The Guardian view on Indonesia’s executions: cruel and unnecessary
|
Version 0 of 1. We have heard a great deal about Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran: their conviction for drug trafficking as members of the “Bali Nine”; their repentance during long years in jail; and this week their execution in Indonesia by firing squad despite an international outcry. Some may chafe at what can look like the west’s selective concern. Few know the names of the Indonesian, Brazilian and Nigerians shot alongside the Australians on Wednesday and still fewer could identify the 607 people whose executions Amnesty International recorded globally last year. The true toll is probably far higher. China, which Amnesty believes to have executed more people than all the rest of the world put together, treats the data as a state secret. But Jakarta is also guilty of double standards. While Joko Widodo, president of Indonesia, insists on the harshest possible response to tackle the “national emergency” of drugs, the Indonesian government simultaneously seeks clemency for its citizens on death rows abroad, including those convicted of drug crime and murder. Overall, the death penalty is in decline. In 1977, only 16 states or territories had abolished it in law or practice; but last month, Fiji became the 99th to abolish it for all crimes. Six more reserve it for exceptional circumstances and another 35 have not used it for at least 10 years. The UN general assembly has seen growing support for a global moratorium. Yet China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and the US continue to execute substantial numbers of prisoners. Indonesia is one of several nations to have resumed judicial killings after de facto moratoria. In Budapest, Viktor Orbán, prime minister, announced this week that reintroducing capital punishment should remain on the agenda “to make clear to criminals that Hungary will stop at nothing when it comes to protecting its citizens”. There is no evidence that the death penalty deters crime, and in any case EU membership requires its abolition. Hungary’s prime minister was simply echoing the popular far right Jobbik party. For Mr Widodo, too, the real rationale appears political and domestic. A weak leader, embattled even within his own party, seeks to beef up his image at home by refusing to bow to international pressure. More executions are likely. Targeting Indonesia alone could prove counterproductive. More important, it undermines the real case against the use of the death penalty. The issue is not that states should spare those who are repentant or who are foreign; nor is it that they should shun methods such as shooting, stoning and injection with untested drugs. It is simply, as the UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon has said, that taking life is unjust and incompatible with fundamental human rights. Those who are criticising Indonesia should also press powerful nations such as the US, China and Japan to spare their own nationals. Australia’s prime minister, Tony Abbott, called the killings of Mr Chan and Mr Sukumaran “cruel and unnecessary”. The same can and should be said of all executions, wherever they are carried out. |