Friday, March 2, 2012
Dear sir, madam,
I hope this email finds you well. I have sent you an e-mail with a request to nominate a child for the Children’s Peace Prize 2012. This prize is awarded annually to a child, whose courageous or otherwise extraordinary efforts have made an impact on behalf of the Rights of the Child.
With this e-mail we would like to inform that after several requests we have decided to extend the deadline with 2 weeks, to send in nominations until March 15th 2012.
We would be very appreciative, if you could send us your nominations before this date. May I also request you to please send the information to your contacts/network so that they also have the opportunity to nominate a child.
We would also like to take this opportunity to thank those who have already sent their nomination form.
Attached to this e-mail you will find the nominating form for 2012 and information about the previous winners of the International Children’s Peace Prize.
If you have any questions or comments, please let us know. We will be glad to assist you in any way we can.
Also visit our website www.childrenspeaceprize.org
Warm regards,
Ellen Vroonhof
cid:77F67E6A-82BE-4710-B28F-8ABF2D60C8EB
Ellen Vroonhof
Programme Manager
KidsRights Foundation
P.O. Box 283 - AC 6011
1000 EA Amsterdam, The Netherlands
E: ellen@kidsrights.org
T: +31 (0)20 343 99 89
F: +31 (0)20 629 9860
www.kidsrights.org
www.childrenspeaceprize.org / www.kindervredesprijs.nl
Friday, January 27, 2012
Death sentences to children in Pakistan
In December 2011, Abdur ur Rehman, 66, kept imploring the police officials of the Railway police station Rawalpindi to release his sixth grade, 12 year old son but no one paid attention on his helplessness. An FIR (164/2011) was lodged against his son under Section 127 of the Railways Act 1890; his son ended up in Adiala Jail and now facing the trail, if proved guilty, his son will be given death sentence or life imprisonment under the same Section of the law whether his stone throwing act has resulted anything wrong or not.
In Pakistan like Rehman’s son, child offenders may lawfully be sentenced to corporal punishment, life imprisonment and the death penalty. To some extent law reform has gone to prohibiting corporal and capital punishment for child offenders, but the law is complex and unclear and these sentences remain lawful in certain circumstances. Juvenile justice is primarily governed by the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance (JJSO), 2000 but hardly implemented in the country particularly in FATA region which remains out of the limbo of the JJSO, though the JJSO was extended to that region in 2004.
The JJSO does not repeal other laws but is in addition to them. The JJSO Section 12 states: “Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any law for the time being in force no child [below 18 years] shall be (a) awarded punishment of death....” However, the provisions in the JJSO are “in addition to and not in derogation of, any other law for the time in force”, and children are liable to the death penalty under other laws. The main laws that could result children for death sentence are the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) 1997, the Control of Narcotic Substances Act (CNSA) 1997, the Hudood Ordinances 1979 and the Railways Act 1890.
The FCR, which is applicable in FATA, does not provide for capital punishment but under the under Section 17 of the Actions (in Aid of Civil Power) Regulations (AACPR), 2011, a child will be punished with death or imprisonment. This new regulation for FATA was signed by president in 2011.
On the next year of the JJSO’s promulgation, the President issued a Presidential Commutation Order (17 December 2001) which commuted the death sentences of juvenile offenders to life imprisonment, though it excluded juvenile offenders sentenced for qisas or hadd crimes. In July 2002, Punjab’s Law Minister affirmed that the death sentences of 74 juvenile delinquents had been converted to life imprisonment. According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, in July 2003 there were 300 cases pending in Punjab in which the ages of children sentenced to death were contested. In May 2004, the federal minister of the Interior stated that there were 13 juveniles under sentence of death – four held in Punjab, seven in NWFP, two in Balochistan, and none in Sindh province. By 2005, most death sentences imposed before 2000 had been commuted.
In May 2005, the District & Session Judge Ghokti inflicted the death penalty upon Ateeq Ahmed for allegedly committing murder in February 1999. The Court failed to investigate the defendant’s plea of juvenility by referring to a medical board. On appeal, the Sindh High Court referred the matter to a medical board in April 2006, and it was deduced that Ateeq was aged only 12 or 13 at the time of the offence. At this moment, Ateeq is in the Central Prison Sukkar-I and the case is still pending in the High Court.
