of the UN General Assembly adopted a third
resolution on a moratorium on the use of the death penalty. The resolution, which was
adopted by 109 votes in favour, 41 against with 35 abstentions, reaffirms previous UN
General Assembly resolutions 62/149 and 63/168 and calls upon all States to: respect
international standards that provide safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those
facing the death penalty, in particular the minimum standards set out in the annex to
Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50 of 25 May 1984, as well as to provide the
Secretary-General with information in this regard; make available relevant information with
regard to their use of the death penalty, which can contribute to possible informed and
transparent national debates; progressively restrict the use of the death penalty and reduce
the number of offences for which it may be imposed; and to establish a moratorium on



executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty. The resolution calls upon States
which have abolished the death penalty not to reintroduce it, and encourages them to share
their experience in this regard. Finally, it requests the Secretary-General to report to the
General Assembly at its sixty-seventh session in 2012 on the implementation of the calls
contained in the resolution and resolved that the matter is considered again by the UN
General Assembly in 2012.

More UN Member States supported the resolution in 2010 than at the vote on the 2008
resolution. Bhutan, Kiribati, Maldives, Mongolia and Togo changed their vote from 2008 and
supported the call for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty. In a further sign of
progress, Comoros, Dominica, Nigeria, Solomon Islands and Thailand moved from opposition
to the moratorium in 2008 to abstention in 2010. For the first time, Madagascar and the
Russian Federation joined as co-sponsors. The number of votes against the resolution
noticeably decreased in 2010, appropriately reflecting the worldwide trend towards ending
the use of capital punishment.

2010 UN REPORTS ON THE DEATH PENALTY
Further highlighting the UN’s concern about the application of the death penalty globally and the trend
towards abolition, three reports on the subject were presented before UN bodies in 2010: a report compiled by
the UN Secretary General on the implementation of previous resolutions on moratorium on the use of the death
penalty was considered and adopted at the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly in November4; the
eighth quinquennial report on capital punishment and implementation of the safeguards guaranteeing
protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty5 was introduced before the UN Commission on Crime
Prevention and Criminal Justice at its 19th session in May 2010; and a report was presented at the 15th
session of the UN Human Rights Council in September 20106, in line with an earlier decision taken by the
Council to continue the former Human Rights Commission’s work on selected human rights issues. The
conclusions of these documents recognize the worldwide trend towards abolition and call upon states that still
retain the death penalty to respect international prohibitions to its use and safeguards guaranteeing the
rights of those facing the death penalty.

Regional governmental bodies also continued to support the world’s journey towards the
abolition of the death penalty. Between 12 and 15 April 2010 the African Commission on
Human and Peoples’ Rights organized a second regional conference on the death penalty in
Northern and Western Africa and proposed the creation of an optional protocol to the African
Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the abolition of the death penalty. In June 2010
the African body issued an interim injunction preventing the state governors of Nigeria from
resuming executions in the country, pending consideration of a petition filed by the more
than 800 death row inmates (see also regional overview on sub-Saharan Africa).

Resolutions against the use of the death penalty were adopted by the European Parliament
on the occasion of the World Day Against the Death Penalty and by the 19th session of the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Co-Operation in Europe in July
2010.

On 7 October 2010 the Spanish government established the International Commission
Against the Death Penalty, whose objectives include the universal abolition of the death
penalty as well as promoting the establishment of a global moratorium on the use of the
death penalty.



RETENTIONIST COUNTRIES: VIOLATING INTERNATIONAL LAW AND STANDARDS
DELAYING AND PREVENTING ABOLITION
While abolition of the death penalty continues to move forward, retentionist states continue
to argue that they are acting responsibly and in step not only with public opinion in their
countries but also with international law. In 2010, retentionist countries continued to justify
their use of the death penalty by stating that in their countries capital punishment is applied
only for the “most serious crimes” and after due process, in line with Article 6 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR)
The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a mechanism of the Human Rights Council under which it reviews,
each four years, the fulfilment by all 192 UN Member States of their human rights obligations and,
commitments. It is a cooperative mechanism, based on objective and reliable information, and equal
treatment of all States. The reviews are carried out by the UPR Working Group of the Human Rights Council. It
consists of an interactive dialogue between the State under review and other States. In their interventions,
States can raise issues, ask questions and make recommendations for action by the State under review. All
UN Member States, both members of the Human Rights Council and observer States, may participate in the
inter-active dialogue; NGOs may attend the Working Group sessions, but may not take the floor. The issue of
the death penalty is regularly raised during the review of retentionist states. The UPR is one of the contexts in
which these states attempt to justify their use of the death penalty with reference to international law.

The ICCPR, adopted by the General Assembly in 1966, outlines restrictions on the use of the
death penalty and sets out safeguards to be observed in capital cases. Article 6, paragraph 1,
recognizes the “inherent right to life” while paragraph 2 states that ”In countries that have
not abolished the death penalty, sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious
crimes…”

While the use of the death penalty is not explicitly prohibited in the ICCPR, its Article 6,
paragraph 6 clearly states that “Nothing in this article shall be invoked to delay or to prevent
the abolition of capital punishment by any State Party to the present Covenant.” The UN
Human Rights Committee has observed in a General Comment that Article 6 “refers generally
to abolition in terms which strongly suggest that abolition is desirable”, and that “all
measures of abolition should be considered as progress in the enjoyment of the right to life”.7
By making reference to Article 6 of this treaty to justify the use of the death penalty,
retentionist countries not only ignore paragraph 6 but undermine the object and purpose of
the Article.

THE DEATH PENALTY ONLY FOR THE ‘MOST SERIOUS CRIMES’
Many retentionist states continue to impose the death penalty and execute people for crimes
that do not meet the threshold of “most serious” according to international law. The
restriction on the use of the death penalty to the “most serious crimes” as stated in Article 6,
paragraph 2 of the ICCPR has been interpreted to refer to lethal crimes or crimes with
extremely grave consequences. The UN Human Rights Committee has stated: “[T]he
expression 'most serious crimes' must be read restrictively to mean that the death penalty
should be a quite exceptional measure.”8

The definition of “most serious crimes” has been further narrowed over time. The Safeguards



Guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of those Facing the Death Penalty (the Safeguards),
adopted by the UN Economic and Social Council and endorsed by the General Assembly by
consensus in 1984, state that “capital punishment may be imposed only for the most serious
crimes, it being understood that their scope should not go beyond intentional crimes with
lethal or other extremely grave consequences”.

The Commission on Human Rights has detailed the types of crimes that should not carry
death sentences, including non-violent acts such as financial crimes or religious practice or
expression of conscience9, “sexual relations between consenting adults”10 and in 2005,
urged that the death penalty not be imposed as a mandatory sentence.11

The UN Human Rights Committee has stated that the following offences cannot be
characterized as the “most serious crimes”: economic offences,12 including embezzlement by
officials,13 drug-related offences14, political offences,15 robbery,16 abduction not resulting in
death,17 and “apostasy, committing a third homosexual act, illicit sex […] and theft by
force”18. The Committee has also raised concerns about death sentencing for a range of
crimes vaguely or subjectively defined relating to internal and external security and political
offences. 19

The UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has stated that
the death penalty should be eliminated for economic crimes and drug-related offences and
that the restrictions to its use “exclude the possibility of death sentences for so-called
victimless offences – including acts of treason, espionage and other vaguely defined acts
usually described as ‘crimes against the State’ or ‘disloyalty’” and “actions primarily related
to prevailing moral values, such as adultery and prostitution, as well as matters of sexual
orientation.”20

In many countries however, drug offences continue to carry the death penalty, with this
sentence being mandatory in some cases. A significant proportion of the executions or death
sentences recorded in 2010 in China, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Laos, Libya, Thailand, United
Arab Emirates and Yemen were for drug-related offences.

