Home | English | Human Rights Documents | Aadel Collection | Report by the Special Rapporteur, Mr. S. Amos Wako, appointed pursuant to resolution 1983/36 of 27 May 1983 of the Economic and Social Council

Report by the Special Rapporteur, Mr. S. Amos Wako, appointed pursuant to resolution 1983/36 of 27 May 1983 of the Economic and Social Council

E/CN.4/1984/29


          1. The question of summary or arbitrary executions has been discussed in the
          United Nations with ever gro ing concern, especially since 1980.' This concern
          has been professed, for eicaII le in General Assembly re olution 35/172 of
          15 December 1980 entitled Arbitrary' summ y e cecutions” , a resolution on ‘. : :
          extra—legal executions, adopted by th Sixth United Nations' on ess on the -‘
          Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders (Caracas, 25 August to
          5 September 1980), resolution 1 (xniv) of 3 September 1981 of the Sub_CommissiOn , ‘
          on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities and General Assembly
          resolutions 36/22 of 9 November 1961 and 36/96 of 16 December 1983 entitled
          ‘ Arbitrary or summary executions”. . . . . ,
          2. In 1982 the Commission on Human Rights by resolution 1982/29 of 11 ‘OErch'-19 82 .
          recommended that the Economic and Social Council should req st the Ch irSn f ‘.. ‘: ....
          ‘ ... ) the Commission to appoint an individual of recognized intern tiotal standIng 9$
          special rapporteur to submit a comnrehensive report to the Commission at its
          thirty—ninth session on the occurrence and extent of the practice of summary or
          arbitrary executions togethIIr with his conclusions and recommendations. OEis
          resolution was subsequently, oDted by the Economic and Social Council as “ ‘
          resolution 1982/35 of 7 Kay 1982.
          3. In accordance with the above—mentioned resolution, Ni. 5 Amos Wako was
          appointed as Special Rapporteur. At its thirty—ninth session the Commission on
          - Human Rights considered the first report of the Special Rapporteur on summary or
          arbitrary executions.(E/C T.4/1983 , 16 and Add.l., end Add.1/Corr.1). . . - .
          4. At its 52nd meeting, n 8 March 1983, the Commissioji on Human .i ta adopted
          without a vote resolution l983/36 containing a draft resolution for adoption by-
          the Economic and Social-Council. OEe draft resolution was subsequently adopted by
          the Economic and Social Council on 27 Nay 1983 as resolution 1983/36 (see annex I-).
          5. The relevant part of that resolution reads as follows: , . -
          “4 Decides t 0 continue the mandate of the Special R pporteur,
          Mr. S.A. Wako. for anotheryear; ‘ - ‘ . -
          5. Requests the Spe ial Rapporteur to review his repbrt in the light
          ‘of. -the 4nformation received, taking paxticularly into account any new - ‘
          information, including relevant internal legislation, provided by' concerned
          Gdvernments as well as views eroressed in the Commission on Human -Rights at..
          its thirty—ninth session and' ‘to submit a report to the Con ission- -at ‘its.
          fortieth session; - . - - - -. .‘ , . . ‘ ) - ‘
          - 6. Considers that the Special Bapport ur in carrying ou' 4iis max dat i
          -should continue to seek and receive info tiara from Gdversents;''; . - : - -
          United Nations odies, specialize4 agebcies, regionalintergo e'rimeutal.
          organizations and non-governmental organizations in consultative status with
          the Economic and Social Courrcil
        
          
          E/CL4/ 1984/29
          page 2
          7. Expresses its anpreciation to those Governments that ] 2 aVe extended
          invitations to the Special Rapporteur to visit their respective countries
          and urges the Special Rapporteur to respond positively to such invitatiot ;”
          4. The General Assembly at its thirty—eighth session in 1983, aaopted
          resolution 38/96 entitled tt Suiumary or arbitrary executions . In that resolution the
          General Assembly requested the Commission on Human iLi hts at its fortieth seSion,
          on the basis of the report of. the Special Rap orteur to be prepared in corffi ormity
          with Economic and Social Council resolutions l962 '55 and 1983/36, to make -
          recommsndations concerning appropriate actidn to c mbat IIid eventuaJ- 1 Y eliminate
          the practice of summary or arbitrary exeIIztions. . ‘
          7. OEe present report is suhaitted pursuant to resolution 1963/36 of the Economic
          and Social Council. In the course of its preparation, careful consideration has
          been given to the views and observations made in the Commission at its
          thfrty—tii uth session, as well as of the- information ‘which has r achCd the
          Special Rapporteur subsequently. . .
          B. In the first repo t, the international statd'ards considered relevant to tins- ‘ :
          subject were outlined and reference was made to ‘th s -eciflc information related to'
          various situatidn where sun ary or arbitrary executions were reported or- allefld. .
          to have taken place. Wri en replies received f6m Governments 00 cerned were
          appended to the report, while the views of other Governments were reflected in the -
          summary records of the Commission's debate on this subject. - , -
          9. In view of the limited time available the informatibn o the ‘ internal .-- . -.
          legislation of various countries which was in the possessioh of the Special Rapporteur
          at that time was nbt imcluded in the first report. In accordance w II -
          resolution 1983J36 of the Economic and Social Council, in this report an attempt has
          been made to analyse available internal legislation as cdmpared with the .
          international legal instruments relative to the subject. However, it ist be said
          that in view of the vastness of the subject and the number of countries imvolved,,
          this analysis cannot be considered exhaustive. Time has :not allowed the .- -
          Special Rapporteur to do research into this area and, therefore, be has had to rely
          exclusively on the information supplied by Governments.
          10. Further, in accordand with the Economic and Social Council resolUi] 0n, the
          present report is intended to provide the Commission, ‘as appropriates t ith any
          information which has become available on the situations mentioned in the first
          report, or any new situation which has ariIIen during ‘IIe last.ye r. .. The ‘ ‘
          Special Rapport ur considers that discussions of arbitrary ‘or ‘swifl fl executions
          should now advance to an examination of the' types of situations it YJh2..ch such
          executions usually take place with a view to' identifflng elements which, could- guide
          future action in this area. The Special Rapvorteur -also considers' that an -,
          examination of factors which trigger summary or arbitrary executioflS could
          similarly assist in identifying practical recommendations which could be offered
          fo stopping such executions. The preliminary alysis whic f 0 119w9 is offered
          as a pilot effort to elicit the reactions of the Commission wit h a view to ifirther
          discussions arid concrete decisions of these and related issues. : ‘
        
          
          E/CN.4/ 1984/29
          page 3
          Activities of the Special Rannorteur
          1 . Since Economic and Social Council resolution 1933/36 decided to e tend the :
          mandate of tne Special Raptorteur o n summary or arbitrary executions for another
          year, the Special Rapporteur has engaged himself in activities that fall within the
          sphere of his mandate, as descriLc L L u.
          12. OE Special Ratporteur visited the Centre for Human RiSts at the United Nations
          Office at Geneva from 4 to 8 July 1963 for consultations. H again, vi ted Geneva
          frS 17 to . 21 October 1983 , from 31' October to 2 November 1983 and from 19 I I
          25 January1984 to finalize the report. The S 'ecialRavport'euII also v4.sit d'
          Copenhagen n 19 and 20 October 1983 for consultations wath the Government of
          Denmark. .. : ‘‘‘ ,
          13. On 29 July 1983 notes verbales and letters were sent to Governments, .
          United Natioti bodies, specialized agencies, regional intergoverSental organizations
          and non—governmental organizations iq consultative status with the Edonomic and'”
          Social Council, seeking information concerning the question of summary or arbitrary
          executions (annex II ) On 6 November 1983 letters were sent to Gavernments
          requesting any additional information (annex ni).
          14. In the course cf his uresent mandate, the SDecial Ratporteur received . .
          communications from the following: ‘ . .
          (a)' Governments: . . : . ., .
          Argentina., Bsnasnas * Belgtum, Bel ze, Canada, Central African Republic,
          Chad, Czechoslovakia , Democratic Kamnuchea, DSocratib”OEmen, Denmark,
          . Franca 1 . Ger many, Federal Republic of, Guatemala,Holy See, Honduras, .
          . Indonesia, Iraq. Jordan;. Mexico, New Zealand, Peria, Portugal, . Qatar, . .
          ‘ Republic': of ICorea Spaia Suriname, Turkey, Tuvalu, United Ki ngdom of
          ! ‘Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, United
          Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Zambia . ‘ . . . . .
          (b ) . Unitad Nations bodies . ,
          Office lof the Commissioner for Namibii and the United NationS , .
          High Commissioner for Refugees. , . .
          (b) p'ecialized agencies and regional intergovernmental organizations : .
          Food and Agriculture Organization, Internatiohal Bank fo,i Reconstrtictidn
          . , . and Developmant, Int rnaticnal Labour Organis'ation, International Itritime
          Organization, Or&ahiII t.ion of American States, World Health Organiz tion,
          . United Nations ducatio'naOE , Scientific and Cultural Organization. .‘: .‘. ,
          (d) 9 overnmpntal organizations in consultative status with the'” , ‘
          E onamic and Social Counci1 , ‘ . 2 . ‘‘
          ‘ Amnesty International, Caritas Internationalis, ‘International Commissiod
          ‘ : ,‘ ‘.: bf Jurists, International, Pederaticn of Journalists, International Peace
          . ,: , , Academy, Paz Romana Salvation irmy, Union of Arab Jurists, World ‘ ‘
          Federatio of Trode Unions, World Jewish Congress, World Young Women's
          Christian AssociationL”Ydiitig Lawyers' International'Association.. “ . :
        
          
          E/CN .4/ 1984/29
          page 4
          15. Some of these communications referred to information contained in the
          Special Happorteur's report before the Commission at its thirty—ninth session. In
          that context the Special Rapporteur wishes to state the following.
          i6. In his report to the Commission at its thirty—ninth session, the .
          Special Rapporte'ur indicated, in regard to a numbm' of situations, that at the time
          when that report was being prepared, information had not yet been received with
          . regard to allegations that had been transmitted to the respective Governments at
          short notice, OEis applied inter ella to situations in Afghanistan (para. 125 of
          previous report), Burundi (para. 135) . India (paras. 157—160), Pakistan (para. 189)
          and the Philippines (pares. 191—194). Foilowing the renewal of his mandate, the
          Special Rapporteur received information from these Governments. . , .
          17. In regard to the information corn ern ng Afghanistan and Pakistan, the
          Special Rapporteur wishes to emphasize his statement in. his report to the Commission
          to: the affect that he had refrained from including in that report a brief summary of
          -the allegations received, since they referred to events having taken place prior
          to 1980; as explained in paragraph 71 of the same report. In line with this
          criterion adopted in the previous report the Special Rapporteur has refrained from
          including in this re-port the replies rec-3ived from the GovernmEnts of Afghanistan
          and Pakistan. .
          18. In regard to the statement in paragraph 155 concerning Burundi, the
          Special Ranporteur wishes to reiterate his statement in his report to the Commission
          to the effect that he had refrained from including in that report a brief summary of
          the allegations received since those allegations referred to events taking place
          prior, to 1980 as explained in paragraph 71 of the same report. However, at the
          specific request of the representative of Burundi his statement at- the
          thirty—ninth session of the Commission on Human Rights is reprodqced in annex IV.
          The-Special Rapporteur ccnfirms that the allegations of summary or arbitrary
          executions which are in his possession concern the previous-regime and not the
          current Government. , .
          19. in regard to the statement contained in paragraphs 157—160 of the previous
          ) report concerning India, the Special apporteur wishes to state the following. The
          r2uresentative of the Government of India met the Special Bapporteur on
          20 October 1983 and 24 January 1984 and referred him to the information communicated
          by the Government of India concerning the allegations of summary or arbitrary
          executions mentioned in paragraphs 157.460 of the previous report. This information
          consisted of Cl) Aide memoire f rem the Permanent Mission of India to the
          United Nations Office at Geneva of 20 October 1983 denying the allegations referred
          . to in paragraphs 157—140 of the report; (2) Comments on the charge of massacre in
          the encounter of Uttar Pradesh police with dacoits by the Uttar Pradesh government
          with: (a) tables showing the numbers of dacoities committed during the last
          five years, the numbers of enoounters with dacoits , the numbers of dacoits killed
          or captured and arms seized, and the numbers of policemen killed or injured;
          (b) a list of gangs in existence between 1975 and 1985; (c) comments on a case
          involving tne death of one person with a descript.on of his criminal history;
          - Cd) a brief note regarding five specific cases of encounters mentioned in a bulletin
          issued by the People's Union for Civil Liberties (pages 29—50 of PUCL Bulletin ,
          March—April 1982 issue); (5) Detailed comments of the Uttar Pradesh government in
          regard_t cases of alleged fake encounters mentioned in the report of
          Amnesty InternEtiona l; (4) Some case studies by Uttar Pradesh State government
        
          
          E/CN.4/1984/29
          page 5
          ,,, .. describing two cases bf encounters; (5) Information, of the State” gov'ernm nt .
          of:' Punjab providing a table of cases of So persons with names and ages, villageS
          and districts, details of' allegations and comments by the Punjab government;
          (6) Note on encounters in the State of Mdhra Pradesh referring to allegations
          contai: d in the Bulletin of the People's Union for Civil Liberties (March—April 1982
          issue quoted above), with tables on extremi t violence and encoIIifiers between
          extremists and the police in Andhra Pradesh from 1968 to 1983. a! , This exhaustive
          and detailed information illustrates the following assertion ofthdGovernni nt'
          of Lndia: (a) the death of so—called Raxalites, :dacoits,”knurder dr 'and other ‘ ..
          criminal elemei'i't'S in the course of 1 5w enforcement activities occurred in genuin'e
          encounters and every such death was the subject of a magisterial inquiry, if such
          an” inquiry indicatII' n miscarriage of justice, prompt and suitable action was
          taken against those found guilty; a number of investigating agencies function at
          the state and national lev ls; (b) it is incorrect to: 1 allege that 6, 0 0o p bple
          were ‘killed dII ing”the years 1979—1981 and that they were victims of police action
          after arrests; thiS allegation was especially inadmissible as India has various ,
          constitutional legal ard judicial processes es,well as a free press which
          ‘ safeguards the right to life, personal secur ty and liberty of individuals OEe
          Special Rapporteur ha referred to information concerning the Constitution and other
          legislation rSlative ‘to this issue, which shows that in India the rule' of law ‘
          prevails and the judiciary is independent of the Executive. The Special Rapporteur
          has not received any information indicating that'.t'h'e. judiciary is hot” independent of
          the Executive. The,:,:Special Rapporteur was referred to the 1983 report entitled
          “Human Rights in the' WbrId ', by the Political Affairs ‘Committee of the Europ&n
          Parliament which' states,that summary executions:d& not take plac in India. “
          . 20.Y:' In ‘r gard to the stat ments contained in paragraphs 191—194 of the, previous
          report concerning the Philippines, reference is made to' annex V which contains the
          repl k' received from that Go II nment in a notedated 1 March 1983. ‘
          21. In addition to the communications referred to ‘above in the context' of the pote
          verhale cent on 17 September 1982 under the origInal mandate of the
          Special Rapporteur, replies were received from the following Governments; Bahamas,
          Barbados, Madagascar, and the Philippines. ‘:‘:‘‘‘ : ‘
          22. On 29 July 1983, letters were sent to the Governments of Guatemala and Suriname ,
          ‘ concerning the” invitationS IIxtended by IIose Governments to the Special Rapporteur. ‘
          Th3 Special Rapporteur responded positiveiy':to ‘these :invitations in the coQtext of
          par agraph 7 of ononc and Social Council resolution 1983/36.
          23 , With regard”to the Shvi ati6n from the Governmerlt'af Guatemala, it niay be
          recalled that the Special Rapporteur stated that, due to constraints of tllne, he
          would not be able to avail himself of that invitatton prior to the
          thirt:y_ninth session ‘of, the. Commission. . ‘ ‘ . .
          24 On 20 October 1983, the Permanent Representative of GuatemaTa to the
          United Nations n Geneva infp 'meIIth Special Rapporteur that, in view of the fact ..
          that the Snecial Rapporteur of the Commission on the question of Guatemala, under
          a! These materials are available at the secretariat for consultation.
        
          
          :E/CN.4/1984/29
          page 6
          resolution 1983/37, had already visited Guatemala in the context of his mandate and
          was scheduled to make a se ond. visit in November 1983, the Government was of the view
          that a visit by the Special Bapporteur on summary or arbitrary executions was not
          necessary. .
          25. I I 1 September 1983, the.Governoeent of Suriname informed the Special Rapportaur
          of its willingness to have him visit the country.
          26. On 6 September1983, the Special Rapporteur informed the: Government of Suriname
          of his willingness to visit the country,either in the week beginning 3 October or
          that beginning 31 October. On 9 September 1983 the Government of Suriname indicated
          its concurrence with the proposal of the Special flapporteur that he visit Suriname
          in the week of 31 October 1983.
          a7. Accordingly, on 30 September 1983 the Special Rapporteur 2 communicated the
          ogramme that he proposed to follow in the course of his mission in Suriname.
          28.. On 14 October 1983,. the Special flapporteur was informed that a Commission of
          : the Government of Suriname would discuss the Special Bapporteur's programme upon
          arrival; on 24 October 1983 the Government of Suriname further informed the
          Special Rapporteur by cable as follows: . , .
          . “CONCERNING VISIT SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR CHR DR WAKO To StjRZNAME FROM
          OCT 30 To NOV 4, 1983, REGRET TO COMMUNICATE UPON INSTRUCTIONS GOVERNMENT OF
          THE. REPUBLIC OF SURINAME THAT SUBINAMESE COMMISSION UNDER CHAIRMANSHIP OF
          MB PH AKRUM IS NOT IN A POSITION TO RECEIVE DR WAKO DURING THE ABOVE—MENTIONED
          PERIOD ON ACCOUNT OF PARTICULAR UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES, WHICH SUDDENLY AROSE.
          OFFERING YOU ON BEHALF OF THE SURINLMESE GOVERNMENT OUR APOLOGIES FOR ANY
          INCONVENIENCE THIS TEMPORARY DELAY MIGHT CAUSE YOU.”
          Go 28 October 1983, the Special Eapporteur informed the Government of Suriname as
          follows:
          “I confirm that I have received a copy of your telex dated 24 October 1983
          by which you inform me of your Government t s decision to postpone my visit to
          Suriname, scheduled to take place from 31 October to 4 November 1983.
          I would be grateful to be informed in due course and at the convenience
          of your Government of the dates on which the visit may take place. I would
          particularly applleciate being informed in sufficient time so that mutually
          .,.convenient.,dates can be arranged.” ,
          29. No further communication has been receiyed by the Special Rapporteur from the
          Government of Suriname at the time of the completion of the present report.
          30. inong the communications received by the Special Rapporteur, information on.
          national legislations concerning the protection of the right to life was communicated
          to him. This information was examined by the Special Rapporteur and is reflected in
          chapter I below.
        