According to Human Rights Watch, some death sentences of child offenders in Pakistan were carried out, including one in 2001 (aged 13 at the time of the offence), one in 2006 (aged 16 at the time of the offence) and one in 2007 (aged about 15 at the time of the offence). It reported that death penalty appeals by child offenders have been dismissed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan when age was not recorded at the time of original trial.
On 4 August 2010, the Supreme Court confirmed the death penalty in a case of murder committed at the age of 17 on the grounds that the issue of age was not raised at the original trial or before the High Court. In addition, the Supreme Court remarked that the “Learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant has laid much stress on the factum of ‘tender age’ in oblivion of the fact that the tender age itself would not mean that an accused should not be awarded the death penalty.”
In June 2010, I met with two juvenile prisoners (Mewal Shah and Sarfarz) in Mach Jail, Balochistan, who were sentenced to death. Mewal Shah, at the time of meeting was, was sentenced to death by the Anti-Terrorism Court in Mastung. After four years in solitary confinement his sentence was commuted by the High Court in Balochistan to 25 years rigorous imprisonment. He was just 13 at the time of the offence. Sarfaraz was 16 or 17 at the time of a commission of the offence for which he was sentenced to death in 2009. His appeal is still pending in Balochistan High Court.
In January 2011, meetings were held three more juveniles in Mach Jail under sentence of death for murder. Bhai Khan son of Shah Mohammad Chandio (at the time of interview 18 years old) was sentenced to death by District & Sessions Judge Dera Allah Yar. Naseerullah son of Rehan Longov (at the time of interview 17 years old) was sentenced to death in March 2010. Zahoor Ahmed son of Sajawal Jakhrani (at the time of interview 17 years old) was sentenced to death in March 2010 by the District & Sessions Judge Dera Allah Yar. Their appeals are also pending in Balochistan High Court. The main problem in the cases of Bhai, Naseerullah, Zahoor and Sarfaraz is the age determination at the beginning of the trail which neither their lawyers nor judges considered important in the case.
There may be many children in jails in Pakistan who are given death sentences and languishing in death cells but not known to us. The fundamental problem lies with our birth registration records, which does not exist, therefore children, their families and their lawyers do not know about ages of children at the time of commission of an offence. Secondly, judges of the respective courts do not put any efforts to determine their ages so that the trial of the cases could have been carried out as prescribed in the JJSO. Pakistan is party to the United Nations Convention on the rights of the child and Convention against torture (CAT) which prohibit awarding death sentences to children and adults.
As law reform is need of the hour so is required training and sensitization of judicial and police officials and lawyers who could play their role in determining the age of the accused. In addition to it, the government must place a system of birth registration so that children if for any reason come in conflict with law their ages could be verified by the system so that they should be treated according to the law.
In Pakistan like Rehman’s son, child offenders may lawfully be sentenced to corporal punishment, life imprisonment and the death penalty. To some extent law reform has gone to prohibiting corporal and capital punishment for child offenders, but the law is complex and unclear and these sentences remain lawful in certain circumstances. Juvenile justice is primarily governed by the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance (JJSO), 2000 but hardly implemented in the country particularly in FATA region which remains out of the limbo of the JJSO, though the JJSO was extended to that region in 2004.
The JJSO does not repeal other laws but is in addition to them. The JJSO Section 12 states: “Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any law for the time being in force no child [below 18 years] shall be (a) awarded punishment of death....” However, the provisions in the JJSO are “in addition to and not in derogation of, any other law for the time in force”, and children are liable to the death penalty under other laws. The main laws that could result children for death sentence are the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) 1997, the Control of Narcotic Substances Act (CNSA) 1997, the Hudood Ordinances 1979 and the Railways Act 1890.
The FCR, which is applicable in FATA, does not provide for capital punishment but under the under Section 17 of the Actions (in Aid of Civil Power) Regulations (AACPR), 2011, a child will be punished with death or imprisonment. This new regulation for FATA was signed by president in 2011.