In December 2010 the amended Anti-Narcotics law came into force in Iran, extending
the scope of the death penalty to include additional categories of illegal drugs (for example,
crystal meth), possession of which became punishable by death.

In October 2010 the National Assembly of Gambia voted to extend the scope of the
death penalty making the possession of more than 250g of heroin or cocaine an offence
punishable by death.

At the 15th session of the Human Rights Council in December, Laos rejected
recommendations made by other countries during the Universal Periodic Review (UPR)
process to abolish the death penalty, stating that Laos is “not ready to abolish this capital
punishment as it is an effective deterrent to most serious offences especially drug
trafficking”.21

In 2010, more than half of the 114 death sentences handed down in Malaysia were
mandatorily imposed for drug-related offences.



Death sentences continued to be mandatory in Singapore for drug-related offences and
were mostly imposed against foreign nationals.

Of the 708 persons under sentence of death in Thailand at the end of 2010, nearly half
of them had been convicted of drug-related offences.

Despite calls for their exclusion from the category of “most serious” crimes, some states
continue to impose death sentences for sexual relations between consenting adults.

In Iran, stoning remained the mandatory punishment for “adultery while married” for
both men and women. At least 10 women and four men were believed to be at risk of death
by stoning at the end of the year, although several cases were still under review and
alternative sentences could be imposed. At least one other woman, Maryam Ghorbanzadeh,
originally sentenced to stoning, was facing execution by hanging for “adultery while married”
at the end of the year.

An Anti-Homosexuality Bill that would, if enacted into law, introduce the death penalty
for “aggravated” homosexuality, was awaiting consideration by the Parliament of Uganda at
the end of 2010.

And in 2010 the death penalty continued to be used by some governments as a political tool
to silence dissent.

At the end of 2010, at least 17 members of Iran’s Kurdish minority, including one
woman were on death row in Iran after their conviction on political offences. All were
convicted after unfair trials for moharebeh (enmity against God) for membership in banned
Kurdish opposition groups, mainly the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan (known by its
Kurdish acronym PJAK), an armed group, and Komala, a Marxist organization. Some were
reportedly tortured in detention and to have been denied access to a lawyer. It is feared that
one of them, Hossein Khezri was executed on 15 January 2011.

During the country’s Universal Periodic Review, the representatives of Libya stated that
the death penalty was applied in aggravating crimes and agreed to examine and provide a
response to a recommendation to review provision to reduce the number of offences that
carry the death penalty - particularly those offences relating to the establishment of groups,
organizations or associations.

Several states allow for the death penalty for crimes of blasphemy and other crimes for non-
violent expression and association. In Pakistan, Aasia Bibi, a Christian mother of five, was
charged with blasphemy and sentenced to death after an unfair trial on 8 November. An
appeal filed against the judgement in the Lahore High Court remains pending.

EXPANSION IN THE NUMBER OF CRIMES PUNISHABLE BY DEATH
Regional and UN bodies have also stated that once abolished the death penalty should not
be re-introduced and that the trend toward abolition should not be undermined by states
expanding the number of crimes for which the death penalty may be imposed. They have
observed that either act is incompatible with article 6 of the ICCPR and contrary to the goal
of abolition.22



Yet in 2010 the scope of the death penalty was expanded in the Gambia. Three bills were
adopted by the National Assembly to make human trafficking, rape, violent robbery and
possession of more than 250g of heroin or cocaine capital offences.

In November 2010, the Supreme Court in India in an attempt to address the problem of
dowry deaths (unnatural death of women after demands on them to pay dowry during or after
marriage) directed all trial courts to ensure that a charge of murder was also included in all
such cases. One effect may be to increase the number of death sentences.

Draft legislation expanding the scope of the death penalty was proposed in several countries
including Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Uganda and USA. Several countries also threatened
to resume executions: these include the Gambia, Guatemala, Nigeria, and Trinidad and
Tobago. A public initiative calling for a referendum to bring the death penalty back in
Switzerland was called off shortly after its launch.

UNFAIR TRIALS
Safeguard 5 of the Safeguards Guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of Those Facing the
Death Penalty, states: “Capital punishment may only be carried out pursuant to a final
judgment rendered by a competent court after legal process which gives all possible
safeguards to ensure a fair trial, at least equal to those contained in article 14 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), including the right of anyone
suspected of or charged with a crime for which capital punishment may be imposed to
adequate legal assistance at all stages of the proceedings.”

Yet despite these clear rights, Amnesty International continues to record death sentences
imposed after unfair trials and sentences based on confessions allegedly extracted through
torture, clearly prohibited in both the ICCPR and the UN Convention Against Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. In 2010, the death penalty
was used after trials that did not meet international standards of fairness in several countries
including: China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, the Gambia, Libya,
Nigeria, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen.

In Equatorial Guinea, four men were executed on 21 August 2010 within an hour of
being sentenced to death by a military court. The men were not present in court when their
sentences were delivered. In prison they had been held incommunicado and reports indicate
they had been tortured to make them confess to an alleged attack on the presidential palace
in February 2009. Their trial did not meet international standards of fairness and the speed
of their execution deprived them of their right to appeal to a higher court, as well as their
right to seek clemency, in accordance with international law and the country’s own law.

In Iran, Amnesty International recorded death sentences imposed on political opponents and
members of ethnic minorities after unfair trials; in some cases individuals sentenced to death
were reported to have been tortured in detention and to have been denied access to a lawyer.

In Saudi Arabia death sentences were mostly handed down after court proceedings that
failed to satisfy international standards of fair trial. Foreign nationals, particularly migrant
workers from developing countries in Africa and Asia, were sentenced to death and remained
particularly vulnerable to the secretive and summary nature of the criminal justice process.



Seventeen Indian migrant workers were sentenced to death on 29 March 2010 by a
lower court in the United Arab Emirates for the murder of a Pakistani national. The men were
provided with an Emirati lawyer, who could not speak their native language, Punjabi, and in
court did not refer to the alleged torture they suffered while in detention. Trial proceedings
were translated from Arabic into Hindi, which the 17 men do not understand. An appeal
hearing had yet to be convened at the time of writing.

DEATH PENALTY AGAINST JUVENILES
One of the clearest prohibitions in international law on the use of the death penalty is in
relation to juvenile offenders. Article 6(5) of the ICCPR states: “Sentence of death shall not
be imposed for crimes committed by persons below eighteen years of age and shall not be
carried out on pregnant women.” The UN Human Rights Committee has referred to the
prohibition of executing children as a rule of customary international law, which may not be
the subject of a reservation made by a state which becomes a party to the ICCPR. Article
37(a) of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child states: “Neither capital punishment
nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed
by persons below eighteen years of age”.