          
          —
          E/CN.4/1984/29
          page 7
          31. Among the counications received by the Special Rapporteur were a number
          containing allegations of summary or arbitrary executions which had already taken
          place. Most of those allegations concerned incidents winch occurred during 1983
          These'a1le at ,o,ns refer tb occurrences pf summary or arbitrary executions in 10
          countriS. ‘Thdse allegations have been duly communicated to the Governments
          concerned five of whom have transmitted replies to the Special Rapporteur. In
          some instances ti' e Permanent Representatives of the Governments concerned have
          taken up contact -and consulted with the Special Rapporteur h Since most of these.
          allegations came to the Special Rapporteur in November 1983, the Governments
          concerned have explained to the Special Rapporteur that more time would be
          reutlired to look into them. For this reason the Special Rapporteur' has
          refrained at this stage from mentioningthe States concerned and the nature of
          the allegations against them. .
          32. All the information which has coIIe ‘into the possession of th .
          Special Rapporteur since he was appointII forms the-basis of chapter II. The
          Special Rapporteur believes that this approach which shows the type of
          , . situntions' in which arbitrary or summary executions usually take place' and the
          elements which may be identified as factors which lead to summary or arbitrary
          executions will give another perspective to the prdblem and therefore'enhance
          the understanding of the phenomena (see para. 10 above). : ‘ ,‘ . .‘ ‘ :‘..-
          33. In addition, in the course of his mandate the Special Rapporteur received
          appeals from various sources making allegations of imminent or threatened -
          summarj executions which might appear prima. facie relevant to his mandate. - ‘In
          this bontext the Special R4porteur addressed an urgent message ‘by telex to-the
          Governments concerned, namely Bangladesh, Belize, Chile, Ghana, Guatemala, Iran,
          Iraq, Li bya, Malawi and Sri Lanka. Replies were received from the Governments
          of Beli e,”Guatemala, Iraq and Sri Lanka. The Special Rapporteureroresses his
          appreciation to those Governments which replied to his urgent messages.' The
          Special Rapporteur considers that this urgent action procedure is an invaluable
          part ‘of th ze onse of the intertiational conmtIIity in dealing with summary or
          arbitrary executions and that this form of urgent action should' be maintained
          and developed for as long as this probleII rSains on the international agenda.
          34. ‘ The messages of the Special Eapporteur to the Governments concerned and
          . .. . ‘ replies from the Governments are reproduced in chronological, ‘order as follows:
          (i) On 22 June 1983 a telex was sent to the Minister for P6reig-n Affairs
          of the Islamic Republic of Iran stating:
          ‘MY ATT TION HAS BEEN DRAWN TO RE OI S OP IflNINML ED(ECUTIONS OF A NUMBER
          OF' PE Ii ONS, ‘ A}1ONG THEM: NUREDD IN ICEANUM, ERSAN T&BAPI, MABMUD PI2ENADZADEH,
          REZA SHALSwU, HABSAM GHAE?r ANAR, GAG IIC DER AVMIESSIAN, KIOMAR ZABSHENASS.
          HAVE T HONOUR TO REFER TO ECONO M YC i frD SOCIAL COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1983/36
          BY ‘VEECa THE COUNCIL RENEWED NY MAI4DATE AS SPECL&L RAPPOBTEUR OP THE' ‘
          CONFESSION ON HUMAN RIGHI!S ON THE QUESTION OF SUMMARY OR ARBITRARY EXECUTIONS.
          AS I RAID OCCASION TO OEFORM THE CONFESSION IN MY FIRST REBORD WHICH I
          PRESE1 TED liT FEBRUARY 1983, THE iUGHT TO LIFE IS SACROSANCT M W SHOULD BE
          . RESPECTED IN ACC0P A1TCE WITH PUiWAi'E1 TAL PRINCIPLES OP JUSTICE. WITHOUT
          IN AllY WAY WISHING TO ENTER INTO ALT MATTER WHICH MAX PE1 1AIN TO THE
          DOMESTIC AND SOVEREIGN JURI ICTION OF YOUR EXCEL17POETCY' 5' GOVERNMENT, I WISH,
          ON ‘A PURELY HUMANITARIAN BASIS, TO APPEAL TO YOU TO ENSURE THAT NO
        
          
          E/C'N.4/19 84/29
          page 8
          EXECUTIONS TA 1OL “PLACE ESPECIALLY IF SUCH EXECUTIONS RESULT PEON A SU?MARZ
          TRIAL OR MIY OTHER PROCEDURE IN WELCH TEE RIGHTS OP THE oeDIVWUALS .ABE NOT
          FULLY PROTECTED. Ii i PARTICDLA.R$kY I REFER TO ARBICLES 5, 6, l4 MID 1503?.
          THE I1ITERNA2IQNg COVENMIT ON CIVIL MID POLITICAL RIGHTS TO W CH TEE .
          ISLA1 UC REFUBLIQ OF IRAN IS PARBY” .. .
          No reply has beSn received from the Government of the Is lamic Republic or: .
          Iran . :
          (ii) 0xx29 JU Lie 1983 a tel k' was sent to the Minister for Foreign Affairs
          ,., .oi the Republic of Iraq stating: .
          “I HAVE TEE HONOUR TO REFER TO ECONOMIC MID SOCIAL COUNCIL RESOLUTION 198 3/36
          BY WHICH THE COUNCIL RU4EWED NY MMWATE AS SPECIAL RAPPOBT UR OF THE
          CON?flSSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ON TEE. QUESTION OF SUI INARY OR A I ARY
          EDCECII1IONS. MY ATTEI4TION HAS BEEN DRAW TO HEPOHTS OF E)CECtT ;3;PNS OF 831
          PERSONS WHICH REPORTEDLY TOOK PLACE IL NAY 1983. TEE NM Dfl5”:OP TEE SEC WERE
          .. (IV N AS:. Sk ABDUL-SAHIB .AL—EAJ.CIM, SAflD ALL ‘ED iT AL WXIM, ; :
          ‘,SAY] MOHAMMAD ff18 SAIL AL-RA3CIM, SAID) ICANAL SAID YOUSTF, AL— - . .. . . . “.,
          SAflJ) AEDUI WAEAB AL—HA ICIM, SAYID MIIIM) SAID) MOKAI4MAD RIDHA. AL-RAICIM.
          WITHOUT I L AMY WAY WtSHBTG TO I1 ITERPERE WITH MATTERS WHICH MAY PERTAIN
          TO T DO ST,IC SOVEREIGN JURISDICTION OF YOUR EXCELLENCY'S GOVER}IIYJENT
          I AN COMPELJiED ‘TO EI4PHASIZE THAT THE RIGHT TO LIFE IS A MOST FUNDAMENTAL
          MID CRUCIAL I mOEtAIT RIGHT' AND TO APPEAL TO YOU ON .A pT3pfl y HUNA nTAXEAN BASIS
          : To:Ia w ' T hAT 1W EU CUTIONS TAfl PLACE ESPD3LALLY ftP SUCH O JCUTIONS'RESULT
          FROM A SDWARY TRIAL OR ANY OTHER PROCEDURE IN WHICH TEE BIGHTS OP THE
          INDIVIIUALS AflE NOT FULLY PROTECTED. iT PA1 DICDLAR E Y I REFER TO
          A ICLES 5, 6, 7, 14 MU) 15 OF TEE INTERNATIONAL CO'VERMIT ON CIVIL MU)
          POLITICAL BIGHTS TO &EOH THE REPUBLIC OP IRAQ IS pay,”
          A reply dated 7 Nov ber 1983 s received from the pe ane 1 s'
          of the Renubl c of Iraq, containing the following message of the
          Government of the Republic of Iraq: . , . ,,. : . , . .
          . Origital; 4ra.bicj .
          ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘Tar from being arbitrary, as mentioned' .n your note, the exe'tttiozi'
          of these six persons took place after proper investigation aiid. trial :
          during which they Sjoyed all of the legally prescribed safegciaras. and in
          particular, the right to legal counsel for their defence. The circumstances
          of the case, as summarized in the judgement based on evide '1ce an& their own
          confessions, are -that Muhamma d Hussein A1—Hakim, .Abdu l sahib Nuha at.
          Mu i'jqahiti Al—Hakim, Ala—ud-Din Muhsin Al—Hakim, Wpmp l_tl&.DJ42 Youssus
          ‘ Htih's in A1-I kim, Abdul Wahhab Youssuf l4uhsin Al—Hakim, ai4 Alimad Muhammad
          RId1 d'1—Hakim were convicted of acts prejudicial to the security, safety
          and. .t'er itoriat integrity' of the country and involving espionage for the
          benafiklof .&hostile”foreign country in a state of war with Iraq, namely
          Iran, tbrough the i/xgitive Muhammad Baa r Al—Hakam, leader of the so—called
          ‘Sapr ii e outiCil of-the Islamic Revolution i i i Iraq' which S based an Iran.
          They were alsq found guilty of criminally consparang to provoke sedition
          and issemiMte a pirit of odious intetcommunal antagonism, of, ‘
          distribttin among their partisans weapons and explosives sent to them
          from Iran, and of engaging in assassinations and acts of sabotage against
          civilian institutions in Baghdad and other cities in Iraq with a view to
        
          
          E/CN.4/1984 129
          page 9 :.
          creating anarchy and confusion in an attempt to overthrow the regime by
          force. Since these criminal acts render their perpetrators liable ' to the
          penalties prescribed in articles 156 and 175/2. of the Penal Codej.r on the
          basis of articles 49, 50 and: 53 concerning ‘co licity, the competent ;, :
          court sentenced them to death':by hanging and this sentence was carried .
          in accordance with the normal legal procedures. t '
          (in) On 22 July 1983 a telex was sent to the President of the Republic of
          Guatemala stating: , . . .
          1 HAVE THE HONOUR TO REFER TO ECONOMIQ AND SOCIAL COUNCIL BESOLUTION- 198 3/36
          BY WHICH TEE dOUROIL.RRNEWEID NY MAIWATE AS. SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR . ‘4 . .
          COMMISSION ON HUMAN BIGHTS ON THE QUESTION OF SUMMARY OR ARBITRARY EXECUTIONS.
          MY ATTENTION HAS BEEN DRAWN TO ALLEGATIONS RECEIVED OF .OEMDIENT EXECUTIONS
          OP A NUMBER OF PERSONS SENTENCED TO DEATH BY THE SPECIAL TRIBUNALS. WITHOUT
          IN M IT WAY WISflG TO OETERFERE WITH HATTERS WHICH NAY PERTAIN TO THE
          DOMBSTIC Mt SOVEREIGN JUM ICTION OF YOUR EXCELLENCY'S GOVERNMENT I SHOULD
          LIKE TO E1WHASIZE TEE PRfl4ACY OF THE BIGHT TO LIFE MW APPEAL TO YOUR
          EXCELLENCY ‘ON A PURELY HUMANITARIAN BASIS TO ENSURE THAT NO EXECUTIONS TAKE
          PLACE ESPECIALLY fl SUCH EXECUTIONS RESULT flON A &TMNARY.. TRIAL QB ANY
          OTHER PRO 3DURE IN WHICH . THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVDUALS. ARE NOT FULLY PROTEC ;
          3 )1 THIS QNNECTION MAY I )RAW YOUR EXCELLENCY' S ATTENTION, TO ARTIC lES 3, 10
          AND 11 OF TEE DTLII 1 JEPSAL DEC lARATION OP HUMAN BIGHTS MID TO. ARTIClES 5, 6,
          14 AND 15 OP THE OETERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL MID 1OLITIQAL RI UT it
          A reply dated 27 ‘July 19a3. was received from the Permanent Mission of the
          Republic of Guatemala in Geneva. ‘ ‘ ‘ . ‘ .
          , : ‘ . ‘ [ Original: panish]
          “The Permanent Mission of Guatemala to the European Office of the
          United Nations presen.:ts its comvlimentp to the Assistant ,Secretary—Gene 'al,
          Director of the United Nations Centre for Human Rights, and has the honour
          to transmit below the text of bhe informationbulletin of the Government of
          Guatemala dated 26 July 1983, with the requeSt that this ‘text should be
          ‘ for arded to H z. Amoa Wako, Special Rapporteur of the Commissipn on
          Human Rights for the item on su ary or arbitrary executio 's, with reference
          to the telegram sent to the President of t ie Republic of Guatemala dated
          22 July 1983: : ; ‘ . . “ ‘
          “OEe Government of the Republic of Guate mala. has decided to ‘suspend the
          death sentences innosed by courts of special jurisdiction and established
          a commission of jurists to study the possibility of modifying or replacing
          these courts and transferring them to ordinary jurisdiction. OEe foregoing
          was announced on 26 July 1983 by the Minister for' Foreign Affairs of
          Guatema la 4 ” . “
          (iv) On 28 July 19B3 a telex was sent to the President of the Democratic ‘
          Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka stating: ‘ , , “ ‘ ‘
          ‘I HAVE THE HONOUR TO BEFEaT0 EbONOMIC .ABD SOCIAL COUNCIL RESO lUTION 1983/36
          BY WHICH THE COUNCIL RENEWED NY MA1WATEI AS SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR OP THE ,
          COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ON THE Q,TJESTION OF SUMMARY OR ARBITRARY EXECUTIONS.
          MY ATTENTION HAS BEEN DRAWN TO A NUMBER OP ALLEGATIONS THAT A CONS ]DERABLE
          NUMBER OF PEOPLE BElONGING TO THE TANIL MfliOBT]TY HAVE BEEN KIL lED IN BEC T
          fl'ICEENTS IN SRI LAN KA. WITHOUT IN ANY WAY WISHING TO INTERFERE WITH
          MATTERS WHICH MAY PERTAIN TO TEE DOMESTIC MW SOVEREIGN JURISDICTION OF
          YOUR EXCELLENCY' S GOVERNMENT, I SHOULD LIKE TO EMPHASIZE THE PRIMACY OF
          THE RIGHT TO LIFE AND APPEAL TO YOWL EXCELLENCY ON A PURELY HUMA1UOEBIA1 I
        
          
          E/ON. 4/]. 98 4/29
          page 10
          BASIS TO flTSGRE THAT TEE RIGHT TO LIFE OP ITOEIflDUAIS BE FULLY PROTECT&D “
          IRRESPECT IVE OF THEIR RACIAL, POLITICAL, RELIGIOUS, SOCIAL OR OT 1R
          SOETtIS OR BACKGROUND • IN TUS COIllEECTION M&Y I DRAW YOUR EXCEL lENCY 'S' H
          ATTENTION TO ARTICLE 6 OF THE INTERNATIONAL dovE}oen1r c i i d int' ANT) PQLITICAXI
          RIGWPS TO /‘JUCH THE SOCIALIST DEMOCRATIC ‘PEPUBMO OF SRI LA1 K& IS ‘PA T I I:
          A reply dated 15 August 1983 was received from the Permanent Mission of the
          Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka i t t Geneva, containing the
          following message from its Government: .
          “1 There hIIie been no executions whether suma ry or arbitrary duming
          recent disturbances, or as a matter of fact, at any tine in Sri Lanka.
          2. . There were unfortunate incidents in the recent p ist when a numb r
          of pe'i sons ‘lost their lives.
          OEese iri idents occurred under the following circumstIIices:
          (i) Since 1975 and up' to 22 July 1983, terror squads claiming to
          belong t ‘ OEmil ext emist group and seeldng to set up a
          , . e iate state'in Sri' Lanka kifled 73 persons byattacks with
          oea6hine gIIas'aiid other automatic weapons. OEe 73 were made up
          of 51 Tamsls, 21 Sinhalese and one Muslim.
          (ii) On 23 July 1983, thirteen Sinhala soldiers were ambushed and
          killed' by' members of the separatist groupoperatifig in
          northern Sri Lanka. .
          :‘ (iii) OEirty—seven civilians were killed in service operations
          arising out of the above—mentioned ambush. . ‘
          (iv) The ambush and murder of the thirteen Sinbalese so].dieri' ar t ‘
          , 23 July by Tamil terror squads sparked off a reaction agaiIIIIt'
          Tamils and Taxnal—owned residences end business.
          . OE Stig tions have revealed that ‘this incidence: of violence
          had been' takSII advantage of by groups of persoS interested :
          ‘ in' disrUpting the maintIInance' of law and crd r ‘b,ith a view t
          overthrowing the lawfully constituted Government by uWawfaI
          means. The attacks of Tawil households and the means of
          production and institutions owned by Tamils were pait' of this
          ‘ tr te r . :
          (v) 316 civilians were killed in the disturbances ‘by civilians, ‘
          this' ‘ihclu es fifty—two convicted and remand prisoners killed
          at Welikada prison by fellow prisoners. ‘
          3. The ‘Go ernxnent has taken all possible measures to restore law and
          order, and normalcy has now returned. In addition to utilizing the
          regulars in the police and armed forces, the Government mobilized the
          volunteer forces and the police reservints for restoring order “and
          peace. ‘ ‘ .
        