On the next year of the JJSO’s promulgation, the President issued a Presidential Commutation Order (17 December 2001) which commuted the death sentences of juvenile offenders to life imprisonment, though it excluded juvenile offenders sentenced for qisas or hadd crimes. In July 2002, Punjab’s Law Minister affirmed that the death sentences of 74 juvenile delinquents had been converted to life imprisonment. According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, in July 2003 there were 300 cases pending in Punjab in which the ages of children sentenced to death were contested. In May 2004, the federal minister of the Interior stated that there were 13 juveniles under sentence of death – four held in Punjab, seven in NWFP, two in Balochistan, and none in Sindh province. By 2005, most death sentences imposed before 2000 had been commuted.
In May 2005, the District & Session Judge Ghokti inflicted the death penalty upon Ateeq Ahmed for allegedly committing murder in February 1999. The Court failed to investigate the defendant’s plea of juvenility by referring to a medical board. On appeal, the Sindh High Court referred the matter to a medical board in April 2006, and it was deduced that Ateeq was aged only 12 or 13 at the time of the offence. At this moment, Ateeq is in the Central Prison Sukkar-I and the case is still pending in the High Court.
According to Human Rights Watch, some death sentences of child offenders in Pakistan were carried out, including one in 2001 (aged 13 at the time of the offence), one in 2006 (aged 16 at the time of the offence) and one in 2007 (aged about 15 at the time of the offence). It reported that death penalty appeals by child offenders have been dismissed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan when age was not recorded at the time of original trial.
On 4 August 2010, the Supreme Court confirmed the death penalty in a case of murder committed at the age of 17 on the grounds that the issue of age was not raised at the original trial or before the High Court. In addition, the Supreme Court remarked that the “Learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant has laid much stress on the factum of ‘tender age’ in oblivion of the fact that the tender age itself would not mean that an accused should not be awarded the death penalty.”
In June 2010, I met with two juvenile prisoners (Mewal Shah and Sarfarz) in Mach Jail, Balochistan, who were sentenced to death. Mewal Shah, at the time of meeting was, was sentenced to death by the Anti-Terrorism Court in Mastung. After four years in solitary confinement his sentence was commuted by the High Court in Balochistan to 25 years rigorous imprisonment. He was just 13 at the time of the offence. Sarfaraz was 16 or 17 at the time of a commission of the offence for which he was sentenced to death in 2009. His appeal is still pending in Balochistan High Court.
In January 2011, meetings were held three more juveniles in Mach Jail under sentence of death for murder. Bhai Khan son of Shah Mohammad Chandio (at the time of interview 18 years old) was sentenced to death by District & Sessions Judge Dera Allah Yar. Naseerullah son of Rehan Longov (at the time of interview 17 years old) was sentenced to death in March 2010. Zahoor Ahmed son of Sajawal Jakhrani (at the time of interview 17 years old) was sentenced to death in March 2010 by the District & Sessions Judge Dera Allah Yar. Their appeals are also pending in Balochistan High Court. The main problem in the cases of Bhai, Naseerullah, Zahoor and Sarfaraz is the age determination at the beginning of the trail which neither their lawyers nor judges considered important in the case.
There may be many children in jails in Pakistan who are given death sentences and languishing in death cells but not known to us. The fundamental problem lies with our birth registration records, which does not exist, therefore children, their families and their lawyers do not know about ages of children at the time of commission of an offence. Secondly, judges of the respective courts do not put any efforts to determine their ages so that the trial of the cases could have been carried out as prescribed in the JJSO. Pakistan is party to the United Nations Convention on the rights of the child and Convention against torture (CAT) which prohibit awarding death sentences to children and adults.
As law reform is need of the hour so is required training and sensitization of judicial and police officials and lawyers who could play their role in determining the age of the accused. In addition to it, the government must place a system of birth registration so that children if for any reason come in conflict with law their ages could be verified by the system so that they should be treated according to the law.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Offenders or victims of exploitation?
THIS is apropos of the news item ‘Minor offloaded’ (March 14). The FIA has arrested 12-year-old Akhtar Ali at Peshawar airport when he was about to board a Sharjah-bound plane.