Yet despite the clear prohibition, Mohammad A., was executed on 10 July 2010 in
Marvdasht, Iran for a crime committed when he was below 18 years of age. In 2010, Iran,
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates and Yemen imposed death sentences
on individuals that were below 18 years of age when the crimes were committed.

In Nigeria, the use of the death penalty against juvenile offenders is among the most serious
concerns regarding Nigeria’s use of capital punishment. Although Nigeria’s Child Rights Act
prohibits the death penalty, more than 20 prisoners currently on death row were sentenced
for offences committed when they were below the age of 18. On 11 June 2010, in its
Concluding Observations on Nigeria, the Committee on the Rights of the Child reiterated the
strong concern expressed by the African Committee on the Rights and Welfare of the Child
concerning the mandatory death penalty for offences in Shari’a Penal Codes (including hadd
punishments – mandatory punishments as prescribed by Islamic texts). Given the absence of
a definition of the child as a person under the age of 18 in Shari’a Penal Codes and that in
certain states children are defined by puberty, the death penalty could be imposed on
children under Shari’a jurisdiction. The Committee on the Rights of the Child recommended
that Nigeria takes the opportunity of its ongoing Constitutional review to expressly prohibit
the application of the death penalty to persons under 18 years of age. It also urged the
country to review the files of all prisoners on death row for crimes committed before the age
of 18; prohibit the death penalty for all persons under the age of 18 in domestic legislation,
including through the appropriate adaptations in the interpretation of Shari’a Penal Codes
and in conformity with the Convention on the Rights of the Child; and include comprehensive
information in its next periodic report on all measures taken to guarantee to children their
right to life, survival and development.23



REGIONAL OVERVIEWS
AMERICAS

The United States of America (USA) continued to be the only executioner in the Americas in
2010 and executed 46 prisoners. But the number of executions carried out in the USA in
2010 decreased compared to 2009, when 52 people were executed. The use of the death
penalty in the country continues to decline, compared to the peaks achieved during the
1990s. Although at least 110 death sentences were imposed during 2010, this represents
only about a third of the number handed down in the mid-1990s. At the end of the year,
there were more than 3200 people under sentence of death in the USA.

While the Caribbean sub-region remained execution-free, there were worrying attempts in
several retentionist states to resume executions but other positive steps were taken in the
region where, for instance, Guyana’s Parliament voted to abolish the mandatory death penalty
for murder.

Executions were recorded in the USA in 2010 as follows: Texas (17), Ohio (8), Alabama (5),
Mississippi (3), Oklahoma (3), Virginia (3), Georgia (2), Arizona (1), Florida (1), Louisiana
(1), Utah (1) and Washington (1). Once again, the majority of executions in the USA were
carried out in a handful of states. Utah and Washington carried out their first executions
since 1999 and 2001 respectively.

At least 124 death sentences were known to have been imposed in five countries in the
Americas last year: Bahamas (at least 5), Barbados (1), Guatemala (1), Guyana (at least 1),
Jamaica (4), Trinidad and Tobago (+) and USA (at least 110).

In July 2010 the London-based Privy Council commuted the sentence of Earlin White, who
had been sentenced to death for murder in Belize in 2003. In its judgement, the Privy
Council indicated one reason for the commutation was the lack of assessment of the social
welfare and psychiatric condition of the defendant at the time of sentencing. In June 2010
however, the Caribbean Court of Justice Act came into effect in Belize, renouncing the Privy
Council and establishing the Caribbean Court of Justice as the final Court of Appeal for all
civil and criminal cases in the country. Transitional provisions allow for pending appeals to
be considered by the Privy Council.

In December 2010 Cuba commuted the death sentences of the remaining three death row
inmates in the country, leaving its death row empty for the first time in recent years. Most
death sentences had been commuted by President Raul Castro in 2008, but the three, who
had been convicted of terrorism, remained under sentence of death. The last execution in
Cuba was carried out in 2003.

In November President Alvaro Colom vetoed a draft law in order to prevent the resumption of
executions, which have not been carried out in Guatemala since 2000. The law, approved by
the Congress in October, created a presidential pardon procedure to comply with a 2005



Inter-American Court ruling stating that Guatemala could not implement the death penalty
because its death row inmates do not have the possibility of applying for pardon or
commutation of their sentence. One new death sentence was imposed last year and 13
people remained on death row as of 31 December.

On 10 May 2010 Grenada was reviewed under the Universal Periodic Review of the Human
Rights Council. With regard to capital punishment, Grenada stated that while the death
penalty remained in national legislation it had not been applied for decades, and that its
mandatory imposition had been removed following a 2006 decision of the Privy Council. At
the end of the review Grenada did not accept recommendations to establish a moratorium on
executions and to abolish the death penalty.

In October 2010 the Parliament of Guyana voted to adopt a bill abolishing the mandatory
imposition of the death penalty against people convicted of murder. The death penalty
remains applicable for certain categories of murder. Forty death row inmates were reported to
have appealed to commute their sentences after the change in the legislation. Guyana was
reviewed under the Universal Periodic Review on 11 May 2011. Guyana voluntarily
committed to continue to consider and consult on the abolition of the death penalty and to
report to the Human Rights Council on the matter in two years.24

Death sentences continued to be imposed in Jamaica in 2010, but no executions were
carried out for the 22nd consecutive year. Jamaica was reviewed under the Universal Periodic
Review on 8 November 2010. With regard to the death penalty, the government
representative stated that Jamaica continued to retain the death penalty and that “in so
doing, it honoured the sentencing principle of proportionality, reserving that penalty for the
most egregious types of murder; moreover, it was discretionarily imposed after a sentencing
hearing. It stressed that the retention of the death penalty was not contrary to international
law or inconsistent with the right to life.” 25 Jamaica also agreed that that there had been a
de facto moratorium on the use of the death penalty since 1988, but clarified that there was
no demand for its abolition, but rather for retention. The Representative also stated that it
was therefore highly unlikely that Jamaica would change its stance and vote in favour of the
forthcoming General Assembly resolution on a moratorium on the use of the death penalty,
which was the end result as Jamaica voted against the resolution on 21 December 2010.
Recommendations to abolish the death penalty did not enjoy the support of Jamaica.

Former death row prisoner Anthony Graves was exonerated in the USA during 2010. He had
been sentenced to death in 1994 for a crime involving six murders. In 2006 a federal
appeals court ordered that he be retried or released on the grounds that the state had
suppressed statements made by its key witness, Robert Carter (who was also sentenced to
death for the crime), that Anthony Graves was not involved. After re-investigating the case,
the prosecution concluded that there was no evidence linking Anthony Graves to the murders
and that he was innocent. The charges against him were dismissed and he was released on
27 October 2010. Anthony Graves became the 138th death row prisoner to be exonerated in
the USA since 1973, clearly demonstrating the fallibility of the system.