          
          E/CN.4/1984/29
          page 11
          4. The Government of Sri Lanka has taken, and will continue to take afl
          possible steps to protect the right to life and property of all persons,
          . irrespective of. their racial or ethni origin ,. ‘ :
          5. . 1,150 persons have been taken into police custody for offences of
          looting and arson. Persons displiced from their bomes on account of theL
          violence have been cared for in several welfare centres both in Colombo
          and iI' the outstations.' ‘OEe fact that the number of thes& w 1OEre centres
          has dwindled from 80,000 at its peak to 10,000 today is an indication' df ‘
          the fact that normalcy is now restored. . .
          6. OEe Goverment of Sri Lanka which is party to the Internat .oia1
          Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is fully conscious of i s . , .
          obligations and has taken all posstble steps to ensure protection to all
          individuals irrespective of their racial, pol4.tiqal, religious, social or
          other status or background.” . - . ‘.. , : . . .,
          The Representative of Sri Lanka called on the Special Rapporteur during
          the la'st*week in January when he was in Geneva and briefed him on the ‘
          situatiII and in particular on the political process which was underway
          in which all political parties were participating to find a solutlon bo
          these del cate problems.
          (v) On 34ugust 1983 a telex was sent to the Minister for Foreign Affairs
          of the Soc1al st People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya stating:
          :‘ H4VE THE HONOU Ii TO RE]3ER TO ECONOMIC MID SOCIAL COUNCIL RESOWT.ION' 1983/36
          “ BY WHICW THE COUNQIL RENEWED MY XA1WATE AS SPECIAL RAPPOW1 MJR OF THE
          CONtCSSIOI'T ON' EUI'IAN RIGHTS ON TEE QUESTION OF 5 T J t flKjJjIf . ‘ AB.BI'flARY EXECUTIONS.
          MY ATTENTION HAS ‘ BEEN DRAWN TO INFORMATION ACCORDING Tb t4IUCH THREE PERSONS
          WHOSE N i l VIES WERE GIVEN AS FOLLOWS: PAB lO ASURAF, NtJBAEMA.S HILLAL MID
          NUSOEPHA AL NAWARI - MAY B ' FACING IMMINENT EXECUTION. WITHOUT UI ANY WAY
          WISHINU TO IRTFLRFEHE WITH MATTERS WHICH MAY PERTAIN TO THE DON]! TIC M W, .
          SOVEREIGN JURISDICTION OF YOUR EXCELLENCY' S GOVERNNEET, I SHOULD LIKE TO'
          EtWHASIZE TEE .PBBIACY OF TEE RIGHT TO LIFE MID APPEAL TO YOUR EXCELLENCY
          ON A PURELY HUYiANITAiIMI BASIS TO EN bUk W THA.T NO EXECUTIONS TAKE PLACE,
          ESPECIALLY I i ? SUCH EXECtJflONS RESULT FROM A SUMMARY TRIAL OR M iT 0OE iR
          , PROCED RE IN WHICH TEE RIGHTS OP. THE INDIVIDUAlS ARE NOT FULLY PROTECTED..
          IN THIS CONNECTION MAY I DRAW Ybtff EXdhLIENCY'S ATTENTION TO AB flCLES 6,
          14 AflD 15 OF THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL MID POLITICAL RIGHTS TO
          MUCH TE' SOCIALIST PEOPLE' S LIBYAN ARAB JANAHIRI O E IS PARTY.” .
          No reply has been received from the Coy. rr ent' o Ttbe Socialist Peopl& a
          Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, . , . . . 1''. , ‘ .
          (vi) On 4 August 1983 a telex was sent to the Government of Belsze,
          . . stating: ‘. , ‘: , ‘ : : ‘ . . .‘:
          “I HAVE THE HONOUR TO REFER TO ECONOMIC MID SOCIAL COUNCIL RE SbIUTION 1983/36
          . BY WE lCH THE COUNCIL RENEWED NY MAIDATE AS SPECIAL RAPPORTiWE 0? ‘TEE ‘
          ‘ COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ON TEE QUESTION OF SUMMARY OR .AJ BITRARY . ‘
          EXECUTIONS. NY ATTENTION HAS BEEN DRAWN TO INFORMATION' ACCORDING TO ‘WEECH
          WO PERSONS WHOSE NAMES WERE GIVEN AS JOSE FRANCISCO VALDEZ MID
          MARIO LOPEZ WERE SEIPBDNCBJ) TO DEATH MOE MAY BE FACING EXECUTION. WITHOUE
          IN ANY WAY WISHING TO INTERFERE WITH HATTERS WHICH MAY PERTAIN TO TEE
          DONESTIC MEl) SOVEREIGN JURISDICTION OF YOUR EXCELIENCYtS GOVERNMENT, I
        
          
          E/CN.4/1984/29
          page 12
          SHOULD LL TO E RA.SIZE T UE PROEI&CY OF THE BIGHT TO L1fl AND APPEAL TO
          YOUR EXCEL lENCY ON A PURELY HMUV'CLTARIAN BASIS TO ENSURE THAT NO EJ CUTIONS
          flEE PLACE, ESPECI4LLY I i ? SUCH ETCUTIONS RES [ JJJB PROM A SUI M&RY TRIAL OR
          MIT OTHER PROCEDURE IN WHICH TEE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVOEUAIS ABE NOT FULLY:
          PROTECTED. IN THIS COImEGTION NAY I DRAW YOUR EXCELlENCY' S ATTENTION TO
          ARTIClES 3. 10 AND 11 OF TEE UNIVERSAL DECLARAflON OF HUIyIMT RIGHTS MW TO
          ARTICLES 6, 14 MW 15 OF THE INTERNATIONAL COVENAIqT ON CIVIL .kfl1) pOLITICAL
          RIGHTS.” . , ,
          A reply dated 12 August 1983 was received from the Prine Minister of Belize
          as follows: - .
          “IN REPLY TO YOUR TEOED( OF 4 AJJGUST CONQUBNOE SENTENCES OF DEATH PASSED
          ON TWO I SONS BY E BELIZE AN COURTS, I RAVE THE' HONOUR TO ASSURE YOU THAT
          THIS IS NOT A CASE P SUWARY OR ARBITRARY ACTION WHICH MIGHT FALL WI2EOE
          T HE S aTIaTES YOU :NENTIONED.. THE TWO PERSONS CONCEPHEU) JOSE joeoejwlScO VAWEZ
          AND M ARIO ORLANDO: LOPEZ BOTH GU TEMALA1T CITIZENS TOGETHER WITH A THIRD
          PERSON WHO IS A MINOR 17 AR5 OLD, JOSE ER 1qESTO BE1OEENDEZ, ‘WERE TRIED BY A
          JUDGE MOE TWELVE ! fl ER JURY IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE MU) P 0 11 1 W
          GUILTY OF TEE MURDER OF TWO PERSONS CONMI'I'J!ED DURING THE COURSE OF A
          RO BERY , FOLLOWING THEIR. CONVICTION, VALDEZ AND LOPEZ kIERE GIVEN THE
          MANDATORY SENTENCE OF DEATH BY HABCING. THE TRIAL WAS CONDUCTED IN
          ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS . . o BELIZE MW THE SENTENCE WAS T H E REGULAR A lOE)
          JUDICIAL' ONE FOR 1W EB . :$EBNMWEZ BEING A MINOR, RECEIVED - & SENTENCE OP
          INDEFINITE OEPRISON1 B NT ALSO IN A000IOEAITCE WITH OUR LAWS. ALL. HE ACCUSED
          WERE PEPPESEWEED AT THE TRIAL BY AN ATTORNEY AT LAW. THEY HAVE THE RIGHT
          TO APPEAL THEIR CONVICTIONS TO. THE COURT OF APPEAL. 33? THEY SHOULD SO DESIRE.
          BELIZE DOES NOT RAVE A PRESEENTIAL SYSTEM .QPGOE21ENT. .AS PBD MINISTER,
          I HAVE NO POWER UNDER THE CONSTITUTION TO PARDON CONVIO ! PERSONS.
          RU lE OF LAW PREVAILS MID THERE IS STRICT. OBSERVANCE OF THE nI DENCE
          OF THE JUDICIARY. THE BELIZE CO&STITUTION DOES PROV E FOR THE EXERCISE
          OF THE PREROGATIVE OF RCY BY PER EXCELLENCY 9'HE GOVERNOR GEI flAL, ACTING
          ON THE AD V ICE OF TEE BEU ADVISORY: COUNCIL WHO WILL CONSEER TEE CASE D I
          DUE COURSE. ” .. , . : .
          vii On 5 ‘August 1963 a telex was sent to'the President of the Republic
          of Ghana stating: . . . . .
          “I H THE HONOUR TO REFER TO ECONOICC .AND SOCIAL COUNCIL PESOWTIOM 1953/36
          BY WHICH THE COUNCIL RENEWED MY MANDATE AS SPECIAL RAPPOR'j tm OF TEE
          COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ON TEE QUESTION OF. SUMMARY OR ARBITRARY IE7OECUTIONS.
          MY ATTEN T TON HAS BREN DRAWN TO ‘INFORMATION A 0 001m]JIG TO WHICH A NUMBER OF
          PERSONS MAYBE PACING IMMINENT EflCIJTION.' WITHOUT IN ANY WAY WISRING TO
          IN'.D RFERE WITH MATTERS WIfiCH MAY PERTAIN' TO TE )O1RSTIC M W sOVEREIGN
          JURISDICTION OF YOUR EXCELlENCY' S GOVERM JEUT, I ?311OULD LINE TO E UHAASI2 1
          D PRIMACY OF THE RIGHT TO LIFE MiD APPEAL TO YOllit: flCELIENCY Oi l A PURELY
          HUNAITETARIAII BASIS TO ENSURE THAT 110 EIRCUTIONS TAIQ3L PLACE, ESPECIALLY IF SUCH
          ETCUTIONS RESULT FROM A SUMMARY TRIAL OR ANY OTHER PROCEDURE IN WHICH TEE
          RIGHTS OF TEE INDIVIDUALS ARE NOT P JLLY PROTECTED. IN THIS CONNEC'fIOI'I HAY I
          DRAW YOUR EXCELLENCY' S ATTENTION TO ARTIClES 3, 10 MID 11 OF TEE IOEITVERSAL
          DECLARATION OP HUMAN RIGHTS AND TO ARTIClES 6, 14 MID 15 OF flITERNATIONAL
          ‘ COVENABT ON CIVIL S d -ID POLITICAL RIGHTS.”. . , .
          No reply has been receAved from the Governwant of the Republic of Gtana.
        
          
          E/CN.4/1984/29
          page 13
          (viii) On 11 October 1983, a telex was sent to the President of the Republic
          -‘ of Guatemala stating:
          “NY MANDATE AS SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR OF TUE UNITED NPLTIONS CONMISSION ON .
          HOMAIT RIGHTS ON TEE QUESTION OF SUN1 t&RY OR ARBITRARY E)CQJTIONS HAS BEE 1I
          RENEWED BY ECONOICEC AND SOCLA I COUNCIL RESO lUTION 1983/36. AS SPECIAL
          RAPPORTEUR, I NOTE WITH SATISFACTION TEE I'B ASLRES RECENOEY TAXEN BY
          YOUR EXCELOEINCY'S GOVERN B NT WITH REFERENCE TO TEE ABOLITIO IT'.OF” SPECIAL
          COURTS AND THE ADOPTION OF DECREE—LAW 91-83, ARTICLE 10” ‘WUEREOF,PROV ES
          THAT PERSONS ARRESTED SHALL fl 'fr4EDIATELY BE PLACED AT THE DISPOSAL OF..
          JDDICILRY. IN TEES CONTEXT, I HAVE BECEIW2) REPORTS OF TEE POSSIBJJ .EG CUTION
          BY FIRING SQUID OF 35 PERSONS ‘WHO WERE PRESU ! 2D TO HAVE DISAPPEARED AND
          APR ALlEGED TO INC lUDE, AS DETAfl EES IN TEE JOSE RIJPOEO BARRIOS BARRACKS,
          TEE LkWYER YOLA1WA UP.IZAR, A1 GELA AOELA AND IN CRECIA ORE LLAITA • WITHOUT .
          WI$HING TO OETERFERE IN THE U TEREAL APFAi S OF STATE OF YOUR flCELlENCY Z
          GOVERNMENT, I SHOULD L]fl TO E?L HASIZE TEE PRB4ACY OF TH RIGHT TO LDJ E MID
          TO. APPEAL, ON PURELY HUHAIqITAICLMI GROUNDS, FOR EflCUTIONS TO BE SUSPEOEOEED
          IF TJ Y RESULT FROM VE I I DICTS OP COURTS IN W E lCH TEE RIGHTS OF THE
          IIWIVTEDUALS WERE NOT FULLY PROTECTED. IN TEES CONNECTION, I DRAW
          YOUR EXCEL lENCY' S ATTENTION TO ARTIClES 3, 10 AND U OF TEE UNIVERSAL .
          DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND ARTIClES 5, 6, 14: AND 15 OF TEE COVENANT
          ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS. . .“ . :
          A reply dated 19 October 1983 s reoetved from the Permanent Mission of
          Guatemala in New York, tating: . : , . . . .
          “OEe '. epotts that'. were ‘furnished to. ro of'35 persons ‘that ie about
          to be executed in' Guatemala ai d among them Nmes. Angela Ayala,' . ‘ ; : .
          Increcia Orellana' and Yolanda Urizar are false and away from reality .
          As indicated in the above mentioned cable 2 I was told to assure you
          that izi'.Gtzatemala, suary or arbitrary.executions are not taking p1ace :
          the death penalty is one of exceptional nature, and it can only be imposed'
          for very serious crimes. It can be in bsed solely by judges of . the criminal
          courts who are att of the judicial body and they are the only ones enabled
          to render verdicts and give a sentence of death after having followed a
          legal and due process, going through at least two instances, the first one
          before a judge and the second one before a tribunal of several members; the
          defendant can also utilize the extraordinary recourse of cassation, which
          is also taken before the Supreme Court in its Criminal Chamber, composed . ,
          of 5 magistrates. . . .
          The Government of Guatemala, as it has been indicated to me, believe
          that the denouncement presented to you is no more than a manoea re by.persons
          or groups interested in disrupting the image of the Government of Guatemala.
          The Government of Guatemala . reiterates to you the conmiitment it has
          made to the people of Guatemala and to the' international con unity to respect
          human rights and keep its actions w ithin the law.
          . Ftrther evidence of its intention is having revoked the Law of Special
          Courts and having recently announced that the Law on Defence of Democratic
          Institutions will be revoked also.
        
          
          E/CN. 4/1984/29
          page 14
          OEe Government has requested the Supreme Court. of. Justice a report on
          whether prosecution is being followed in any court against the above
          mentioned persons. The outcome of this report will be conveyed tc'.'you in
          due time. :. .
          I have also been asked to let,'you 1 ow that military bases are not
          detention centres and that the centres which now exist in Guatemala to keep
          coumon delinquents are well Imown by the population; also that ralati es
          and friends of the inmates can visit them in accordance' 'with prison.. .
          regulatibns. . . ,“ . . . .
          The Government mentions that every time that tha General Assembly 6f
          the United Nations”deals with human rights in the Third Co ittee, these
          campaigns begin ‘to'op rate in order to make an impression on the Delega'tS.”
          ‘ (ix) On 22 October ‘l983: a ‘telex was sent to the President of the Republic
          of Chile stating: f l . . ,
          “I HAVE .TEE ‘HONOUR TO REFER TO ECONOMIC MW SOCIAL COUNCIL ‘RESOlUTION 1983/36
          BY WHICH. THE COUNCIL OED1 EWED MY MMWATE AS SPECIAL..RA.PPORTEUR TEE
          CO1 WSSION ON RUH R RIGHTS ON THE Q,UESTION OF .‘5IJ Ry OR .APBITRARY EXECUTIONS.
          MY ATTENTION HAS BEEN DRAWN TO INFORMATION ACCOEDING TO WHICH THE NILITARY
          PROSECUTOR OF' SAflIAGO, GENERAL OSVALDG HERNM1DES EDHEROS IS REPORTED TO
          HAVE CONYOfl A WAR TRIBUNAL MW HAS ALIEGEP LY' ASKED FOR THE DEATH. PENALTY
          FOR oeuiai PERSONS NONG TEE FIVE WHO IT IS REPORTED WILL BE TRIED ON
          25 NOVEMBER 1983 BY .9 WAOE TROEtffAL.r 1?tA!4ES OF TEE TBSE APE GIVEN AS
          JORGE PAINA DONOSO, CARl O ABANEDA Nfl .MOEA, M W HUGO JORGE MARCHAI&. WITHOUT
          IN M I T WAY WISHING TO INTEPPEBE. WITH MATTER54 WHICH MAY PERflIN ‘TO :TEE.
          DOMESTIC MW SOVEREIGN JURISDICTION OF YOUR EXCELLENCY' S GOVERNMENT, I
          SHOULD LTWfl TO EMPHASIZE THE' PRIMACY OF THE 1TJ( PJ2 LPE AND APPEAL TO YOUR
          EXCELlENCY ON A EPRELY HUMRTITiUtILN BASIS TO ‘ENSURE THAT GAPLOEL PU IUSHMENT
          DOES NOT RESULT FROM PROCEDURES IN WHICH THE”RIGHTS OF..THE .BOEIV UAIS ARE
          NOT FULLY PROTECTED. IN TELa CONNECTION NAY I DRAW YOIflXCELIUDNCY' S ‘
          ATTENTION TO' ARTIClES 6 MU) 14 OF THE. INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON OrnL Mu)
          POLITICAL RIGHTS' TO WHICfl THE REPUBLIC OF CHI lE IS PARTY.” ‘
          No reply has been received from the Government of the Republic of Chile.'
          (4 On 2 February 1984 a telex was sent to the President of the Republic
          of Bangladesh stating: , ‘
          “I HAVE THE HONOUR TO REFER TO ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1983/36
          BY WELCH TEE COUNCIL RENEWED MY MA1WATE ‘AS SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR OF THE
          CONMISSION ON EUMAIT RIGHTS ON TEE QJJEETION 0F” SUNMAM OR ARBITRARY . ‘
          EXECUTIONS • MY ATTENTION HAS BEEN DRAWN TO INFOIMP2 ION ACCORD lEG TO WELCH
          A PERSON WHOSE NAI4E ‘IS GIVEN AS GOLAN MUSTAFA. WAS ‘SEETENCED TO DEATH BY
          SPECIAiL MARTIAL LW COURT MID MAY BE FACING' ‘EXECUTION. WITHOUT IN ANY WAY
          WISHING TO INTERFERE WITH MATTERS WHICH NAY ‘PERTAIN TO THE DONESTtC MID
          SOVEREIGN JURISDICTION OF ‘YOUR EXCELlENCY' S GOVERI'RIENT, I SHOULD LIKE TO
          EMPHASIZE THE PROEIACY OF THE RIGHT TO LIFE MW APPEAL TO YOUR ‘EXCELLENCY
          ON A PURELY HUNANITARL4N BASIS TO ENSURE THAT NO. .E](JDCTJTIONS TAKE' PLACE,
          ESPECIALLY IF SUCH EXECUTIONS RESULT FROM A S [ TNMARY TRIAL OR ANY OTHER ‘
          PROCEDURE IN WEIGH THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVD)UkLS ARE NOT FULLY PROTECTED.
        