The boy was provided passport by Pakistan and granted permission to work in Sharjah by the UAE. Sadly, the FIA treats such children as offenders and criminals, though the law of the land says that such children have to be treated as victims of exploitation and trafficking.
Some months ago, I had an opportunity to meet 16-year-old Mohammad Toheed at juvenile ward in district jail, Quetta.
Toheed travelled from Punjab to Iran in search of a job.
His brother had paid Rs20,000 to an agent. Toheed was arrested in the Kunruk area of Iran and was later deported.
In Pakistan, Toheed spent four days in the FIA lock-up in Quetta and was produced before the magistrate who awarded him 15 days’ sentence under Section 17 (border crossing) of the Emigration Ordinance 1979.
Toheed should have been sent to his family as he was received by the FIA in Pakistan.
Instead, the main culprits behind his travel to Iran should have been traced and sentenced because Toheed was a victim of exploitation.
In 2002, the Prevention and Control of Human Trafficking Ordinance was promulgated and in 2004 the rules of the ordinance were framed. The law aims at controlling human trafficking and providing effective measures for preventing offences related to human trafficking and to protect and assist victims of such trafficking and exploitation.
The FIA is supposed to deal with cases of trafficking between the countries.
But, unfortunately, neither the FIA nor the judicial officers have ever given a child the status of a victim who is sent by agents to other countries.
It has been observed that not only in district jail, Quetta, but children caught from Dubai, Muscat, Iran and Bahrain are also found in FIA detention centres at different locations in Balochistan.
These children, sent by agents or relatives to other countries, are not considered victims by both the FIA and the courts.
Children are incarcerated when they are deported from other countries back to Pakistan.
Even if they are considered offenders, the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance 2000 says that child offenders must be rehabilitated and provided proper counselling and support rather than being sent to jails.
I hope the FIA will not put Akhtar through the same incarceration process which Toheed and many other children have passed through.
ABDULLAH KHOSO
National Programme Manager, Juvenile Justice
Islamabad
http://www.dawn.com/2011/04/12/offenders-or-victims-of-exploitation.html
The boy was provided passport by Pakistan and granted permission to work in Sharjah by the UAE. Sadly, the FIA treats such children as offenders and criminals, though the law of the land says that such children have to be treated as victims of exploitation and trafficking.
Some months ago, I had an opportunity to meet 16-year-old Mohammad Toheed at juvenile ward in district jail, Quetta.
Toheed travelled from Punjab to Iran in search of a job.
His brother had paid Rs20,000 to an agent. Toheed was arrested in the Kunruk area of Iran and was later deported.
In Pakistan, Toheed spent four days in the FIA lock-up in Quetta and was produced before the magistrate who awarded him 15 days’ sentence under Section 17 (border crossing) of the Emigration Ordinance 1979.
Toheed should have been sent to his family as he was received by the FIA in Pakistan.
Instead, the main culprits behind his travel to Iran should have been traced and sentenced because Toheed was a victim of exploitation.
In 2002, the Prevention and Control of Human Trafficking Ordinance was promulgated and in 2004 the rules of the ordinance were framed. The law aims at controlling human trafficking and providing effective measures for preventing offences related to human trafficking and to protect and assist victims of such trafficking and exploitation.
The FIA is supposed to deal with cases of trafficking between the countries.
But, unfortunately, neither the FIA nor the judicial officers have ever given a child the status of a victim who is sent by agents to other countries.
It has been observed that not only in district jail, Quetta, but children caught from Dubai, Muscat, Iran and Bahrain are also found in FIA detention centres at different locations in Balochistan.
These children, sent by agents or relatives to other countries, are not considered victims by both the FIA and the courts.
Children are incarcerated when they are deported from other countries back to Pakistan.
Even if they are considered offenders, the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance 2000 says that child offenders must be rehabilitated and provided proper counselling and support rather than being sent to jails.
I hope the FIA will not put Akhtar through the same incarceration process which Toheed and many other children have passed through.
ABDULLAH KHOSO
National Programme Manager, Juvenile Justice
Islamabad
http://www.dawn.com/2011/04/12/offenders-or-victims-of-exploitation.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