Former US Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens is among those who have changed their
mind about the death penalty. Since retiring from the Supreme Court in June 2010, the
former Justice said publicly that there was one vote during his nearly 35 years on the Court



that he regretted – his vote with the majority in Gregg v. Georgia in 1976 that allowed
executions to resume in the USA after nearly a decade without them: “I think there is one
vote that I would change and that […] one […] was upholding the capital punishment
statute. I think that we did not foresee how it would be interpreted. I think that was an
incorrect decision”.26

This statement adds to his opinion released in the 2008 judgment in Baze v. Rees, when he
revealed that he had concluded, after more than three decades on the country’s highest
court, that the death penalty was a cruel waste of time. “I have relied on my own
experience”, wrote Justice Stevens, “in reaching the conclusion that the imposition of the
death penalty represents the pointless and needless extinction of life with only marginal
contributions to any discernible social or public purposes”. A punishment with “such
negligible returns to the State is patently excessive and cruel”, he added.

The cruelty of the death penalty was demonstrated in the week leading up to the execution of
Brandon Rhode in Georgia on 27 September 2010. His execution had initially been
scheduled for 21 September, but that morning, despite supposedly being under constant
observation by two guards, Brandon Rhode attempted suicide by making deep cuts in both
arms and his neck with a razor blade. He was rushed to hospital where he was assessed as
being in immediate danger of losing his life, having lost half his blood. He was revived,
stitched up, and brought back to prison. His lawyer saw him there on the afternoon of 21
September, held in a restraint chair, in which Brandon Rhode was “in severe pain and
discomfort”, his face “haggard, pallid and jaundiced”. The execution was delayed a number
of times during the six days between his attempted suicide and 27 September, but in the
end the courts refused to stop it.

In 2010, Amnesty International was also concerned by the execution in the USA of people
with significant mental impairments or after trials during which the juries did not hear
available mitigating evidence at the sentencing phase.

Holly Wood, a 50-year-old African American man with significant mental impairments, was executed by lethal
injection in Alabama on the evening of 9 September. He had spent 16 years on death row. The presentation of
mitigating evidence at the sentencing was minimal. In particular, there was no evidence at all presented
about Holly Wood's mental ability despite the lawyers being in possession of an expert report indicating that
Wood operated, “at most, in the borderline range of intellectual functioning”. Four federal judges on three
courts concluded that he was denied adequate legal representation at the sentencing stage of his 1994 trial.

Jeffrey Landrigan, a 50-year-old Native American man, was executed in Arizona, on 26 October. He had been
sentenced to death for the 1989 murder of Chester Dyer. At his trial in 1990, his lawyer did not present any
mitigating evidence on his background of abuse and deprivation or its effects on him. In 2007, the retired trial
judge said that she would not have passed a death sentence if she had heard such mitigating evidence,
especially the sort of expert mental health evidence that had been presented during the appeals process. The
former judge was among witnesses who appeared at a clemency hearing in front of the Arizona Board of
Executive Clemency on 22 October 2010. She told the board that in her view Jeffrey Landrigan should have
received a life sentence.

On 9 November 2010 the USA was reviewed under the Universal Periodic Review of the
Human Rights Council. In response to recommendations by a number of countries regarding



capital punishment, the US delegation responded that “while we respect those who make
these recommendations, we note that they reflect continuing policy differences, not a
genuine difference about what international human rights law requires.”27 This response did
not address the fact that while international law recognizes that some countries retain the
death penalty and restricts its use to certain circumstances, this acknowledgment of present
reality should not be invoked by countries “to delay or to prevent the abolition of capital
punishment”, in the words of Article 6.6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights.28

A nationwide shortage of sodium thiopental, one of the three drugs used to execute prisoners
by lethal injection led to the suspension of some executions at the end of the year. By the
end of 2010, the pharmaceutical company Hospira, the sole manufacturer or supplier of this
drug in the USA, had begun discussions with the Italian authorities about Hospira’s intention
to resume production of the drug at its plant in Italy.29 On 25 October, a day before Jeffrey
Landrigan’s execution, the Arizona Attorney General revealed that the state had obtained
sodium thiopental from an unidentified source in the United Kingdom (UK). Following
campaigning by abolitionist groups, on 6 January 2011, the UK Secretary of State for
Business Innovation and Skills made a statement to the High Court of Justice indicating that
the UK Department for Business Innovation and Skills would issue an order under s. 6 of the
Export Control Act 2002 (ECA) controlling the export of sodium thiopental to the USA.

ASIA-PACIFIC

The January 2010 announcement by the President of Mongolia of an official moratorium on
executions was an important milestone in the journey towards abolition of the death penalty
in the Asia-Pacific region. While the region still accounts for the highest number of
executions in the world, the Pacific Islands continued to be a death penalty-free zone –
recording no executions or death sentences in 2010 – and there were encouraging
developments in several other countries. However, the continued use of the death penalty for
drug-related offences, often against foreign nationals, as well as the lack of adequate legal
representation and due process guarantees remained a matter of concern for Amnesty
International throughout the region.

In 2010 Amnesty International was not able to confirm comprehensive figures on the use of
the death penalty for China, Malaysia, North Korea, Singapore and Vietnam although
executions were known to have been carried out in all these countries. Available information
confirmed at least 82 executions were carried out in five other countries in the region:
Bangladesh (at least 9), Japan (2), North Korea (at least 60), Malaysia (at least 1), and
Taiwan (4). These are minimum estimates as few official figures on the use of the death
penalty are released by governments. The number of people executed in China is believed to
be in the thousands.

At least 805 death sentences were known to have been imposed in 19 countries: Afghanistan
(at least 100) Bangladesh (at least 32), Brunei Darussalam (+), China (+), India (at least
105), Indonesia (at least 7), Japan (14), Laos (4), Malaysia (at least 114), Maldives (1),



Myanmar (2), North Korea (+), Pakistan (365), Singapore (at least 8), South Korea (4), Sri
Lanka (+), Taiwan (9), Thailand (at least 7), Vietnam (at least 34).

The number of countries that imposed death sentences in the region in 2010 increased
compared with 2009, when 16 countries were known to have sentenced people to death.
Eleven countries imposed death sentences but continued not to carry out executions in
2010: Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, India, Indonesia, Laos, Maldives, Myanmar,
Pakistan, South Korea, Sri Lanka and Thailand.

For the second year, no executions were reported in Afghanistan. At least 100 people were
sentenced to death, had their sentences confirmed by the Supreme Court and at the end of
2010 were awaiting consideration of their clemency appeals by the President.

The government of American Samoa was reported in August 2010 to have sought capital
punishment against a man charged with the murder of a police officer. The last execution in
the country was carried out in 1939.

Bangladesh carried out at least nine executions and sentenced at least 32 people to death in
2010. Five men were executed on 28 January 2010, only thirteen hours after their sentence
was confirmed by the Supreme Court on 27 January. Syed Farooq-ur Rahman, Sultan
Shahriar Rashid Khan, Mohiuddin Ahmed and AKM Mohiuddin Ahmedand Bazlul Huda were
found guilty, together with six other men who were sentenced in absentia and are currently in
exile, of the murder of the country’s founding leader (and father of the current prime
minister), Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Four of them had filed an appeal for clemency with
President Zillur Rahman, who generally considers clemency appeals only after the final
sentence is proclaimed. However, three of the appeals in this case were rejected before the
Supreme Court issued its judgment.