          
          F/ eN. 4/19 54/29
          page 15
          IN THIS CONNECTION MAY I DRAW- YOUR EXCEL lENCY ' S ATTENTION TO ARTICLES -3, 10
          All]) 11 OP THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OP HUMAR RIGHTS MW TO ARTIClES 6 MID
          14 OF THE rnEfl ION4I COVENMIT ON CIVIL M I ] ) POLITICAL RIGHTS.” :
          No reply has been received from the Government of the Republic of Bangladesh.
          ( xi) On 9. February 1984 a t 1ex was sent to the President of the Republic , . .
          . ;. . , of Nalawi stating;. . . ,
          “I HAVE TEE HONOUR TO BEBER TO ECONOMIC MID SOCIAL COUNCIL RESOlUTION 1983/36
          BY WELCH THE COUNCIL RENEWED MY MANDATE AS SPECIAL RAPPORT liU l i OTHE . ‘-‘ :
          COMMISSION ON HUNA1 T RIGHTS ON SUMMARY OR ARBITRARY E) UTIONS.. NY ATTENTIOL. :
          HAS BEEN DRAWN TO INFORMATION ACCORDING TO WHICH THE DEATH SENTENCES IMPOSED
          ON ORTON MID VERA CHOEWA BY TEE SOUTHERN REGION TRADITIONAL COURT WERE UPHELD ‘
          BY THE NATIONAL THADITIONAL COURT OF APPEAL M W TEE TWO PERSONS MAY BE . ..
          FACING VUCECUTIONS. WITHOUT IN ANY WAY WISHING TO INTERFERE WITH MATTERS
          . W fl NAY PE TAIII TO, THE. DOt flSTIC AND SOVEREIGN. JUTiISUICTION.OF YOUR
          EXCELlENCY' S GOVER}INE NT, I SHOU LIKE TO Ea EASI THE PRIMA.CY OF TEE . ,
          RIGHT OI&I'E All]) APPEAL TO YOUR EXCEL lENCY ON A PURELY HUMANITARIAN BASIS .. .
          TO E URE TEAT NO EKECUTIONS TAKE PLACE, ESPECIALLY. fl SUCH E] CUTIONS , . ; .
          RESULT FROM A SUMMARY TRILL OR ME! O'I'Hf H PROCEDUBE flf WELCH THE RIGHTS OF, . . . .
          THE OEDIVIDUAIS ABE NOT FULLY PROTECTED. 1151 THIS. CONNECTION MAY. I DRAW.. .
          TOUR EXCEL lENCY:' S ATTENTIOL TO ARTIClES' 3 -MOE ‘:10 OF TEE} UNIVERSAL . :‘ : .
          . DECLARATION OF HUMAN. RIGHTS AIW TO ARTICLES 6 MW 14. OF. THE INTERNATIONAL
          •-COVENABTON.CIVILMW POLITI AL.RIGHTS.” ... .... . .
          No revly. has been received from the Government of the Republic of Malawi. .
          ‘ . - . . • . . 1
        
          
          E/CN.4/1984/29 :
          page 16
          ‘ LIFE: REVIEW OF NATIONAL LEGISLAflONS
          I. PROTECTION OF THE RIGHT TO
          . j ‘IIe fundamental ight par' 4xc l1ince' , but is
          35. OEe right to life iS ttOt 0 he' rights. Article 3 of the Universal Declaration
          also the prerequ isite al] r i O has the right to life, libei ty an&'security
          of .Human Rights states that on Civil and Political Rights, the .
          of person”. The International V. and the African Charter on H jh n and
          American :convention on ‘Human R1& no individual shall b “arbitrarily de rived of
          People's Rights each specify tha. 0 provides that “no one shall be..depriv d Ce..
          his life”. OEe European Convert execution of sentence of a court following.
          his life inten ioII1ly”' ve this penalty is provided by law”. The . . :
          his conviction of a crime for ? ! can Convention and the American Convention each
          Int n jt j'&IIl ‘Covenaht, t t ' U.!0P 11 be protected by law”.
          statathab the right to' life “ , ,
          “. : .. . ‘‘ g legislative provisions received.rrom G6 ernments,
          )6 In all the replies containiherent dignity and inviolability .is recogn1z d in
          “the right'to life” and man 'ifl 1 in the constitution or basic laws. itst'.oT'.the
          the supreme law of the land name ingent and scrupulous p'rdcedures' are laid down
          replies received indicate that S be followed' before ‘a judicial' authority can
          in th 'i i . f the land which mu: an accused person. Moat 0 t the procedures laid
          mete out the sentence of death 05 which replied to the request of the
          down in the lII s of the countrie substantially conform to the provisions of
          Special Rapporteur for informatlo ernational Covenant on Civil and Political
          articles 6, 9, 14 and 15 of the r Law Enforcement Officials which was adopted by
          Rights a id”t ie ‘Code of Conduct t er some of the' ‘lb islation would app ar to be
          the General Assembly in 1979. Hspirit of the above—mentioned International Covenant
          in conflict with the letter a.nd.be elaborated in the following paragraphs.
          and the Code 6f:conduct as wil].
          of the question of the right to life and the
          37. OEe wide scope and ccmplexi as well as the information which came to the
          diversity of national 1egislati0fl give to the following paragraphs a general
          : possession of the special Eappor cover all aspects of the subject and are not
          scope which cannot be expected jal Rapporteur, however, feels that they do
          meant to be exhaustive. OEe sPec 5 obtained from his analysis.
          ) eflect the more outstanding fea .
          A. Articles 6, paragraph 2, a 4 Co a o cni2,, 4
          imposed for the most serious crimes and the act
          38. OEe death sentence is to b 5 tituted an offence “at the time when it was
          or omission must be one which con
          committed”. .
          j. Death pena3 y
          . death penalty has been abolished completely.
          39. In a number of countries, 1 ting to the death penalty vary from country
          However national legislationsre of offences as well as the frequency with which
          to country as regards the vane ‘ertaitt countries the death penalty is commonly
          this punishment is imposed. IrtfCflces but may also be applied according to the
          imposed for violent criminal of rti 1 country for a whole range of other
          circumstances prevailing in a pa relatively minor in other situations.
          offences which might be regarded
        
          
          E/CN. 4/1984/29
          page 17-
          2. Crimes punishable by death
          40. A survey of capital offences reveals that the death penalty may be imposed
          for the following-categories of offences: - . .
          (a) Crimes against the person - -
          (1) Crirnes:resulting in loss of life : a number of couptrie which,
          retain the death penalty for ordinary offences have restricted.
          its use to murder. OE some of these countries the death penalty
          can beapplied for crimes resulting in loss of life, although it :
          -. -.m y not have been the intention of the accused person to kin, as
          in the case of robbery causing death. .
          (ii) Crimes causing grievous injury or suffering : some countries have
          laws providing th death nalt'y for crimes ulting in serious
          injury or acute suffering, without necessarily involving loss of-
          life.. ,.. Among such crimes are g i.evous bodily-harm. with. specified. -
          aggravating circumstances such as torture., . kidnapping with torture,.
          cruel and inhuman treatment of people in custody. .. -.. , — -
          (iii) Crimes liable to cause-serious injury or death:,. , in some countries,
          ‘ “ IIe”deabh penrlty'can be-”appli-ed'jfcr'acticns liable to- cause injury
          or death, even if they ha enot t?dstiited in this. Such offences
          include kidnapping, with intent to murder, or -when the victim. is placed
          ln danger of being murdered, the use of explosives against individuals,
          demanding specific transport facilities or allowing them to be'dama ed
          if life or foreign—owned property is thereby jeopardized. .
          (iv) Armed robbery faced s th a rapid mc i ease in the incidence pf armed
          robbery, many countries, .particu1ar,I ,developipg countries, have
          - introduced a, mandatory death senten6e for,thjs bffence,
          (b) Crimes agaijIIt property nd economic &rimes ,, , . -‘ - - -
          A number of countr:es nrovicie the death penalty for crimes against property
          ‘ and economic crimes not necessarily in osving violence In some countries, the
          death penalty has been introduced ‘or certain economic crmnes such as hoarding
          grain or consumer goods, embezziemeiifi and fraud, illegal currency dealing,
          smuggling and black mariceteering. OEeft or apprppriation of property, if
          committed more than once and unlawful misappropriatlon of public property or
          foodstuffs are also punishable by death in certa1n countries. In a number of
          developing countries ..damage to the economy such as , a avat d economic sabotage,
          sabotaging the production or distribution of essential commodities such as
          petroleum products, passing industrtal secrets to unauthorized persons i.s
          punishable by death. ‘Persons, have been executed for illegally e portingprSns
          and importing cars and video equipment. - - - : ‘ - .
          Cc) Crimes against the state and political offences - - . -
          In many countries treason, piracy and military crimes are punishable by
          death. Insurrection, sabotage an attempted coups, , threats to the authority, of •‘
          the Government,' counter—revolutionary activities, ilte al ‘flrike ,, and, - -
          demonstrations, terrorism and illegal activities connected with political parties
          carry the penalty of death. , . . . ,‘‘:“, ‘ .“
        
          
          E ,'CiT .4/l9e4/2c
          rage 18
          (i) ‘The severe use of the death penalty is also to be observed in
          attempts to suppress drug ti'afficking. Some countries have passed
          laws making the death penalty rnandatory for a variety of drug
          offerices.
          (ii) Immorality and behaviour such as adultery, rape, se cualrelatioiis&-P
          with a girl under the age of 12;: fornication and sodomy re punishable
          by death in several countries.
          (iii ) In a few countries to join d advocate membership of certain: groups
          and organizationS of a political or religious nature is. punishable
          by death. :
          . . . 3.' Retroactive legislation .
          41. In at least two countrieS a new law which GiIIer' introduced the death penalty
          or extende I the number of offences which were puniahabl by death was made
          retroactive to cover persons 1read in custody for acts which diu not constitute
          an offence at the time they were committed. . : ‘.
          . . B. Article 6, para ph 4,' of the International Covenant on Civfi fl . I
          ,. .. , , Political Rights : : ‘. ‘ ‘
          1. ‘ “Anyone sentenced to death shaft have the right to seek pardon or.:
          ‘ commutation: of the sentence. Amnesty, pardon 'or ‘commutation of the
          sentence pf death may be granted in all cases”. ‘. ‘ .
          42;e:' In the legislation of most States, the right to seek pardon or commutation
          of the sentence is provided. In a number of countries, the:head of State is:
          empowered to grant a pardon or commute the sentence while in' some others this 3.S
          under the authority of the Minister of Justice'. In some countris ‘institutions
          such as a judicial cocjmission or an advisory committee on the prerogative of
          mercy are designated to examine appeals for pardon in order to advise the
          head of State or to make decisions on its own. In some countries the death
          , ) penalty can be carried out only after it is reviewed and confirmed by the head
          “ of ‘State or the designated government official. In a numbei' of countries review
          of the death sentence by a higher court is automat: C and obtigatory. ‘ ‘:
          45. “According boone Government,..an act of grace, ‘b i ig aSehronic, has
          disSppeared from [ the] law;.. pardon is a gener l meaSure' hich is not'granted .
          in cases of serious crimes., which have advers&yaffectedsocietll's conscience . ;
          and is specifically omitted, from the laws goverhing such rimes, this is:'alSo ‘ .
          the case in.respect f the law of amparo (eiiforcII ent of c 0 s.titutjon righta)...
          OEe' remedy: of amparo is a, means of controlling legality,' the purpose of which' is
          to ensure that government measures or the decisibns of oourts:'pay due respect to
          the liberty of citizens, human rights and the fundament l norm which govern the
          legal life of the country, thereby preventing abuses of power in order to ensure
          the rule of law. OEe Susreme Court assumes the role of a court of amparo.
          44. ‘ egarding military courts, in. some countries, thei e is no system of appeal
          to a higher court. In some:CountPies, a death sentence by the military court.
          “ ‘h .s to . b confirmed by he Government. . , . : : : . “ .
          45. In a number of cases persons have been azecuted within hours- of the sentence
          being passed under circumstances which show that either the competent authority,
          whether the head of State or Court of Appeal, has not had an onportunity to
          consider the appeal or pardon or, if he has, it has been done in an jtrary way.
        
          
          EiCiT ,4/1984/29
          page 19
          C. Article 6, paragraph 5, of the International Covenant on Civil and
          . Political Rights
          46. Article 6, paragraph 5, provides that the sentence of death shall not be
          imposed for crimes committed by persons below the age of 18 years nor carried out
          on pregnant women. A number of Governments comply with this provision in their
          legislation. Some Governments in their reply state that in their laws a person .
          over 70 years of age is also excluded from the execution of the death sentence.
          D. Articles 6, paragraph 2, and 14 of the International Covenant on
          Civil and Political Rights
          . 1. Impartial, independent and competent court . .
          47. It is universally recognized that one of the.best guarantees for the
          impl?n!entation cf legal safeguards applicable to all fair trials is the existence
          of an' dependent judiciary. .
          we refer to the constitution or basic laws of practically any country, .‘
          wa,tevr.the basic principles, underlying the constitutional system, there are
          provisions whIch are designed to ensure or insulate that the judiciary is free .‘
          from political pressure and that the judge is competent and independent. In many
          constitutiopp it zsE,provided that the judiciary shall be independent in the
          exernise ,cf Us functions or shall be separated from the executive at all levels.
          Sern ti s it is stipulated that neither the executive nor the legislature may
          exep4 e...any judicial function or intervene in any judicial proceedings.
          . . , “ ‘ ‘
          49. : 30me'con5titutioP ,, prohibit the establishment of any extraordinary commissions
          or tribunals of a temporary nature, outside the framework of the judiciary, to try
          any particular cases or persons. In one country it is specifically provided that
          no one may be tried by exclusive laws or special courts. Military jurisdiction
          only applies in cases of offences against military discipline, but the military ,
          courts shall in no case and on no grounds extend their jurisdiction to persons not
          belonging to the army.
          50.,, A number of Governments state that their laws provide for systems to guarantee
          impartiality and independence of the court, such as appointment of judges by a
          commission independent from the executive. In order to guarantee the independent
          status of judges, special measures have been established for their appointment,
          disciplinary control and removal.
          51. Several devices have also been adopted in various countries in relation to
          the selection of judges in order to achieve the necessary independence of the ,
          judiciary from the executive. In some countries, judges may be appointed by the
          executive only with the consent of the legislative body, its leader or one of its
          chambers. In other countries, judges may also be appointed by the executive upon
          the nomination or with the advice of the judiciary or a representative thereof.
          There is a growing tendency for judges to be appointed on the recommendation of,
          or by, a judicial service commission or a superior council of the judiciary, in
          an attempt to remove appointment from the arena of politics, to ensure high
          qualifications and to maintain continuity of judicial administration.
          52. According to one Government, under its constitution “the appointment of judges
          of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal is made by the President of the Republic
          and cannot be removed except by a special procedure involving the assent of two
          thirds of the Members of Parliament”, and “the judges of the High Court, District
          Courts and Lower Courts are subject only to the disciplinary control of the
          Judicial Services Commission consisting of the Chief Justice and the two other
          Judges of the Supreme Court”.
        
          
          page 20
          53. When the- judge re-appoihted by the execUt ive'; m hasiS is ofte&' placed on
          aecui'.ity of tenure as a aeana of uarantaeing t 'ie indeoendencd of the judiciary,
          : and the rules governing their transfer froze one post to another are often . , :
          calculated or intended to promote their feeling of security and therefore to
          preser v th$r ‘iyz i4endence Similarly, man other rules relating to salary,
          penaion limicatLon of nun—jud .ci .u activittes and dxnqualifications are intended
          to protect the indepehdence of the judiciary and consequently to ensure the .
          right of everyone to a fair triaL . .
          . , . 2 Spe a3 tourts ,. . .
          54. Among the baatc principles for the safeguarding of the independence of the
          judiciary one is'- 6f' particular concern when dealing 4 ith criminal offences. It
          concerns the creation of special courts to try on ., .pereon or -,a group :pf persons
          or to try specific offenc.es. A number of countries have established special
          courts,' ‘or special military or revolutionary courts, to try political off ence ‘
          or crimes. In other countries State Security Courts were established to try a
          ‘ number of offences including crimes against State security, economic espionage . . .
          and drug smuggling. Special criminal courts have been createct wsth jurisdiction
          over crimed of violence or other .cr.izue such as• embezzl rnent of public funds and .
          offences inyolving age to State property. : . ‘ ; . : ‘ :
          55. While some Govern.menta sLte that r io kind of special courts or military
          tribunals can, exist tinder their laws nd that, all criminal IIarges are tried ‘by
          ordinary cour ta, II a number of States military, courts and. apeciaL.courts auch as
          revolutIo nary courts also have jurisdiction over civilians. In certain countries
          military, courts have jurisdiction only over, members at the ared fdrces. In some
          ‘ oII r countries the jurisdiction o f military courts is extended to try civilians'
          on certain categorses of off ences under certain situations, such as a state of
          em r ney. ‘One Government mentions the Security Tribunal which tries crimes ‘ ‘
          against the security of the. State and those Qoncan'aLn public order and the
          ptional i,!lterest. ‘ . ‘ .
          ‘ ‘‘ ‘ . ‘ 3. Public trial . .‘
          56. A number of .G verrunents state that under their laws crimiIIl trIals are held
          In publics except for reasons of morals, public order or' national security-or for
          ‘ the v.ital.,interest of the parties concerned and that the Court may decide th t,:”
          in exceptional case.s, all or some of IIetrlals should be conducted in cameraand
          . attended only by the parties concerned. ‘ . ,
          57. Some G4vernments also state that verdiats must b delivered in public. ‘
          ‘ ‘ , ‘ . 4. , FaIr trial ‘ ‘ . .
          58. A, number of Governments refer to their jury ey t m awe guarantee to ensure
          a fair trial. Some other Governments mention the system of. ‘investigation and
          inquisition by magistrates . A number of Governments state that: he accused shall
          be presumed Innpe nt until:proved gu!lty, and has the ‘right ,to be. heard.,'.: either by..
          himself or tnrough the counsel of his o n choice, or b both. A number of
          Governments mention the obligation of the State to provide legal asaistan6e at ‘
          , its own expense, in cases where the accused cannot afford legal assistance of his
          wn choice. ‘
        
          
          E/OLr.4/1984/29
          page 21
          59. A number, Governments mention their laws and regulations concerning .
          evidence, apo state that strict rules as to the admissibility of evidence are
          establtshed with the. burden of proof placed on IIe prosecution. Some Governments
          state that any confession obtained by coerc lon is inadmissible as evidence and
          tint admission of guilt by th accused is inadmissible as evidence for the death
          penalty. S&neGovernuients,mention the rightS of:' the acIIased to-produce defence
          withesses and, to cross—examine witnesses for' the orosecution. ‘ .
          Go Reference is also made to the right of an accused person to have free
          assistance from an interpreter if'he cannot understand or speak the language
          used in the court.
          61 One Government, referring to the procedures of military courts, states that
          the rights of the accused are protected in the same manner as in ‘civil'criminai ,
          courts “except , with regard to the time element”. , ‘ _fl “ “ . - ‘ . .
          --“ 62.' In one country the procedures of a special court provide that “IIe' ‘
          indictment must be communicated in writing to the defendant or to his lawyer at
          least three days before the court mee s”.fl,and that ,“the:court mu ';'allow the
          defendant ‘and hir'IawyeP' t 1 a t' 15 hours to plead”. . ‘
          5. Double jeopardy , , ;
          63. In ‘a number of countries the lawfl'provides that -“no person -shall be twice
          put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offence”. The constitution of one -
          country, which is typical of many',: provides: ‘ , .: ‘. ‘ ‘ . .
          “1 ,40 person who shows.'hat he, has been tried by a- competent'- court- for a
          criminal offence and either convicted or acquitted -s-hail again be tried
          for that offence or for any other criminal of fence of. which he- cbuld - ‘
          have been convicted at the trial for that offence, save upon the order of
          , a superior court II the course of appeal or review -prodeedings' rel tin'g
          to the conviction q acqpi ttal”. . ‘ . ‘ ‘ ‘ , ,-‘, - , :
          E Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Raghts
          64. Constitutions,and.other laws- in most countries--refer'to their legal safeguatds
          against arbitrary arrest or detention. Some of-the,, lawt ‘provide for procedures:af
          a lawful arrest or detention of a person, embodying the institution of - ‘ - ‘
          habeas corpus , a means of judicial supervision to ensure the right to liberty and
          security of person. Under these laws the unlimited continuous detention of-a ‘
          suspected or accused person i,s, strictly prohibited. For:”example ohe constitiitibh'-
          provides that any person who is arrested or -detained and who-'.i's-not released, ‘ ‘
          shall be brought before a court as soon asia-reasonably practicable. It aOEo
          provides for the official notification of, detention in a gazette' within 14 day ,
          and the right of the detained to reqqest'a review of this detention by an-”-” ‘-‘
          independent and impartial tribunal. , , ‘ , ‘ : . - ,‘ 1 ‘ ‘ “
          65. Another constitution provides that “any , person who is arrested or -detained
          shall be informed as soon as is reasonably practicable, in a language that he -
          understands, of the reasons for his arrest or detention” .
        
          
          E/CN. 4/1984/29
          page 22
          66. In a number of countries, during a state of emergency the right to libekty
          and security of. persons may be limited and arbitrary arrest and detention may ‘be'
          authorized in so far as the circumstances of any sitUation existing during the :
          state-of emergency reasonably justifies such arrest and detention. In some cases
          constitutional guarantee of the right to liberty and-security of person is
          suspended by emergency legislation, orders, decrecs and IIstructions issued- by
          the executive. The mechanism for checking and controlling the t s of State
          powers originally envisaged in the constitution is rendered nominal. Arrest
          without a warrant and detention without charge and incommunicado for an extended
          period of time are legal under certain legislations. -
          67. Some legislations provide for the bail system under which persons awaiting
          trial may be. re-leased. The constitution of one country provides that “all -
          persons ,excep those charged with capital offences when evidence of guilt' is
          strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficieht' sureties. In this
          : , regard exceptions are found in cases of a certain category of crimes related to
          “ the security -pf State. , , .
          F. Article 3 of the' Code'of Conduct for Law Enforcement Offibials ‘ .
          68. Article 3 of the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials
          “Law enforcement officials may use force only when stri tly necessary
          and to theextent required for the performance of their duty”. .
          69. One Government states that detailed.-r'egulations concerning the use of : ‘
          firearms by the police has been enforced and that these regulations are kept
          within the scope of the notion of “self—defence”. All incidents in'which firearms
          have been used or where threats of the' use of force have been ‘mSe ‘must ‘be
          reported to.the,.natiortal'Cominissioner df Police.. ‘‘ ‘‘
          70. AnothertGoverriment states that the-policy of the successive governments of
          the country is that the police should not be generally armed and that they may
          need to be armed when it is known that they may have to face armed and dangerous
          criminals. It'also ‘statqs that it would be for a court of law to decide, in the
          “ event”ofd ath or injur y resulting from police use of firearms, whether reasonable
          force had been ,used in the circumstances to prevent crime ‘and ‘that any police ‘
          officer to whom.- firearm is issued is answerable personally in law S any other ‘
          private citizen would he for his action. ‘
          71. Another Government states that under certain laws enforced uponCthe' ‘ . ‘ ‘‘
          declaration by' the Government of certain ‘areas as “disturbed areas L;r th
          armed forces are empowered to use force, even to' the extent of causing ‘death , “
          against any person who is a,cting in contravention of'any law or drder' fdr-'the' ‘
          time :being in-force in the ‘dtsturbed area prohibiting the assenibly”of five or ‘
          more persons or tht carrying of weapons and-the like. It is also' sta ed,'that
          such force, can, however, be used only after giving due warning to the person ‘-
          concerned and only when it is considered necessary to do so for the maintenance
          of public order. A member of the'armed forces violating the legal provisions ‘
          in this connection may be prosecuted in a court of law.
        
          
          E/CN. 4/1934/29
          page 23
          I I. ANALYSIS OF SITUATIONS IN WHICH ARBITRARY AND SUMMARY EXECUTIONS USUALLY
          TAKE PLACE ‘ ‘
          . A. Situations . . ‘ . .
          72.. Despite much diversity frcm country to country, the followitig situations
          in which summary or arbitrary executions have taken place are common. .
          . 1. Political Upheavals . , . .‘ .
          2. Internal armed conflicts .
          3. Suppression of opposition groups or individuals . .
          .. 4. Abuse of power by agencies entrusted with law'enforcement . . . .
          . 5. Other situations. . ,
          73. These features may exist concurrently or in sequence in the' same country.
          74. Typical examples described in the following paragraphs wer.eselected from
          the it/formation in the possession of the Special Rapporteur in order to illustrate
          ., he, practice of summary or arbitrary executions in the context of real situations.
          , ‘ , . . ‘ ‘ 1. Political'upheavals ‘‘ . . .. ‘ ‘‘
          75. OE a number of countries mass executions have been carried out after violent
          changes of governments. Due to the institutional and legal vacuum immedi tely'.'
          following the fall of a regime, during the transition period, armed forces,
          revolutionary tribunals or even mass public rafries. a suIIe the role of imposing
          ‘!justice”. Many executions are carried out without any trial. Even when trials
          are held death sentences. are often delivered after brief or summary trials
          without any. procedures for safeguarding the rights of the accused, who are
          accorded no rights, and sentences are often delivered without any legal base.
          Many of the convicted are executed immediately or within an extremely short
          period of time after sentencing. OE many cases the convicted are givep no
          opportunities for appeal or review of the sentence or for pardon. Killings by
          or after torture in prison ordetention camps are also commonly reported.
          76. Those executed are people suspected of their collaboration with the enemy,'
          former.government officials, military officers, policemen, supporters and ‘
          associates of the former regimes, persons suspected of their opposition to the
          new regime and to the new government's policies. It is not unusual that family
          members and friends of those accused or executed, including women and children,'
          are also among the victims.
          77. Mass'exe utions are often justified by characterizing the victims as : , “
          traitors, foreign agents, counter—revolutionaries, enemies ‘of the ‘people, etc.' ‘‘
          OEe following, are typical examples. ‘ :‘
          Situation A ‘ ‘ ‘ . . .
          78. Having achieved independence after a long period of armed struggle against
          colonial rule, the country remains in a state of civil war with several political
          movements competing for power, each backed by a foreign power and foreign troops.
          Having achieved control of the greatest area of' the territory, one group establishes
          a government and adopts one _party rule. Some time after independence, the death
          penalty is introduced for the first time for offences against the security of the
          State.
        
          
          E/'CN ,4 ,'1984/29
          pane 24
          79. After an attempted coup within the rulin party, a speciji]. military tribunal
          is aet up td try those arPested for complicity in the attempted cou p . The:
          proceedings of the special military tribunal are conducted in sect4t and its
          verdicts and sentences are not tnnde public., It is not known what procedures
          the tribunal fcll' ws, nor is it known wh h r the defendants arc accorded basic
          defence rights, in addition to those tried by the tribunal, the exact number of
          who'II II not knbwn, a considerable number of peopl have been exeduted without
          any trial. :
          80. Suspected members and supporters of the armed opposition grou have allegedly
          been killed in detention centres or prisons on the orders of security forces.
          SituatIon B .
          31. Since the military administration council took power and abolished a feudal
          system of gover nment IIich had been” in xistence for many iears, a large number
          : of executions and killings have occurred in the turbulent political situation.
          P. special penal code was proclaimed and special military tribunals were set up.
          The tribunals were empowered to impose the death penalty on civilians without ,:
          providingad quate safegu rds for a tair tial. A fS years later, what was
          termed “revolutionary justice” took oyer. Executions are carried out after brief
          trials held by communal leaders or w t hout any form of trial.
          : 82. The victims include meIIbers of ti e' ruling family, former official , military
          officers, members of opposition and riyal factions within the post_revolutionary
          guverament and ordinary citizc ns-su p cted o holding opinions and conducting
          activities against the Government. . 1, .
          Sit iation C : 1 : .‘ , . . . . .
          83. Soon after the fall of the re im Y a large ‘nurnb' r of executions began to
          trke place. OEos executed were former overnMent officials, militarY and
          security police nersonnel and sunporters of the former regime Later the victims
          included opponents of the nc regime and .ts policies, as well those suspected
          of certain offenc..s, such as drug traffi. ing, sexual and mr ral offences, and
          of being nemb rs of etnnlc anc religious ninorities. Executions are carried out
          w thout any trial, and those tried by the ravoluttonary tribunals are not
          accorded nrocodur'l safeguarca OE a large number of cas .s, arrested persons
          are held incdmmunicado; charges arc not communicated to ‘the accused md accSs
          : to legal counsel is denied. Torture is common. In a number of. instances, ,
          trials are extr muly brief or' held in camera and executions a -e. arried put .
          immediately after sentencing. The victiIIs include a consider'abl ' ;n ber of , . .
          minoi's'.' . “ ‘ : , ‘ ‘ , ‘ , “
          Situaticr 4 D ‘ ‘‘ ‘ .
          84. ifis soon as the revolutionary forces took power, the new government began .
          •sxecuting former government bffibials and'military personnel; this has been . .
          followed by systematic executions of large number of e sons who were suepoctdd
          of their association with the former administration; opposition to the new
          government and disobedience regarding the new government's policies. OEose . .
          executed include intellectuals, teachers and parsons with secondary or higher” ‘
          education. Besides the killing of political and social groups, a large number
          of individuals have bean executed for minor infringements of work discipline and
          disobedience of official instructions. Several persons have been executed for
          shirking work. Within the ruling, group, officers, soldiers and their families
          have been executed because of political differences ‘ . ‘
        
          
          E/DN. 4/1984/29
          rage 25
          Situation E .
          85. During the rule of the fbrmer government, the country uxpbrianced a complete
          breakdown of the rule of law and the destruction of institutions guaranteeing
          the most, basic civil and political rights. Even after the fall of the former
          government disturbances continued. Both the-government forces and armed
          opposition groups reportedly killed unarmed civilians. People fleeing both
          guerrillas and army soldiers flocked into army camps f or fear of being killed , . ,
          in the countryside which has become a de facto “free fir&' zone. Anyone caught
          by soldiers outside the camps is considered a guerrilla and shot in an
          indiscriminate manner. In response to allegations of mass-killings by the
          armed, forces, the government denies that there are executions by the army, and'
          states that- killings are being carried out- by guerrillas wearing st6len army
          uniforms.. . : , - , . . ‘ . . . -
          Situation F - . - -- . : . : -
          86 After. many-years of internal armed struggle, the revolutionary group took
          the power.. . All -officers of the-former government's armed forces and police were
          sent to special camps- with the avowed purpose of (political) re—education. It
          is alleged that a number of- people who continued to oppose the new regime have
          been charged with:”plotting to overthrow .the.revolution-ary government” by
          : organizing opposition. L i one case several persons who origiri lly -received - ‘
          sentences of life imprisonment have been condemned to death after a-eecond trial
          conducted by the same court as heard the --original -trial. The econd trial was
          brief and held in camera and defence witnesses were not allowed.
          2. Internal armed conflicts
          87. A large number of people have been killed -in countries where there has been
          internal armed conflict. Killings have been car ried out by both government as
          well as ooposition forces. Indiscriminate killings of non—combatant civilians
          have often been carried out by governmantforces in-the areas where guerrillas
          are active. In a nujnbar of countries intensive counter. guerrilIa operations
          , “-s have been carried out using -the strategy df emptying such areas of the entire
          cIvilian population in order to eliminate any possible suppot't for the guerrillas,'
          and o ten indiscriminate killings have occurred, involving entire village- -
          populations including wom in ahd ch.ldrcn. Villagers have also been abducted and
          killed by “death squads” under military control , Torture and mutilation have
          been routinely practised. OE some cases, people trying to flee the areas of
          armed conflict or who rsached refuges camps in neighbouring countries have been
          indiscriminately attacked by government forces and many of them have been killed. -
          Often it.is claimed that those villages and refuges camps were infiltrated by
          guerrilla forces and that death occurred in armed clashes between government
          troops and guerrilla forces. - - . - - - - -
          88. In.a number -of countries a state of siege or a stats of emergency has been
          imposed and constitutional guarantees- for human rights are ‘suspended or severely
          curtailed. In some other countries heavy security measures are enforced and
          arbitrary arrest and detention of those suspected of their involvement .- - - —
          with guerrilla movements result in frequent executions of detainees.
          Situation A - - - - - .
          89, Since a coup db6tat which deposed the head of State, there has been a aivil :
          war between the armed forces of the new president and those loyal to the former
        