On 12 July, 824 people were charged with murder, conspiracy, aiding and abetting murder,
looting military weapons and arson in relation to a mutiny that took place at the headquarters
of the Bangladesh Rifles, a border security force in Dhaka in February 2010, during which
74 people were killed. If convicted of murder, the 824 men could face the death penalty. In
September 2010 the Minister of Home Affairs, Shahara Khatun, introduced a bill in the
Parliament expanding the scope of the death penalty to include staging mutiny.

During the same month, the President pardoned 20 death row inmates who appear to be
members or supporters of the governing Awami League. The pardoned prisoners, convicted
for the murder of the then-ruling Bangladesh Nationalist Party activist Sabbir Ahmed Gama,
were sentenced to death in 2006 by a Speedy Trial Tribunal set up to fast-track high profile
criminal cases. Amnesty International urged the President to extend the pardon to the more
than 1,000 death row prisoners in the country.

On 2 March 2010 the High Court Division of the Supreme Court ruled as unconstitutional the
mandatory imposition of the death penalty for murder after rape in Bangladesh. The court
delivered the judgement after considering a writ petition challenging the death sentence
imposed against a juvenile offender, Shukur Ali, according to section 6(2) of Suppression of
Women and Children Repression Prevention Act. The court also instructed the legislators to
remove all provisions in law allowing for the mandatory imposition of the death penalty.



In 2010 China continued to use the death penalty extensively against thousands of people
for a wide range of crimes that include non-violent offences and after proceedings that did
not meet international fair trial standards. No official statistics on the application of the
death penalty were made available to the public. Officials of the Supreme People's Court
(SPC) of China stated in November 2010 that the SPC, which reclaimed the power to review
all death penalty cases in the country in 2007, had overturned an average ten percent of the
cases it had reviewed, which may mean that there has been a slight decrease in the number
of executions carried out in China since 2007.

In February 2010 the SPC issued new guidelines for courts in the country clarifying that the
death penalty should be “resolutely” handed down to those who have committed “extremely
serious” crimes, but that the punishment should be reserved for the tiny minority of criminals
against whom there is valid and ample evidence. The guidelines further interpret the “justice
tempered with mercy” policy, which was first stated in a document approved by the Sixth
Plenary Session of the 16th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China in 2006.
The policy requires that courts should treat repeat offenders with severity while they treat
minors and the elderly with leniency; and that commutations should be limited in the cases
of those convicted of violent crimes such as murder, robbery and rape.

On 1 July 2010, new regulations jointly issued by the SPC, Supreme People's Procuratorate,
Ministry of Public Security, Ministry of State Security, and Ministry of Justice became
effective. These regulations strengthened the prohibition against the use of illegal evidence
in criminal cases, including coerced confessions and other evidence obtained through torture
and other ill-treatment, by enhancing legal procedures regarding the collection, examination,
verification and determination of legality of evidence in death penalty cases.

In August the official Chinese government news agency Xinhua reported that proposed
amendments to China’s criminal code could see the death penalty removed from 13 out of
68 crimes that currently carry the punishment. On 20 December the draft code was
submitted to the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, China’s legislature,
for its second reading. If passed, the draft would remove the death penalty as a punishment
for crimes such as tax fraud, and for smuggling valuables and cultural relics.30 It may also
remove the death penalty as a punishment for those over 75 years of age. This new
amendment is a step by China to limit the use of the death penalty, although it would remove
crimes which have seldom been punished with capital punishment in recent years.

Gan Jinhua’s death sentence was reviewed by the SPC in January 2010. He had originally been sentenced to
death in 2005 for robbery which resulted in the death of two nuns. His lawyer reports that the police forced
Gan Jinhua to confess, resulting in inconsistencies between his testimony and the evidence put forward in
court. Important exhibits, including the alleged murder weapon, were not presented during the trial
proceedings. Forensic experts and relatives of Gan Jinhua, who say he was with them at the time of the crime,
were not allowed to testify.

In February 2010 Wang Yang’s case was sent for final consideration by the SPC. His case had been heard a
total of nine times by different courts since he was first sentenced in 2003 for “fraudulently raising funds,”
“loan fraud” and “escape from detention”. The SPC was reviewing the case again at the end of the year. Wang
Yang’s family has pointed out that despite all the retrials and hearings, there has never been further
investigation into the alleged crime – instead the same evidence has been submitted each time, raising
questions about why the courts have reached different verdicts when considering the same case.



The Chongqing Municipal No.1 Intermediate People’s Court tried Fan Qihang in January 2010 and found him
guilty of various crimes including “forming, leading or taking active part in organizations in the nature of
criminal syndicate”, and “intentional homicide”. None of the 187 witnesses lined up for the trial showed up on
the day. On 10 February, he was sentenced to death. The Chongqing Municipal Higher People’s Court upheld
his death sentence on 31 May. Fan Qihang said that he was repeatedly tortured in an unofficial place of
detention and forced to confess to crimes he did not commit. Originally detained in June 2009, the lawyer hired
by his family was not allowed to meet with Fan Qihang until November 2009, when he was transferred to a
detention centre. The lawyer secretly videoed interviews with Fan Qihang, in which he details his torture,
shows the wounds inflicted on his wrists, and says he had attempted suicide. The video, and testimony of
torture submitted by other defendants, were part of final appeal submissions by Fan Qihang’s lawyer to the
SPC and were publicised after eliciting no response from the court. The prosecution was part of a Strike Hard
campaign against organized crime in Chongqing that was repeatedly criticised for widespread use of torture
and wrongful convictions. In August 2010 over 50 lawyers from Beijing appealed to the SPC to investigate
allegations of torture in Chongqing. Fan Qihang was executed on 26 September 2010 after the SPC approved
his sentence.

On 11 February 2010 Fiji, responding to the UN Human Rights Council, committed to
abolishing the death penalty for crimes in the Military Code, where it is still applicable for
treason and mutiny. Fiji had previously abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes only.

Last year at least 105 people were reportedly sentenced to death in India, where executions
have not been carried out since 2004.Thirteen death sentences were commuted by the
President during the year. In a landmark decision in February 2010, the Supreme Court ruled
that the socio-economic factors leading to a crime are relevant and mitigating factors that
should be taken into account when considering the commutation of a death sentence. On 19
August the government of India introduced a bill to the Parliament to amend the 1982 Anti-
Hijacking Act to make hijacking punishable by death. In the case Rajbir @ Raju & Anr Versus
State Of Haryana, which was heard on 22 November 2010, the Supreme Court in India, in an
attempt to address the problem of dowry deaths (unnatural death of women after demands on
them to pay dowry during or after marriage) directed all trial courts in India to ensure that a
charge of murder was also included in all such cases. One effect may be to increase the
number of death sentences.

For the second year, no executions were recorded in Indonesia in 2010. Information received
from the Government of Indonesia indicates that two people were sentenced to death and
seven people had their sentences commuted in 2010. However, Amnesty International
recorded that at least seven new death sentences were imposed during the year, including
three against foreign nationals for drug-related offences, and that at least 120 people were
on death row at the end of the year. According to official figures, 102 people were under
sentences of death as of 31 December 2010.