          
          E/CN.4/1984/29
          page 26
          president. Allegations of indiscriminate killings of civilians -and captured
          persons have been made by both sides. Government troops are reported to hav'II
          tortured and killed civilians in-areas far from battle zones. Several killings
          have, been carried out in reprisal for armed attacks upon government forces or
          officials. Those civilians regarded as actual or potential opponents to the new
          president have been summarily or arbitrarily e cecuted. :
          Situation B .
          90. OE the situation of a widespread armed conflict between government forces and
          opposition groups, tens of thousands of non—combatants have been killed by ‘
          government forces or , “death squads” which had government support, if not approval.
          Traditionally the country has been dominated by the military who subjected it to
          a series of coups dr&tat. After the most recent successful coup , a state of
          siege was imposed and martial law was declared. The military control the
          executive and legislative powers and ruled by decrees which have the force of.
          law, often eliminating the safeguards to protect basic human rights. The judiciary
          is subordinated in practice to the regime and its policies. Those regarded as
          opponents of the regime. have been assassinated by “death squads”. OEe victims
          include trade—unionists, political party members, university staff, students,. .
          human rights activists and church people. The government occasionally admits
          the involvement of security or armed forces personnel in the killings, but .
          maintains that such killings are committed by personnel exceeding their authority.
          However no action seems to have been taken against those officials who exceeded
          their authority and in fact some of them have received promotion. . - :
          Situation C
          91. Armed guerrilla movements hav been activein areas where poverty and
          illiteracy are prevalent. The military, supported by a small group of the .
          country's privileged who control politics and the economy, have led counter— :
          insurgency campaigns for over a decade.. Most of the deaths and disappearances
          occurring during this period have been attributed to government forces or
          semi—official paramilitary groups.. . OEe- victims were mostly peasants in areas
          where guerrillas operated, but students, lawyers; university teachers, journalists
          and opposition politicians were also included. Constitutional provisions :
          prohibiting torture and instituting a form of habeas corpus are not implemented.
          The judges are rendered powerless. .
          Situation D
          , 92. Armed conflicts between the occupying forces and the members of a liberation
          movement conducting guerrilla warfare have been intense for an extended period
          of time. Civilians-including women, children and old persons are the victims
          of indiscriminate killing during raids by the occupying forces on villages, ,:
          communities and refugee camps, which the military authorities claim to be used
          by the guerrillas as support bases. Detention-without charge and incommunicado
          for a prolonged period has often led to the death of detainees.
          Situation E , .
          93. As guerrilla movements have become increasingly active in several areas of
          the country, killing a large number of village peasants for their suspected
          co—operation with the government, the security forces have carried out massive
          counter inzurgency operations. The areas in which guerrillas are active are
          designated as emergency zones and put under military rule. Those killed in the
          counter—insurgency operations are described as guerrillas in official accounts,
        
          
          E/CN. 4/1984/29
          page 27
          but i t is alleged that in the remote areas of the emergency zone the security
          forces have carried out large scale, sometimds -randorn killings of members of
          local communities suspected of having supported guerrillas. Killings have also
          been carried out by “community patrols' which consist of community m embers under
          the direction of the regional military authorities which rule the area.-
          Situation F
          94. The state f: emergency has been repeatedly extended with the avowed, purpose of
          eliminating armed dissident activities in a certain area of the country and many
          killings by government soldiers have been reported. According to the government,
          most of these killings were carried out by dissidents in stolen army uniforms
          with the puroosa of fomenting rebellion *
          3. Suppression of opposition groups or individuals
          ‘95. Illegal killings of opponents and suspected opponents to governments have
          been carried out in a large number of countries, either ‘Mith or without legal
          proceedings in areas where there' is no armed conflict. ‘-: --
          96. In a number of countries individuals are killed in order to eliminate
          movements opoosed to the regime. The victims are from a wide variety of
          professional backgrounds and include trade- unionists, as well as people who are
          simply suspected of opposition to the regime. - OEey are assassinated in the
          streets, or abducted and made to disappear and are often found dead later showing
          signs of torture. These killings are allegedly carried out by the military, -
          security forces, police or paramilitary groups with the sanction of the authorities.
          Although in some cases governments have admitted the involvement of security
          forces or armed forces personnel in such killings, it is explained that the deaths'
          occurred during a ‘choot—out” with government forces- or- police. In other cases
          these killings are attributed to independent ‘kicath sqi1ads ' which the government - -
          claims, operate outside its control. However, no action appears to have been
          taken by governments against such death squads '. : -
          97. OE some situations a large numbar of executions follow attempted coups.
          Those suspected of their involvement in such ttempts are executed often secretly
          and without- trial. In some situations it is alleged that charges of attempted
          ‘ 2 coups” are apparantly made in ordcz- to justify the- elinjination of the target
          groups or individuals-. In a number of countries, people-are executed, often - :
          without trial, only for their m mbersh-ip in certain: raflgious: cts or ethnic
          groups which are rivals of the ruling sects :or -groups . - - - - - -
          98. There are frequent attacks by-armed- forces, security forces or police on
          peaceful demonstrations, political gath rihgs and workers - and students on strike,
          causing a large number of deaths by-'shootin , bayonetting or clubbing. Under
          states of siege or heavy security measures the armed forces and police have
          been given- extended powers and made immune from prosecution. - -
          99. The independence of the judiciary has often been seriously undermined,
          Froquenti.v. trials have been carried out without any guarantee of safeguards to
          protect the rights of the accused. Executions have taken place often immediately
          after sentencing, el mtnat nn, any possibility or chance of appeal, even ‘when the
          right of appeal is granted by the law. In a large number of cases, a confession,
          often extracted under torturc is the only evidence that leads to the death :
          penalty. Prr ,st without warrant and extended detention incommunicado without :
          charge is institutionalized in several instances and this often leads to deaths
          in detention.
        
          
          E/CN, 4/1984/29
          page 28
          100. In some countries prisoners are intentionally deprived of food nd water or
          medical attention, often after being tortured, and left to die. In some .
          instances opponents and critics of governments are assassinated even outside the
          countries cohcerned.
          Situation A
          101. Under the continuous imposition of the state of siege the military took poweP
          by a coup d tat. During this period the armed forces killed a' large number bf' :
          opponents or presumed opponents of the military government as part of the 0 war “
          against subversion”. Most of these killings occurred after the victims “disappeared”
          The bodies were found showing signs of torture. OEe practice of “disappearances”
          . “ was attributed to the police, security forces or in some cases armed squads claiming
          public authority. The victims wers often taken from their' houses at night by man
          who identified themselves as agents of the police or armed forces. Many of the
          victims were takII to secret camps of ‘the armed forces or police, and the majority,
          were never seen again. Others were killed as they were being abducted. A'
          considerable number of corpse have subsequently been found in unmarked graves.
          Situation B , ‘ ‘
          102. IIImediately following th coup d'&at which toppled a constitutionally
          instituted government, a large number of people were repo tcdly executed within
          a period of a' few months. In subsequent years, political activists, trade—
          unionists, student's, intellectuals and peasants have been killed or rnade to
          ‘ disanpear after being arrested by the security forces or police. Deaths during
          detention by the security forces and in incidents officially described as
          “confrontations” with members of the security forces are frequently reported.' A
          number of psrsons have allegedly been killed by secret organizations reported to
          hav consisted of members of the security forces. , ,‘ :
          ‘ ) Situation C ‘ ‘
          103. A iar a- number ‘of peopl h e''allegedly been ‘executed every iarY ‘DSths by
          torture are aise regularly reported. The victims are jnambet s of ethnic and'
          religious minorities, members of political organizations and ‘those suspected of
          Opposing the government and its policies. Minors are also included among the ,
          victims. Most of those executed are sentenced to death by permanent or temporary,
          special courts for offencas of a' pdlitical nature. The procedures of ‘tha special
          courts do not provide legal safegu irds for the rights of the accused ‘and for
          a fair trial. The independence of the courts is non—existent, the right of
          defence is severely restrtcted and thtre is no right of apoeal. OEe law i s
          int'ei retud according to the political principles of the ruling party'' ' ' Under
          the penal cdde the death penalty can be imposed for a wide range of criminal
          and political offences. A large number of crimes against the internal s ecurity
          and external security of the State are listed in the code, even including the
          crime of being a member of a particular religious or ethnic organization. .
          Situation D ‘
          104. In the continuing campaign to limjnate dissidents, a dcclaratjon has been
          issued, calling f or the doath of enemies of the revolution living abroad, and
          of counter—revolutionary elements within th country. Since then a nusber of
          citizens living abroad have been killed or wounded in assassination attempts. ‘
          Also in the months following the declaration a number of persons in exile were ‘
          sentenced to death in their absence by a revolutionary tribunal. There are also
        
          
          E/Ci . 4/1984/29
          page 29
          reports of deaths in detention of former members of a banned political party,
          students, lawy2rs, teachers and writers. OE some cases the deaths have been
          described as suxctde.
          Situation E
          105. Since its independence the country has been ruled by a life president.
          Persons opposing or perceived to be opposing the president are assassinated
          in exile, found shot dead or abducted from outside the country to be tried and
          convicted of treason by a special court, the procedures of which do not embody
          safeguards for the rights of the accused. The victims include cabinet ministers
          and opposition leaders.
          Situation F
          oe 106. OE a situation of active opposition, martial law was imposed. Under
          martial law, the president of the country was given exIInsive nowers and human
          rights guaranteed by the constitution were suspended by presidential decrees and
          other administrative orders. Even after the lifting of martial law, habeas corpus
          remains suspended in certain regions and with respect to persons detained for
          crimes related to the security of the State. The armed fbrces and police are
          empowered to arrest without a warrant and, if need be, to detain persons suspected
          of rebellion or subversion and related crimes. A large number of killings by
          government troops and security forces has occurred mainly in areas where
          opposition groups are active. A number of victims have been found dead after
          they were arrested by military personnel or security agents. OtherII&mply
          disappeared and were later found dead. , . . .
          SituationG , . ‘‘‘ :
          107. Under the official policy of racial discrimination, security laws are applied
          to suppress the majority who belong to a different'Scial group. Several detainees
          held under these security laws have died. In all cases the detainees were
          allegedly tortured during interrogation by the police before they died. By law,
          ““ indefinite detention without trial is authorized for' both State witnesses and
          suspected offenders. OEe security police is also empowered to withhold all
          information about the detainees. ‘ ‘
          Situation H ‘ ‘
          108. After a small group of non commissioned officers took power by a coup d' tat
          a state of emergency was imposed and the constitution was suspended. Soon after
          an attempted coup d'&tat, the military authorities declared a state of war under,
          which the army was authorized to conduct a field court martial and to carry put
          the death penalty. Faced with general strikes, demonstrations and demahd ,, ‘
          calling f or elections and a return to democracy, the government arrest d ‘a number
          of leading figures in the ‘country, without any legal basis br proceedings.
          Thcse persons were killed while in detention. Thu victims were trade—unionists,'
          lawyers, journalists, businessIIen, university professors and army officers. An
          official explanation stated that they were killed while trying ,to escape.
          Situation I ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘
          109. Under the state of emergency all constitutional guarantees of the basic
          rights of the individual were suspended and the Minister of the Interior held
          extraordj y powers of arrest and detention. In response to lncrcasing
        
          
          E/CN. 4/1984/29
          D g 30
          opposition activities by various groups, the security forces hays carried out
          mass ki'ilihgs and executions of the opponents to the government. Trials by
          military courts are summary, denying the right of defence and the right of appeal.
          Torture is commonly employed before the prisoners are executed. Members of
          a religious dissident group are reportedly killed in detention. OE one incident
          a large number of inhabitants of a town were shot dead collectively for their
          suspected IIvolvcment with th• religious movement. A considerable number of
          individuals were assassinated allegedly for their opposition to the government.
          The victims included doctors, engineers, lawyers, dissident religious leadars
          and journalists.
          Situation 3
          110. Over an extended period of time a considerable number of people died in
          detention or were killed in an arbitrary manner by the security forces. Plthough
          under the code of crimin l. procedure arrested persons should be referred to th ‘ .
          public prosecutor's office within 48 hours of arrest, in practice civilian and
          military sed irity services carry out arrests and detain suspects incommunicado
          i definitely without charge and without reference to the judiciary. Death
          sentences are imposed on those charged with alleged opposition to the regime.
          Trials held by the state security court or council of war are carried out in
          a sUmmary manner without adequate means of defence, the right of appeal and other
          procedural ‘safeguards for a fair trial. L i some cases executions are carried
          out when cases are still at the appeal stage. Death s ntences in absentia and
          secret executions are also reported. . , .. .
          111. Deaths in detention are attributed to the use of arbitrary or excessive
          force by the security forces. A number of prisoners also died due to lack of ,
          food and adequate medical care.
          . : 4• Abuse of power by agencies entrusted with law enforcement , ,
          112. In a number of situations, killings have been carried out by police and ‘
          ‘ security forces as a result of their abuse of power and in the absence of . . .
          governmehtal sanction or order. Ladividuals are killed and prisoners or detainees
          ill—treat d, in some cases on the orders of low levels of command, or in other
          cases by law enforcement agents or soldiers without any order.
          113. Killings have often occurred to suppress local popular movements at the ‘
          request of' privileged sectors of the population. The victims in many cases are
          peasants, ldcal social activists, trade—unionists, community organizers, lawyers
          or politicians. Tney are killed in many cases after arrest by the police or
          security forces, but are officially announced as having been killed in armed
          confrontations. Unrestrained ill..treatment of detainees by law enforcement
          officers has often resul ad n death in detention. The deaths have been explained
          by the authorities as suicide, or having been shot whfle atterapting to escape,
          or simply as “mysterious killings”. , . ,
          114. Even though investigation by both governmental and independent commissions
          have been itiitiated in a fe i cases, remedial measures or punjshm nt of th .,
          officers responsible are rarely enforced. The existence of s curity laws givihg
          law enforc ment agencies extended powers of arrest and detention, or to fire
          upon suspected persons without warning, contribute to the unchecked abuse of
          power. ‘‘
        
          
          E/CN. 4/1984/29
          page 31
          Situation P . .
          115. A large number of killings are reported in connection with land conflicts
          between small farmers and large landowners, private ent erprisS, ‘real estate
          brokers as. uell as public organizations. •Some of the killings are attributed
          to the police force and others to hired professional assassins. A number of
          deaths are allegedly the result of torture by the olics or others with police
          permis$iOfl or encouragement. It is also alleged that the police took action on
          the request of large landowners, outside legal procedures. lo judicial action
          is known to have been taken to stop these abuses of power. The victims are
          farmers, laaders of rural workers, union leaders, lawyers who are assisting
          farmers and rural workers.
          Situation B , . . . .
          116. A large number of killings by the police were reported from several areas.of
          the country. The rise in deaths coincided with the beg nningof an active
          political movement... L i response to this movement, strong measures were taken ‘ . .
          in a number of regions. Under a special legal authority, thepolice hold
          extended powers to arrest or fire upon suspects without verification or control.,
          OEe victims include both persons suspected of belonging to opposition movements
          and social activists. It is alleged that the victims are killed by the police
          after arrest and often after having been tortured, According to an official
          account, these deaths in police custody are due to accidents, suicide, being
          shot while attempting to escape or in armed confrontation with the police.
          . 5.. Other situations
          117. Li a number of countries during campaigns against crime, harsh'measures
          hav , been taken against those accused or suspected of criminal offences.
          Capital punishment has been extended to a large number of crimes which were
          formerly punishable by less severe sentences. Trials have often been held with
          summary procedures and in some cases military courts were used in trying
          civilians.
          uS. Li several countries killings have been ordered by tha head of State for
          no apparent serious reason at all. In one country, lawlessness and
          lack of discipline in the army caused the execution of civilians by soldiers
          for personal or material motives.
          Situation A
          119. A large number of people were executed after being convicted of murder,
          rape, robbery, drug trafficking, embezzlement, espionage, smuggling of art
          treasures, etc. OEese executions are a part of a campaign against crime. Li
          order to try criminals swiftly the law of criminal procedure has been amended
          and safeguards ensuring a fair trial revoked or abridged. Under these amendments
          the courts can bring defendants to trial without informing them of the charges
          against them and without notifying the defence counsel. OEc maximum time .limit
          for appeal was shortened, in the case of trials of criminals involved in serious
          crimes and other activities that ‘seriously threaten public safety” and “if the
          facts of the crime arc clear, the evidence is conclusive t.
          Situation B
          120. Under rule by the military regime, an increasing number of civilians are
          tried and sentenced to death by military courts. The provisional constitution
        
          
          E/CN .4/ 1984/29
          page 32
          order has bean enacted annulling the Constitution and its guarantees for basic
          rights of the individual, and doing away with the independence of tne judiciary
          by rcquir ng judgos to take an oath barring tno highest courts from scruttnizing
          any action taken by tb& miliIIry authodti&s br from raviewing military court
          proc . edings
          Situation C . : . . . .
          121. In a campaign to eliminate criminals, a large numb r of criminal susp .cts
          have been killed aflag&dly by the .s. durit ? C& es arid t ith sovernment approval.
          The killings were carried out by “hit squads” drawn from an army unit, without
          any judicial process to determine the guilt of the suspects. A number of vIItims
          were abducted first and their bodies were afterwards found lying in the ‘streets,
          thrown into the rivor..or left in remote areas. It is . alleged that on a number
          of occasions high government officials and army leadeiship have ednittac the
          involvt t.nt of the security forces and apj- 'oved the killings as a drastic
          solution to the growing crime pr Qoic in the country. I I official explanation
          attributes those dnths to unknown or mysterious causes.
          Situation D ‘
          122. OE recent years an increasing number of death penelties have bacu imposed
          on persons accused of se urity primes or drug offencei OEials have been held
          with special p'i'ocedureS that d prive the defendant in security cases of basic
          legal safeguards. OEe government has announced its intention of imposing the
          death penalty on persons found posses i ,ng fii earms, ammunition and explosives
          in an area declared as a “security area”. . . .
          . . . ,
          , ‘ . .— . ‘
        
          
          page 53
          B. Common factors :
          125. In examining the background of situations in which summdry or arbitrary
          executions take place, a number ‘of characteristic elements may •b.e identified
          as factors likely to foIIent conditions for th occurrence.of summary or arbitrary
          executions Those factors could b i d vided into (1.' c lvi i and political factors
          and (2) economic and social factors.
          1 Civil and political factors
          (a) Absence of a democratic political process - .
          124. In a con iiJderab1e number of situations arbitrary or summary executions have
          resulted from the absence of a democratic political process; it either did not
          exist or was seriously onstructed despite formal constitutional guarantees In
          OE such situations there Was little room for political opposition groups to voice
          their opinions freely and influence tne Government and its pol_cies legall3'.
          In other situations, where only a limited depree of political freedom ensted
          and opposition to the Gb 'nment and its policies was tightly checlIId, excesses.
          have also been c6mmitted.'
          125. In many situations arbitrary or summary executions followed a'transfertt-
          power by violent means, such as a coup d'4tat, and by assa s nation of those4n
          power. In not a few cases the military took power by a coup' d4tat, abolished
          the democratic political process, suspended the basic human rights guaranteeci
          in the ConstiIItion and remained in power until they decided to hand it over , to
          civilians or until another coup a'etat remo' .ed them from office, during this
          period, they clamped down heavily on vulnerable sectors of the popul8tion.
          126. In some situations the rulers have remained in powor from the independ nce
          of the country or since they were initially chosen ny peaceful means as IIe political
          leaders of the country, becoming increasingly oppre. ive and dictatorial with
          time . Opposition against their r gimes and any attempts to seek transfer of power.
          have been systematically suppressed Under these coneitions institutions, whether
          ) political, legal or judicial, which could normally be expected to check and control
          political powc-rand its likely abuse ceased to function. The legislative and
          judiciary branches were simply subjected to the wishes of the executive branch.
          Ct) Existence of special security measures, such as statos of siege, states of
          emergency and secuc ty legislattons
          127. SummIIry ai'bitrary executions have frequently followed various l ixd of
          security measures taken, with Governments seeking control o-,cr situations such
          58 internal aSed cdnflicts, opposition movements against the r4girno and'.political
          disturbances A state of siege and/or a btatu of emergency have often been
          declared-and (though-in a few situaticus whe.re they w e originally justified)
          maintained ‘f6Z an extended period even after the original circumstances no longer
          applied. In a number of countries, laws embodying security measures have be n
          enacted and in some others, the security measures have been enforced by decrees
          issued by the executive. .
          128. Those security measures usually suspend a substantial numbe.r.of tha basic
          human rights guaranteed by the Constitution Oi' other laws and give extraordinary
          powers of arr st and detention to the executive, indluding military and law
          enforcement agencies. Abuses of power and ‘serious violations of human ri&hts
          by the Governmeht could therefore not be properly eheck d. t drits of habeas corpus
        
          
          E/CN.4/1984/29
          pap,e 4
          were not implemented. Security measures often authorized the police, armed forces
          or security forces to arrest “suspected' persons and detain them indefinitely
          without charge or incommunicado for interrovation. Control by the judiciary or
          other ind pendent bodies over such detentidn was nominal or simply non—existent.
          Law enforcement agents are often authorized to shoot a person trying to “escape”
          arrest or detention, with immunity from prosecution. In one instance a public
          security decree' authorized the police, with the approval of government authorIties,
          to bury dead bodies in secret without any inquest or post- mortem examination.
          This decree applied to the burying of any dead body, including persons who died
          in custody. .
          129. In a number of situations security laws also amended the criminal code and
          rules of criminal court procedures, introducing the death penalty for a large
          number of offenoes, some of which carried a mandatory death penalty. Special
          ourt pi ocedures were introduced for trials of “security cases”, depriving
          lefendants of basic legal safeguards for a fair trial. In one situation, undsr
          the speciaf regulations of procedure for security cases, evidence could be heard
          from witnesses whose identity need not be revealed to the defendant. Hearsay
          and secondary documentary evidence, as wail as the uncorroborrated confession
          of accomplicds could be admitted. The burden of proof was on the defence.
          (c' Existence of special courts and tribunals
          130. In a considerable number of situations special courts and tribunals, such
          as revolutionary courts and security tribunals, were set up outside the normal
          judicial system of the country. In a number of situations themilitarY courts
          also tried civilians outside the control of the judiciary , Such. special courts
          and tribunals wera empowered to try “political”, 1 tsecurityT or “anti—revolutionary”
          offenders, and in most cases, they were not bound to follow the established ! , ,
          procedures of the ordinary courts. The safeguards for a fair trial have often
          been ignored by these special courts and the right of defence has been extremely
          limited. In some cases legal representation was not allowed in the special court,..
          In other cases accused persons were not informed of their charges until the opening,
          trials, allowing no adequate preparation for defence, Cross—examinatic'n.of .
          >roeecution uitnesses was also not allow d. Evidence presented by the
          prosecutibn could often nbt be contested: The right II' appeal to a higher court
          was frequently denied. The judges of the courts and tribunals were not
          necessarily independent persons with legal backgrounds but often military
          personnel. . The courts and tribunals were controlled by and answerable to the
          executive or the military. I n some situations pecial courta.were set up on an
          ad hoc basis by decision of the government orTthe ,mi1itar .. Trials wcre often
          held in camera and sentencing was often not the result of apolication of the law,
          but was dictated by political exigencies. Capital ‘puhishment was made mandatory
          for a iai'ge nSber of offenccs by decrees issued by the xecutive power which
          were applied retroactively. The offences for which the death penalty was made
          applicabl by the special courts were murder, terrdrism, sabotage, treason, other
          “security crimes” and, in some countri ‘moral nd 4conoIIic Simes. Executions
          were often carried o ut immediately or shortly after sentending.
          (d) Control of th 'judiclary by the executive or ifltsrv cower :
          131. In a considcrabl number of situations the independence of the court has
          been seVerely curtaiifid or non -txistent, often in contradiction to the
          constitutional guaranteS for the independence of the judiciary. Conviction and' '
          sentencing was often influenced or pr d t rrnined' 'by the executive. The staIIs
          of jud es is controlled directly by the executive. In a number of instances ordinary
        
          
          E/CN. 4/1984/29
          page 35
          courts have been deprived of jurisdiction over certain categories of cases without
          any legal justification. Those cases were tried by the military courts or special
          courts. In some situations, judges were intimidated to make decisions favourable
          to the executive or were, by nature of their appointments and tenure, for exampOE,
          inclined to make decisions which conformed to the wishes of the executive.
          (e) Existence of secret police, security forces and paramilitary groups outside -
          the normal law enforcement apparatus :
          132. In a considerable number of countries :special units of armed forces, secret
          police security forces have existed, actihg outside ordinary legal procedures
          under the supervision of the authorities or with their approval or connIvance.
          In a number of situations, paramilitary groups of civilians, police and armed -
          forces personnel, sometimes called “death squads”, have operated in a similar
          manner. -Those special units or forces hav carried- out arrests and detention
          oe and in many cases have killed suspects without any of the legal formalities required
          by law and without reference to the judiciary. Their activtties in most cases
          have bden -kept secret and outside the control of the judiciary. Information on
          arrests- or detentibn is -not communicated even to the families of the arrested or -
          detained. - . - -
          (F) Absence of discipline among law enforcement agents or -
          - military personnel - - ,
          133. InTa number' of situatiohs police or military personnel have arbitrarily-or -
          disproportionately- used force against individuals or groups of individuals without -
          being- punished --for their-acts. Often no investigation has been carried out on such:
          wrongdoings -or misconduct. A code- of conduct for such -parsonnel often did not - -
          exist or was ignbred. Where it existed, the training of personnel did not pay due- -
          attention to the rights of those suspected, arrested or detained.
          134. In some countries corruption penetrated law enforcement and-military
          institutions and police or military actions were frequently taken in favour of
          the interests of certain indiViduals, groups, social classes or organizations upoh
          their request. - - - - . -
          -- 2. Economic and social factors
          (a) Inequitable distribution of wealth .
          135. In a number of situations only a few landowners have traditionally controlled
          most of the country's wealth and the vast majority of the population has lived in
          extreme poverty. In one case 8o per cent of the agricultural land was held by
          2 per cent of the owners. OEe fertile farmlands were held by such wealthy owners,
          producing export crops while the mass of the rural poor pursued subsistence- - . -
          farming on uneconomic plots with poor soil. Many of the inipoverished farmers
          and peasants, often illiterate, were force-d to leave their lands- with or without
          nominal compensation by the government, large landowners, or enterprises, and
          became farm workers or slum dwellers in cities without stable means to support-
          their families. Social movements for the rural and the urban poor have led to
          conflicts between the poor and the rich, between the underprivileged and the
          Privileged. Governments, often representing the interests of the privileged, have
          Utilized the police force or private groups of individuals to suppress those
          movements. In some situations security forces and paramilitary groups, at the
          request of large landowners, have arbitrarily adopted violent means to expel
          People from their land, carried out arbitrary arrests, and destroyed the houses
          of small farmers who were involved in land disputes.
        
          
          E/CN, 4/1984/29
          page 36
          136. In the cities the majority of the populatioi, lived .h extreme poverty in
          shax p contrast to the small minority who were ridh. OE& government often took
          action against leaders of community movements in aiunII accusing them df
          0 subversjve activities”. . .
          137. This inequitable distribution of wealth is often along ethnic, tribal, racial
          or even religious lines. Those who hold power re often in turn a minority of these
          groups who identify their survival and economic 'and social progress with “IIe .:
          holding of power to the exclusion of other groups. Political power is used not only
          to en ble them to have access to the nation s i1th but also to deny other ‘
          groups their due share nd to supprdss them when they want to assert their rights.
          (b) Ethnic conflicts . ‘ : ‘
          138. In attrniber of countries ‘certain ethnic grotfpz were ubjected to diIIdrirnintion
          and violent attacks by the ethnic groups which held power in the government. In
          some countri s, respondang to secessionist movements or terrorist attacks by the
          ethni'd' nfihIIit members,' the government took harsh SaSiires against th ethnid
          minority s a whole. Tension between different ethnic groups, intehsified ‘by” '
          other conflicting factors of an economic and social nature, often lead to incid nt'
          of communal violence which causes deaths on a wide scale. , . . ; . .. .
          139. These situations can at times be exacerbated and a satua.tion may arisein which
          an ethnic, tribal, racial or religious group feels that its su”vival is'der endent
          on having an independent State of its own or a State within a federal struoture
          where it can maPage its own affairs. This is in most casbs unacceptable to the
          government in ‘pb ie'E. ‘ Ihstead of dealing sensitiv ly an T d 1 positively with genizix ”
          grievances and trying to eliminate or alleviate the ‘rodt causes, the governmSht '
          chodses the alternative of suppression, ‘ihict in turn,' l ”ads to violence on bbII
          sides and consequent misery. ‘ ‘ : : .‘
          (c) Relagaous intolerance
          140. In a number”of situations, members of certain religibus grdiips hfle'been ‘:‘
          ‘ discriminated against, ostracized or charged as criminals. Members of those: :
          religious groups have often been accused of crimes, such as treason, espionage
          and assistance to the enemy.. In some instances, where a government has adopted
          a certain religion as its official doctrine, it has often forced members of other
          religious groups to recant their faith, failing which they have, been impriscniS, .:.
          executed or otherwise discriminated against in the political and economic life, of
          th na't1on” '' : ‘ , ‘ ‘ : ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘
          Cd) Racial discrimination ‘ “ ‘ . . . ‘ “ .
          141. In sos countries members df certain ‘ ‘acial groups have b eii systtmatida'Ily .
          and ruthlessly discrirnin t'ed against by the overnrnen't” which represented' anbth r ‘
          raciSl group. As rotes'ts against the discrimination were intcnsified,' th'II : “ ‘‘
          government took harsh and often violent measures ag ihst the groups and in''div duals'
          who were simply asserting and exercising their rights as human beings.
        
          
          E,CN. 4/1984/29
          rage 37
          III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
          142. Developments since the submission of the last report have continued to
          bear out the factual trends described therein, namely that the practice of
          summary or arbitrary executions is still a widespread phenomenon in the
          contemporary international community and that respect for the right to life is
          far from being a universal reality. For the year 1983, the Special Rapporteur
          received reports of alleged summary or arbitrary executions involving thousands
          of persons, even if those who died as a result of anti—guerrilla or counter—
          insurgency measures that were not executed in accardance with international
          conventions are excluded. - : :
          143. The review of national legislation as analysed in chapter I above, although
          not exhaustive, shows a dichotomy between the constitutional and legislative
          1 %bviSions which safeguard the right to life; on the one hand', and the actual -
          - OE practice of Statas in which it is alleged summai'y er arbitrary executions are - -
          committed on the other. Whereas in some cases the national legislations are in -
          conflict with the International covenants and thus create or permit a situatiort
          in which summary or arbitrary executions ‘can take place, in other cases, summary
          or arbitrary executions have in fact taken place despite safeguards of the right -
          to life being meticulously stipulated in natibnal legislations in conformity with
          the, International Covenants. OEls applieiparticulariy to those: ituations which
          are characterized as states of emergency, whether officially declared or not.
          144. OEe information reviewed in chapterti shows that the situations in which
          summary or arbitrary executions-occur are complex and involve multiple factors.
          In several instances, abuses of the right to life through bjtrary or summary
          executions are compounded by economic and social factors in addition to civil
          and political factors. OEe information set oi t in chapter II above illustrates
          the types of situations in which a combinati6n 6f thbse factors can lead, and
          indeed has contributed, to the spread of theT henoIIehbn of arbitrary or summary
          exe&ztionS. , ‘ - ‘ t' - ,
          145. The Special Rapporteur has noted that the violation of the right to life
          through summary ‘or az bitrary executions is the responsibflit : of State authorities
          or agencf s in s yeral-'ihstances. ‘However, the information beion'the Special -
          Rapporteur also indidate's ‘that non—respect' of the right' to life can be attributedt
          to groups other than governments or quasi—governmental agencies.
          146. The Human Rights Committee ‘ I I ts retort' to the thirty—sixth session of ‘‘
          the United Nations General Assembly it rightly emphasized the importance of the
          right to life even in times of emergency by ‘stating;
          ‘ , : C'' “OEe committee holds the view that m a ures taken under article 4
          (of the International Covenant on Civil-and Political Rights) are of an
          ‘ excdj ti6nal and temporary nature and may only last as long as the life
          ‘ of' the -nation concerned is threatened and that in times of emergency,
          the ‘p'rot'ectfon of human rights becomes all the mok'e important particularly
          those rights from which no derogations can be made” . - ‘
          1/ Off [ cial”Hecords of-the Gerieral”AsseIIbiy,HThirty-.sixth Session,
          pplement No.40 (A/36/40), Annex VII.
        
          
          E/CN. 4 1934 -29
          Dage 8
          The Human Rights Committee has on another occasion stated: 2/
          “The protection against arbitrary deprivation--of life which is
          explicitly required by the third sentence of article 6-C l) is of - . .
          -paraIIdunt importance. The Committee considers that -States parties. should
          take measures not only to prevent and--punish deprivation of life, by :
          . orimirfal..aats,--but also-prevent arbitrary killings by their own security
          forces. ---OEe deprivation of life by the authorities of the State'is-a -- -
          matter df -the- utmost gravity. - Therefore, the- law must strictircontroL . - - -
          and limit the circumstances in which a person may be ieprived of his -
          life by such authorities” .
          147. One diSturbing feature that'.the Special :flapporteur -has not$ is -the -i,ncx ea5.e -
          : :fl in summary:or -arbitrary executions-which are. not exclusively pplitical-ly motivated
          but which-are:tho-.resujt-of campaigns to curba rising crime rate.-
          148. In- -vIew of the - continuing gravity and scale of the phenomenon of summary :
          orvarbitrary. executions, the Special Rapporteur':-wishes -to reiterate the corLclusiofls
          and recommendations of his first report which continue-to retain their validity --
          anII.relnance for future -action... It-is the deep conviction of tb . Special - .
          flap orteur that the Commission should continue ---to have a mechanisrn-to :wonit9r. --::
          practices c i' Situations of. atmmary:. or arbitrary executions, -priority- being :gi yeii'
          to those situations where there is an imminent or threatened summary or arbitrary
          exeIItib f l.- -- -- - - - . : :-- - :--- - - - - -
          149 There is also a need for continued study of this phenomenon with special
          attentioh::being.given, on an ongoII-g basis, to ways and-means of reducingand, -
          elimifiating this-abhorrent: practice-k-- In this;- regard,: the need - br -perio4ic - ----
          reporting- -by Governments - on their. efforts to- give -effective.prote tton to. tt e.. :
          rignt to Ufe could be given consideration. The experience ga.ned by the Spe nal
          : Rapporteur indicates that this is a matter that the Commission should keep .u ider -
          review at all times, rather than just for a limited period. -
          l5O ;Th& Special Rapporteur would like to single out for special--mentionv he--; - --. - :
          impoi'IInce of ensuring that Governmenta:are aware of and support IIe.;lflter---and -
          IIit df the- said provisions and are- -committed to upholding them in-sthe&r . -- - -
          legislations and in-practice, and, further, that law--enforcement, militarLy and-. - :
          paramilita y officials pla cti under their effective control, so as to ensure
          that excesses--cannot take place without. the Government's knowledge or-outside itS
          control. - OEe--Special -Rapporteur::would therefore strongly-recommend that - - -
          consideration be given to ways and means of enforcing the -discipline of:law-:
          enforcement, military and paramilitary personnel and bringing them under effective
          control in -order to minimize the risks of arbitrary and summary executions taking
          place 1 Perhaps this could be examined by the United-- Nations Committee on Crime
          Prevention and Control or by the forthcoming United Nations ongress-cn the-
          Preventionof Crime -and the- Treatment of Offenders. - The- Commission may -also wish
          toLJ,nv lte INTERPOLto examine the role it could play in, this regard: either-on its
          o n or n conjunction with the United Nations.
          2/ Ibid ; ,. - Thirty—seventh Session,---Supplement No.40(A/37/40),-Annex V..:.
        
          
          {.)
          E/CN.4/1984/29
          page 39
          151. As part of the process of mobilization the United Nations Department of
          Public Information could convene a high—leveL meeting of editors from different
          regions of the world to examine and strengthen the role of the press and the
          mass media in combating summary and arbitrary executions.
          152. OEe Special Bapporteur feels strongly that an all—out international
          mobilization of efforts is required in order to bring summary or arbitrary
          executions to a halt. As part of this process of mobilization to protect the
          most fundamental of all human rights, the right to life, it would seem desirable
          for the United Nations tc launch a concerted campaign against summary and
          arbitrary executions, drawing upon the endeavours of Governments, specialized
          agencies, regional intergovernmental organizations, non—governmental organizations
          and the general public.
        