Two people were unexpectedly executed in Japan on 28 July 2010. The execution warrants
were signed by the then Minister of Justice Keiko Chiba, formerly a member of the
abolitionist group in the Japanese Parliament. Following the executions which she witnessed
personally, Minister Chiba announced plans to set up a commission within the Ministry of
Justice to study the death penalty as a form of punishment. On 27 August 2010, the
Minister of Justice opened the execution chamber of the Tokyo Detention Centre to the



media. This is the first time this has been done in Japan. During the House of Councillors
(Upper House) elections in July 2010 Keiko Chiba lost her seat as Councillor but retained her
role as Minister of Justice until September 2010. On 17 September Minoru Yanagida was
sworn-in as the new Minister of Justice. Shortly after his appointment, he announced at a
press conference that he would carry out executions during his term of office. However, on
22 November Minoru Yanagida resigned from his position as Minister of Justice and, pending
appointment of a new Minister of Justice, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshito Sengoku indicated
that he would perform the duties of the Minister of Justice. On 30 December Acting Minister
of Justice Sengoku was reported by national broadcasting organization, NHK, to have said
that the committee set up by former Minister of Justice Chiba would resume its discussions
on the death penalty in 2011. Amnesty International remains concerned that 14 new death
sentences were imposed during the year and that 111 individuals were under sentence of
death as of 31 December 2010.

On 4 May 2010 Laos was reviewed under the Universal Periodic Review at the Human Rights
Council. With regard to the death penalty, the government representatives stated that the
sentence of death “was intended to deter the most extreme and serious crimes, particularly
drug trafficking and that, although the death penalty was still in existence legally, no
execution had ever taken place. Laos had upheld a moratorium for many years and would
consider revising the Penal Law in the coming years, including with a view to limiting the
scope of crimes to which the death penalty would apply.”31 However, at the 15th session of
the Human Rights Council in December, Laos communicated its rejection of
recommendations made by other states during the May Universal Periodic Review to abolish
the death penalty. Laos stated that the country is “not ready to abolish this capital
punishment as it is an effective deterrent to most serious offences especially drug
trafficking” and that the country is “a party to the ICCPR and will review the scope of the
offences in its present criminal law to be in line with Article 6 of the ICCPR.”32

During the Universal Periodic Review on 3 November 2010, the Maldives agreed to examine
and provide a responses no later than the 16th session of the Human Rights Council in
March 2011 on recommendations to establish a moratorium on executions, abolish the death
penalty and to accede to the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR.

Amnesty International was able to confirm that at least one execution was carried out and
that at least 114 new death sentences were imposed in Malaysia in 2010. More than half of
these were imposed for drug-related offences, while nearly all the rest were handed down for
murder. In both offences the death sentence is mandatorily imposed.

On 14 January 2010 President of Mongolia Tsakhia Elbegdorj announced the establishment
of a moratorium on executions with a view to its abolition. In his speech “The Path of
Democratic Mongolia Must Be Clean and Bloodless”, the President declared that since he
took office in May 2009 no execution had been carried out in the country. In his
announcement President Elbegdorj also stated that he had commuted the death sentences of
all death row inmates who have appealed for clemency since he became President in June
2009. At the end of 2010, the death penalty in Mongolia remained classified as a State
Secret under the Law on State Secrets and the Law on the List of State Secrets. There are no
official statistics on death sentences or executions. In the past, families of those on death
row were not notified in advance of the imminent execution and the bodies of those executed



were not returned to the family. According to information available to Amnesty International,
at least nine people were on death row in Mongolia in June 2009, and at least three of them
had their sentences commuted by October 2009.

A draft bill to ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, aiming at the abolition of the
death penalty was introduced at the Spring Session of the State Great Khural (Mongolian
Parliament). During the review of Mongolia under the Universal Periodic Review on 2
November 2010, the government representatives stated that the relevant standing committee
of the Parliament had been discussing whether the Parliament should ratify the bill and that
“if Parliament responded positively, draft amendments to all legislation regulating the death
penalty, including the Law on the State Secret, would be formulated.”33 At the end of 2010
the bill was still awaiting a final vote by the Parliament.

Amnesty International received reports that at least 60 people were executed in North Korea
in 2010. The death penalty is often imposed even though the alleged crime is not subject to
a death sentence under domestic law. Executions are usually carried out in secret, but an
increased number of reports were received compared to last year of executions being held in
public to serve as an example to others.

No executions were reported in Pakistan in 2010, for the second consecutive year. Despite
Prime Minister Gilani’s announcement on 21 June 2008 to the National Assembly that all
death sentences in Pakistan should be commuted to life imprisonment, some 8,000
prisoners remained on death row in 2010. President Asif Ali Zardari declared in August 2010
that all executions would be stayed until 31 December 2010, with the exception of those
imposed for terrorism or anti-state activities.

At least 356 new death sentences were imposed, the vast majority were imposed on men,
seven on women and one on a person who was under 18 at the time the crime was
committed. Aasia Bibi, a Christian mother of five, was charged with blasphemy and
sentenced to death after an unfair trial on 8 November. She claimed that she had not had
access to a lawyer during her detention and on the final day of her trial. Aasia Bibi denied the
allegations and her husband, Ashiq Masih, claimed her conviction was based on “false
accusations” of blasphemy. However, the trial judge “totally ruled out” the possibility of false
charges and said that there were “no mitigating circumstances”. She has been detained in
prison and held in virtual isolation since June 2009. An appeal filed against the judgement
in the Lahore High Court remains pending.

Death sentences continued to be mandatorily imposed in Singapore, mostly for drug-related
offences and mainly against foreign nationals. At least eight death sentences were handed
down last year.

On 14 May 2010 the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal by Malaysian national Yong Vui
Kong against the mandatory death sentence which had been imposed against him in January
2009. He had been found guilty of trafficking 47 grams of diamorphine (heroin) when he was
19 years old.34

On 16 November 2010 Alan Shadrake, a British journalist and author of Once a Jolly
Hangman: Singapore’s Justice in the Dock, was sentenced to six weeks’ imprisonment and



fined S$20,000 for criticising Singapore’s death penalty laws and the manner in which they
are applied.

Four death sentences were imposed in South Korea in 2010. On 25 February the
Constitutional Court resolved - in a five to four ruling - that capital punishment did not violate
“human dignity and worth” as protected by the Constitution. In March 2010 the Minister of
Justice Lee Kwi-nam reportedly authorized a plan to build a new execution chamber within
Cheongsong Prison in North Gyeongsang Province. Reports indicated that the plan was
temporarily put on hold in October 2010.

The resignation of Wang Ching-feng as Minister of Justice of Taiwan in March 2010 sparked
international attention over the issue of the death penalty in the country. During her tenure in
office, Wang Ching-feng had refused to sign execution orders because of her opposition to the
death penalty. Following the appointment of Tseng Yung-fu as Minister of Justice in March,
Chang Chun-hung, Hung Chen-yao, Ko Shih-ming and Chang Wen-wei were executed on 30
April. The executions came just two weeks after Tseng Yung-fu reportedly stated that his
ultimate goal was the abolition of the death penalty.

On 28 May 2010 Taiwan's Constitutional Court refused to consider a petition filed on behalf
of 44 death row inmates who had exhausted all their appeals, four of whom had already been
executed. The petition demanded a constitutional interpretation of the legality of the death
penalty in Taiwan. On 15 October a task force set up by the Ministry of Justice considered
the possibility of abolishing the death penalty. Although it was reported that the task force
reached a conclusion that “it would be probably be acceptable to most Taiwanese to replace
capital punishment with a sentence of life without parole in Taiwan”35, the Ministry of
Justice later issued a press release, stating that the Ministry of Justice had not come to any
conclusion regarding the replacement of capital punishment with life sentences without
parole. The Ministry further stated that it would not consider abolishing the death penalty
unless there is a “public consensus, together with a reasonable and appropriate substitute
punishment.”

No executions were recorded in Thailand in 2010, but at least seven new death sentences
were imposed. According to figures released by the Corrections Department, as of August
2010, 708 people were under sentence of death, 65 of whom had their sentence confirmed
by the Supreme Court. Nearly half of the 708 had been convicted of drug-related offences,
while the remaining 369 people had been found guilty of murder and other crimes.

Information on the use of the death penalty remained classified as a state secret in Vietnam
and Amnesty International was not able to confirm a figure for executions. At least 34 death
sentences were reported in Vietnam in 2010. In June 2010 the National Assembly adopted a
law replacing firing squad with lethal injection as the method of execution. The measure will
be effective from July 2011.

On 23 February, an informal meeting of the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) took
place at the Fourth World Congress Against the Death Penalty. Over 25 ADPAN members
attended. ADPAN members from India, Taiwan and Indonesia spoke at a roundtable
discussion on “Asia: the Legal Road to Moratorium and Abolition” organized at the congress
by Amnesty International.



In 2010 ADPAN statements and actions were issued on Japan, Mongolia, Singapore, South
Korea and Taiwan. These included a high-profile campaign in Singapore in support of
Malaysian national Yong Vui Kong, led by his defence lawyer, and a speakers’ tour organized
by ADPAN member organization Murder Victims Families for Human Rights. Five new
members joined ADPAN in 2010, bringing the number of members to over 50 in 23
countries from across the region.

EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA

After a year hiatus in 2009 when for the first time no executions were recorded in Europe
and the former Soviet Union, in March 2010 the Belarusian authorities carried out two
executions. Vasily Yuzepchuk and Andrei Zhuk were executed by a shot to the back of the
head.

On 19 March 2010, when Andrei Zhuk’s mother tried to deliver a food parcel to the prison in Minsk where both
men were held, the parcel was returned to her by the prison authorities and she was told that the two men
“had been moved”. She was told not to come looking for her son any more, but to wait for official notification
from the court. On the morning of 22 March, Andrei Zhuk’s mother was informed by staff at the prison that her
son and Vasily Yuzepchuk had been shot and her son’s body was not returned. In October 2010 she filed a
legal case against the Belarusian authorities for violating her right to manifest and practice her religion by
refusing to release her son's body or to tell her where he had been buried.

Three new death sentences were imposed in Belarus in 2010. Two men were sentenced to
death by shooting on 14 May 2010 for crimes committed during an armed robbery of a flat in
the city of Grodno in October 2009. Both men were found guilty of premeditated murder,
armed assault, arson, kidnapping of a minor, theft and robbery. Their sentences were upheld
by the Belarusian Supreme Court on 20 September 2010 and the two men appealed for
clemency from President Lukashenka. The appeals were pending at the end of 2010. A third
man was sentenced to death in September 2010.

Belarus was reviewed under the Universal Periodic Review on 12 May 2010. With regard to
the death penalty, the delegation noted that the death penalty was applied extremely rarely
and that a parliamentary working group had been established with a view to finding ways to
abolish the death penalty. Belarus accepted recommendations to respect minimum standards
restricting the use of the death penalty. They also agreed to examine and provide a response
at the 15th session of the Human Rights Council in September on recommendations to
release complete information on the execution of Mr. Andrei Zhuk and Mr. Vasily and
establish a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty. Later in the
year Belarus communicated to the Human Rights Council its rejection of these
recommendations stating that the decision to abolish, or introduce a moratorium on, the
death penalty could not be taken in light of the results of a 1996 national referendum on the
issue; that information on the execution of the two men in March had been disseminated to
the media; and that, in accordance with the law, the institution where the death penalty is
carried out is required to notify the court that handed down the sentence that the sentence
has been enforced, and the court is required to inform the next of kin. The law does not



provide that other organizations or individuals should be informed of the enforcement of the
death penalty.36

Kazakhstan, where the death penalty is retained for terrorist offences involving fatalities and
serious offences committed in wartime, was reviewed under the Universal Periodic Review on
12 February 2010. With regard to the death penalty, the country’s delegation stated that a
policy of gradual abolition was being pursued. The moratorium on executions established on
19 December 2003 continued to be observed in 2010.

On 6 December 2010 Kyrgyzstan, which abolished the death penalty for all crimes in 2007,
acceded to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty. As of 1 January 2010, the death
sentences of 172 prisoners had been commuted to life imprisonment.

Following terrorist attacks in March 2010, the Speaker of the State Duma (Russian
Parliament) Boris Gryzlov was reported to have announced that the Russian Federation will
not ratify as yet Protocol No. 6 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms concerning the abolition of the death penalty. At the end
of 2009, after the extension of the moratorium on executions established by the
Constitutional Court in 1999, 697 death sentences were commuted to life imprisonment.

The 2004 moratorium on death sentences and executions continued to be observed in
Tajikistan during 2010. In April 2010 President Emomali Rahmon established the Working
Group on the Study of Social-Legal Aspects of the Abolition of the Death Penalty in the
Republic of Tajikistan, consisting of key officials from the executive and the judiciary, as well
as the Ombudsman. On 5 October at the 2010 Review Conference of the Organization for
Security and Co-operation in Europe which discussed the death penalty, Jumahon Davlatov,
head of the Working Group and Presidential Advisor on Legal Policy, stated that “we shall in
the very near future arrive at its total abolition”.

MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA

Fewer death sentences and executions were recorded in the Middle East and North Africa in
2010 than in 2009. However, where the death penalty was imposed it was frequently used
after unfair trials and for offences, such as drug-trafficking or adultery, which are not
recognized as the “most serious crimes” and therefore in violation of international law.

At least 378 executions were carried out in nine countries: Bahrain (1), Egypt (4), Iran (at
least 252), Iraq (at least 1), Libya (at least 18), the Palestinian Authority (5), Saudi Arabia
(at least 27), Syria (at least 17) and Yemen (at least 53).

At least 748 death sentences were imposed in 16 countries: Algeria (at least 130), Bahrain
(1), Egypt (185), Iran (+), Iraq (at least 279), Jordan (9), Kuwait (at least 3), Lebanon (at
least 12), Libya (+), Morocco/Western Sahara (4), the Palestinian Authority (at least 11),
Saudi Arabia (at least 34), Syria (at least 10), Tunisia (at least 22), United Arab Emirates (at



least 28), Yemen (at least 27).

The authorities of Algeria, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco/Western Sahara, Tunisia and
United Arab Emirates imposed death sentences but continued to refrain from carrying out
executions.

Bahrain resumed its use of the death penalty in 2010, when Jassim Abdulmanan, a
Bangladeshi national sentenced to death in 2007 for murder, was executed by firing squad
on 8 July 2010. At the end of 2010 another Bangladeshi national, Russel Mezan, had his
death sentence confirmed by the Supreme Court of Bahrain and was appealing to the Court
of Cassation.

In 2010 Egypt continued to hand down and execute death sentences. Death row inmates,
family members and lawyers were not notified of the imminent executions. Amnesty
International was able to confirm that during 2010 four executions were carried out and 185
death sentences were imposed. Most of the death sentences were imposed for murder, but
some were also recorded for drug-related offences.

Atef Rohyum Abd El Al Rohyum was hanged on 11 March 2010 despite evidence suggesting
that he was not guilty. His family was not made aware that his appeal, which had been filed
with the Public Prosecutor in May 2009, had been rejected despite a formal enquiry on its
status submitted two days before the execution.

Egypt was reviewed under the Universal Periodic Review of the Human Rights Council on 17
February 2010. The country’s delegation stated that capital punishment was only applied for
very serious crimes and that there had been a reduction of cases where capital punishment
had been issued and applied. At the end of the review, Egypt accepted a recommendation to
respect minimum standards relating to the use of the death penalty but rejected
recommendations to establish a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death
penalty.37

The Iranian authorities acknowledged the execution of 252 people, including five women and
one juvenile offender in 2010. Amnesty International received credible reports of more than
300 other executions which were not officially acknowledged, mostly in Vakilabad Prison,
Mashhad. Most were of people convicted of alleged drugs offences. Fourteen people were
publicly executed. Death sentences continued to be imposed in large numbers.

Detainees in Iran are often held for lengthy periods of time prior to trial, where they are at
grave risk of being subjected to torture and other ill-treatment; political prisoners are often
held incommunicado. Trials are generally unfair and detainees are systematically denied – by
law – access to a lawyer until investigations have been completed, which can take many
months. Proceedings, particularly those held outside the capital Tehran are often summary,
lasting only a few minutes.

In Iran, the death penalty continued to be imposed for acts that do not qualify as the most
serious crimes, in violation of international law, such as those relating to drug trafficking or
vaguely worded charges relating to national security. “Enmity against God”, or moharebeh, a
vaguely worded charge that lacks a precise and explicit definition but is usually applied to


Death SentenceS anD executionS in 2010
FactS anD FigureS

China executed 4 countries in the G20
more people than executed in 2010: China, Japan,
the rest of the Saudi Arabia and the USA
world put together
23 countries
carried out
executions
in 2010

58 countries are classified
as retentionist: less
than half of them
executed in 2010 138 inmates sentenced
to death in the USA
Methods used included: have been exonerated
since 1973
BEHEADING
ELECTROCUTION
At least 17,833
people were under
HANGING
sentence of LETHAL INJECTION
death at the end SHOOTING
of 2010 One person was executed in
Iran for a crime committed
when he was below 18 years
of age

96 countries have abolished the
death penalty for all crimes
9 countries have abolished the death Four men were executed
penalty for ordinary crimes only in Equatorial Guinea within an
34 are abolitionist in practice hour of being sentenced to death
by a military court

Death SentenceS anD executionS 2010

the number oF countrieS carrying out executionS
1991-2010

the number oF countrieS abolitioniSt For all crimeS
1991-2010

amnesty international march 2011 Index: ACT 50/001/2011


countrieS With the higheSt
number oF executionS in 2010

china executed 1000s
– more people than the
rest of the world put
together

iran 252+

north Korea 60+

yemen 53+

uSa 46

SauDi arabia 27+

libya 18+

Syria 17+

banglaDeSh 9+
+ indicates that the ﬁgure amnesty
international has calculated is a
minimum

Somalia 8+

Number of people 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50

Index: ACT 50/001/2011 amnesty international march 2011

executionS
in 2010

amnesty international march 2011

Belarus 2
North Korea 60+
Palestinian
Authority 5 Japan 2

Index: ACT 50/001/2011
USA 46
Libya 18+ China 1,000s
Egypt 4 Taiwan 4
Sudan 6+ Bangladesh 9+
Viet Nam +

Singapore +
Equatorial Iran 252+ Malaysia 1+
Guinea 4
Bahrain 1
Iraq 1+
Syria 17+
Botswana 1 Saudi Arabia 27+
Yemen 53+
Somalia 8+

+ indicates that the ﬁgure amnesty
international has calculated is a
minimum. Where + is not preceded
by a number, it indicates that there
were executions (at least more than
one) but that it was not possible to
specify a ﬁgure.
© Amnesty International


those who take up arms against the state, may, depending on the case, be punishable by
execution.

In October, a man was sentenced to death for “apostasy”. At the end of the year he was
awaiting the outcome of his appeal. In December another man was sentenced to death for
creating “pornographic” internet sites and “insulting the sanctity of Islam”.

In 2010 Amnesty International noted an increased use of the death penalty against alleged
drugs offenders. In October, the Interior Minister stated that the campaign against drug
trafficking was being intensified, and the Prosecutor General stated in the same month that
new measures had been taken to speed up the judicial processing of drug-trafficking cases,
including by referring all such cases to his office, thereby denying them a right to appeal to a
higher tribunal, as is required under international law.

In December 2010 the amended Anti-Narcotics Law came into force apparently making it
easier to sentence to death those convicted of trafficking. It extended the scope of the death
penalty to include additional categories of illegal drugs (for example, crystal meth),
possession of which became punishable by death. Under the Anti-Narcotics Law, some
defendants are not granted a right to appeal, as their convictions and sentences are
confirmed by the state Prosecutor-General.

In 2010 Amnesty International received a series of credible reports that hundreds of alleged
drug traffickers were being executed in secret in Vakilabad Prison, Mashhad. Those executed
appeared to be amongst the most vulnerable sectors of society. In April, mass protests in
Afghanistan took place after reports surfaced that dozens of Afghans had been executed in
secret in Iran at that time. Although the Iranian authorities denied this, they acknowledged
that over 4,000 Afghans were detained in Iran, the majority for drug trafficking.

In August a Nigerian was reportedly executed in secret in Vakilabad Prison, along with more
than 60 others while in October a Ghanaian and at least nine others were reportedly
executed. In neither case, had their Embassies been informed of their impending execution.

During 2010 those whose political beliefs were at odds with those of the government were
executed. In January, two men were hanged following unfair trials in which they were
convicted of “enmity against God” and of being members of a banned group which advocates
the restoration of an Iranian monarchy. Theirs were the first executions known to be related
to the post-election violence that erupted across Iran in June 2009. Lawyers for the two
men's lawyers were not informed of their clients' executions, in contravention of Iranian law.

In December 2010 another man, who was sentenced to death a year earlier, was also
executed without warning. He had also been sentenced for his alleged membership in a
banned opposition group, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI). He was
hanged at the same time as Ali Akbar Siadat, convicted of espionage for Israel.

A further six men and one woman were sentenced to death in Iran for alleged links to the
PMOI. In some cases, their alleged links with the PMOI may amount to no more than having
had contact with family members who are members of the PMOI.38


Dödsstraffrapport 2010

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (13)

Similar to Dödsstraffrapport 2010

Similar to Dödsstraffrapport 2010 (18)

More from Amnesty International Sverige

More from Amnesty International Sverige (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (15)

Dödsstraffrapport 2010