          
          E/CN .4/l984 129
          Annex I
          page 1
          Annex I . .
          ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL RESOLU ION 1983/36
          Summary or arbitrary exe&itions .
          The Economic and Social Council,
          Recalling the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, tihich guarantees the
          right to life, liberty and security of person, :‘ , : .
          Having regard to the provistons of the Internatibnal Covenant on Civil and
          Political Rights, which states that every human being has the inherent right to
          life, that this right shall be protected by law and that no one shall be
          arbitrarily deprived of his life, — ‘,_— -
          Recalling General Assembly resolution 34/175 of 3 lVbecem 6 r 1979, in hibh ‘‘
          the Assembly reaffirmed that mass and flagrant violations of human rights were
          of special concern to the United Nations and urg&1 tti ' omIIiSsion onJliiman Rights
          to take timely and effective action in existing iid tUture caseS of ti ass and
          flagrant violations of human rights, . . :. ‘
          Mindful of General Assembly resolutions 36/22 of 9 Move mber 198i and 37/182 ‘
          of 17 December 1982, in which the ,Assembly condemned the practice of summary and
          arbitrary executions,
          Beai ing' ip”IIjnd resolution 5 df 5 S ptSmbei' 1980 on' tra—leg I executions
          adopted by' the ‘Sixth' United Natiori sCongress on the Prdvdtition of Ciime and the
          Treatment of Off end&'s; ‘ ‘ .‘ .
          Taking note of resolutions 1982/10 and 1982/13 of 7 september 1982 of the
          Sub—Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, in
          which the Sub—Commission recommended that effective measures should be adopted
          : • to prevent the occurrence of summary and arbitrary executions, including extra—
          legal executions, . .
          Deeply alarmed about the occurrence on a large scale of summary or
          arbitrary executions, including extra—legal executions,
          Convinced of the need to continue to deal urgently with the question of
          summary or arbitrary executions, including extra—legal executions,
          ].. Strongly deplores , once again, the increasing number of summary or
          arbitrary executions, including extra—legal executions, which continue to take
          place in various parts of the world;
          2. Appeals urgently to Governments, United Nations bodies, the specialized
          agencies, regional intergovernmental organizations and non_governmental and
          humanitarian organizations to take effective action to combat and eliminate
          Summary or arbitrary executions, including extra—legal executions;
          3. Takes note of the report of the Special Rapporteur, Mr. S d. Wako,
          submitted in accordance with Council resolution 1982/35 of 7 May 1982;
          4. Decides to continue the mandate of the Special Rapporteur
          Mr. S.A. Wako, for another year;
        
          
          E/CM .4/1984/29
          Annex I
          page2 .
          5. Requests the Special Rapporteur to review his report in the light
          of the information received, taking, particularly into a000uflt any new
          information, including relevant internal legislation, provided by concerned
          Governments as well as views expressed in the Commission n Human Rights at
          its thirty—ninth session and to submit a report ‘ I I the cotutnission at its
          fortieth session; , . . : . ‘
          6. Considers that the Special Rapporteur in carrying out his mandate',”
          should continue to seek and receive information from Goverflment3, United Nations:
          bodies, specialized agencies, regional intergovernmental organizations and
          non—governmental organizations. in consultative status with the Economic and .
          ‘t ,ocial Council; ‘*, . ,
          7. Expresses its appreciation to those Governments that have extended
          invitations to the Special Rapporteur to visit their respecti 'te countries and :
          urges the Special Rapporteur to respond positively to such invitations;: ‘ .
          8. Urges all Governments arid all others concerned to co—operate with
          and assist the Special Rapporteur; . . ‘, ., . 4 - ‘‘ ‘. .‘. .
          9. Requests the Secretary—General to provide all necessary assistance ‘
          to: .th .Ppecial Rapporteur; ‘ . . ..
          10. Decides that the Commission on Human Rights should consider the
          question of summary or arbitrary executions as a matter 0 f high priority at
          its, fortieth session. under the item entitled' “Question the violation 1 of
          human' rights and fundamental freedoms in any' part of the world, with jiirticular
          reference to colonial and other dependent countries and territories”.
        
          
          E/CN .4/1984129
          Annex It
          page 1 .. ..
          . L'rnex II
          NOTES 1T AMS SENT TO GOVERW S .
          Note verbale dated 29 July 1983 sent to Governments which replied: to the
          requests for information sent in 1982
          .. , . , . . . . , . . :
          and has the pleasure to convey to His Excellency's Government, the appreciation of
          the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on Summary or Arbitrary
          Executions, Fir. S. Amos Wako for the co—operation extended to him by .
          His Excellency's Government in putting information at his disposal and the
          constructive and valuable contribution made on his first Report (E/CN.411983 116
          -. ‘. and Add.l copy attached) during its consideration by the Commission on Human
          Rights at its thirty—ninth session.
          The Secretary—General has the ‘honour to refer to the Economic and Social
          Council resolution 1983136 entitled “Summary or Arbitrary Executions”. A copy of
          ... this resolution is attached to this note verbale. By this resolution, the Council
          decided to continue the mandate of the said Special Rapporteur for one year. The
          Special Rapporteur was requested to review his report,, taking particularly into
          account any new information including relevant internal legislation. Any
          information in the possession of His Excellency's Government relevant to his
          subject, in addition to that already communicated to the Special Rapporteur would
          be most appreciated. Such information should if possible include the following:
          (a) Information and' observations on the occurrence, extent and current
          trends regarding summary or arbitrary executions wherever they may have occurred
          or are occurring.
          (b) Comprehensive information on legislation' and any judicial decisions
          concerning: . “ ‘
          — guarantees and procedures relevant to the deci ion to execute or kill a person
          by ordinary courts, special- courts or law enforcement agencies including the
          military in all types of situations whether during peace time or states of
          emergency. .
          — when the executive or any other body may detain or hold a person in custody
          and the rights of a person so held. ,
          — the structure and composition of and appointment to such courts or tribunals.
          (c) Policies and measures taken b His Excellency's Government to ensure
          that such guarantees, procedures and the exercise of such powers are correctly
          followed.
          (d) Suggestions of short and long term measures which should be taken at
          local and international level to combat effectively this phenomena of summary or
          arbitrary executions. .
        
          
          E/CN.4/ 1984/29
          Annex II '
          page 2
          (e) Comments and views on matters raised in the recommendations of the first
          report and in particular paragraphs 225, 226 and 230 of the said report and your
          detailed recomIIendatjons on these matters. : . , . , . .. . ,
          The Special Rapporteir interd' toreii i th II OET6rmai'on received in response
          to this note during the second half of October 1983; he will complete ‘his report
          to the Commission on Human Rights in accordance with the aforementioned resolution
          during the first half of January 1984. The Special Rapporteur would therefore be .
          most grateful if His Excellency's Government were to formulate any reply taking ,
          this programme into account. .. , ‘ . . .. . . . ‘ “ . . ‘ ‘
          . . . . .: ‘
        
          
          EJcN .4 1l984/29
          Annex II
          page 3
          Note verbale. dated 29 July 1983 sbnt to Gdv rnments which did not reply to.
          therequ ts for inforrngtion sent in 1982 . . . ‘ . :
          and has the honour to refer' to Ecohomid and Social Council resolutions :1982/35 and
          1983/36 entitled “Summary or ‘Arbitrary? Executions”. A copy of each'. of these
          ,.. resolutions is attached to this note yerbale. By this resolution the Council
          decided to continue the mandate of the Special Bapporteur ‘Mr. S.Amos i. ako, for
          another year. It requested the Special Rap brtdur to Sview his r port...
          (E/CW4/1983/16..and Add.l), which was submitted to the Commission at its
          ... thirty—ninth session (a copy of winch is attached heretb) in the light of the
          , information received, taking p rticulariy into account any new information , .
          including relevant internII.]. ‘legislation nd -‘tt t bIIit' ‘t report to the Commission .
          at its fortieth.session. Any new information in the possession of His Excellency's
          Gov rnment that may be relevant to this st.ibject, t ould ‘be very much appreciat d.
          Suchinformation should, if possible, include IIe'foflowing pointsL , , , , , . . . .
          (a) Information and observations on the occurrence and extent regarding
          summary or arbitrary executions wher v'e 'they may have odcurred or are-.occurring.
          (b) Information on constitutional, legislative and administrative measures
          which set out guarantees and procedures relevant to a decision to execute a person
          or persons by the judiciary and special tribunals and courts such as military
          tribunals, revolutionary courts, peoples' courts etc., including inter alia :
          — the competence of the courts, tribunals, etc.;
          — independence of the courts, tribunals, etc.;
          — whether evidence obtained in a manner contrary to national and/or
          international law is admissable;
          — publicity of trials and verdicts; .
          — procedures and relevant substantive rules under states of emergency,
          exceptions, siege, armed conflict, etc.
          (c) Information on constitutional, legislative and administrative measures
          which set out guarantees and procedures relevant to a decision to execute or kill a
          person or persons by the executive, including law enforcement agencies, members of
          armed and paramilitary forces and other governmental officials or agents as well
          as information on constitutional, legislative and administrative measures relevant
          to situations in which executions or killings are probable.
          Such information could include inter alia :
          — rules concerning the application of force by the executive and/or the bodies
          or persons mentioned above;
        
          
          E/CN.4/1984 1 29
          Annex II
          page 4
          — tults and procedures for the protection of detainees and other persons in
          custody, including the possibi1itrof holding- 4etaineesand otIIerPerS0nQ in
          custody incommunicado; . H . .
          — procedures and relevant substantive rules under states of emergency,
          exception, siege, armed conflict etc.
          (d Y Policies and measures taken to enforce the guarantees and procedures set
          out in (b) and (c) above, including any judicial de 6 isions. .
          Ce) . Suggestions on the policies and measures that should be taken at the , . ‘.
          local and international levels to preyent summary and arbitrary execiiutiofl5. . :
          (F .) Comments, views and suggestions on matters raised 1i ”the recommendations
          of the first report and in particular paragraphs 225, 226 and 230 of the said
          .‘ report and your detailed recommendations on these matters ‘ , . . . .
          . ‘OEe'Special Rapporteur intends to review the information received in'response-'
          to this note during the second half of October 1983; ‘he iIi complete his report':.
          to the Commission on Human Rights in accordance with thefl aforernentidned resolutionS
          during. the:first half of January.].9 4. The Special Rapporteur would therefore
          be. most grateful if His,Excellency's.Government were to formilat ' ny reply taking
          this programme into account. j .“ (.. , ‘
          . . .
          H - . .
        
          
          E/CN4/198.4/29
          Annex Ifl.
          page 1
          Annex III
          LETTERS FROM THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR TO GOVERNMENTS
          Letter dated 8 November 1983 from the Special Rapporteur to ,tha.Governmenta
          which replied to the requests for information sent in 1982
          Dear Mr 'AvIIassadb ', ‘ . ‘ :
          I have the honour to refer to Economic an4,, Social Council resolution 1983/36
          of 27 May 1983 by which my mandate as Special Rapporteur , of. the CommissLon on
          Human Rights on Summary or Arbitrary Executiohs ‘ Ias' renewi d. By this resolution I
          am requested, in operative paragraph 5
          - “to review [ my] retort in the light of the information received, taking
          particu1ar .y into account any new information, including relevant
          internal legislation, provided by concerned Governments as well as v;ews
          e*pr ssed in the ‘CbIImi Sion at its thirty—ninth session and to submit a
          report to the Commission at its fortieth session” (operative paragraph 5).
          I ‘aII of'IIe opinion that my i'e'p6rt should include a description of the various
          safeguardS and arrangements ext tII 'in'national legislation for the purpose of
          protecting the right to life. ‘ ,
          In this connection I note with appreciation that Your Excellency's Government
          had fUr'rd hd such information in response to previous requests. This information
          has proved to be most useful in the updating of my report as requested by the
          Council. . . . , . ‘
          . , . . ., , . .
          I would be grateful if Yoiir ExcellencyJs $overnment were to transmit—any ‘.
          additional information, if''pIIS'sible, by 3l”DS&mber 1983 concerning legislation
          prevailing in, your country. It is my intent ion p.qomplete to the
          ) CoSiSsionby mid—January 1984 iid”I' 'emain &v il'abIe to Your Excellency's Government
          ‘ should any further clarification be desired.
          Please accept, Mr. Ambassador, the assurances of my highest consideration.
          ( Signed ) S . Amos Wako
          Special Rapporteur of the
          Commission on Human Rights on
          Summary or Arbitrary Executions
        
          
          r
          E/CN.4/1984/29
          Annex I I I
          page2
          Letter dated 8 November 1983 from the Special Rapporteur to the Governments
          which did not reply to the requests for information sent in 1982
          Dear N: s or,.. .: - .
          I have the honour to refer to Economic and Social Council resolution 1983/36
          of 27 May 1983 by which my mandate as Special Rapporteur of the Commission Ofl
          Human Rights on Summary or Arbitrary Executions was renewed. By this resol!.it .9fl I
          am requested, in operative paragraph 5: . .
          “to review [ my] report in the light of the information received, taking
          particularly into account any new information, including relevant
          oe internal legislation, provided by concerned Governments as well as views
          ) expressed in the Commission at its thirty—ninth session and to subriiit a
          report to the Commission at its fortieth session tt (operative paragraph.- 5 ).
          I am of the opinion that my report should include a description of tM yarious
          safeguards and arrangements ensting in national legislation for the purpose of
          protecting the right to life. . ‘ . . :
          In this connection .1 note that no information on such 1egis1ation haS been
          received from Your Excellency's Government in response to the requ ti boni ped•,
          in the notes verbale of 17 September 1982 and of 29 July 1983. Since I con id r
          that such information coming from Your Excellency's GovetnmIItwouldbe IIbst
          valuable in the preparation of my report I would be grateful to whatever
          information on the subject that may be provided at your earliest convenience and,
          if possible, by 31 December 1983.
          You may wish to note that it is my intention to complete my report td t he
          Commission by mid—January 1984 and I remain available to: tour Excellency'S : ,
          Government should any further clarification be desired.
          Please accept, Mr. Ambassador, the assurances of' my highest consideration.
          ( Signed. ) S. Amos Wako
          Special Rapporteur of the
          Commission on Human Rights on
          Summary or Arbitrary Executions
        
          
          EJCN.4/l984/29;
          Annex IV “
          page 1
          Annex IV
          STATEMENT MADE BY THE PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE
          OF BURUNDI AT THE THIRTY—NINTH SESSION OF THE
          CONMISS'XbN ON HUMAN RIGHTS ON 4 MARCH 1983 P
          [ Origiztl FRENCH ]
          Mr. President, ‘‘:H':”:c : ‘ ‘‘; . . ..
          Veneration for the fundamental hum n rig'hts' III  fi'e'&doms, r niSt IIri i ” ‘iti b”
          is the right to .if , is deeply ingrained in the people and Government of Burundi.
          The sanctificat .on of human rights in Burundi has reached new heights since
          the proclamation—of - bhe-S'ec'bhd Republic on 1 November 1976. OEe r gim instituted
          OE by that proclamation surpasses its predecessors by the strength ot it& atIIIIIISt
          to the hu!nan 4 ijarianidea].s professed and pursued by the United Nations. ...
          . ,. ‘ ‘‘ ,. • : : . .‘.‘,;. , ‘. •. U
          Th s& tt.ib'f ctdj' ‘i ‘ i en d xr' em n ' oii dd ri it to coSr$Ij “t-iit j t j :
          hope expressest by the Secretary—General of the United Natipns in his letter
          0/SO 214(33), of ]4JandII'y 1983. We intend to do so'fully and unambfguously.
          ,‘‘ . 1 ' ,, . . r:. ,c :','' ' ;rz • : ‘.i: • .,j. . .‘ ‘ :
          In the section of his Pe ort IIat deals with Burundi, We Special RapporIIur
          refers to his receipt of a nu ber' of reporII containih 'aliifltions of ummatj' 0r'
          arbitrary executiops that were transmitted to the Government of Bu.rundi on
          14January 198 . .‘ ;r .t.. j ) :‘ . ‘ :.y,':: P ,‘ .
          .. ... “ - .-
          ‘ i4id mi t Mid'Wi dr t E'he' blic of B ru di ohtadte&tHe Cent e' ‘fbr' : . . ‘T
          Human Rights at the Palais des Rations immediately following the receipt of that ““
          document.. We did so in order to engage in a direct dialogue with Mr. S. Amos Wako,
          the Special Rapporteur, and in preliminary discussions aimed at et iting the' ‘
          clarifications we felt ,to be necessary. We have been unable to reply until now
          because of the SpecidY RapoortIIir's absence from Geneva. ‘
          Thanks to my meeting with Mr. Wako the day following his arrival in Geneva, . , , ,
          ‘ and in the light of the explanations he kindly provided “corice sihg the content of ::
          his report, the Government of Burundi herewith submits the, ver4.fiable f&cts of the
          case. “ flC .j” :. ,' fl :, , , .- >. :, , , . .
          It requires but a moment's thought'; to r aiiz& the -i bt St'9 iie document in
          question on pur country's reputation. In a.word, it casts a, shadow over Burundi's ,
          brilliant ‘hi 6i df ‘proIIctior for htiIIII rights”and' safegiiard'ih &r indivfdual ‘ V
          and collective security.
          We should like to begin by dispelling all uncertainty as to the “ti ?6rmti.oii ... ,
          transmitted to the Government of Burundi via the Permanent Mission.
          :, :, ‘‘‘.“. . ‘‘:‘‘,.— ;fl' .': ‘“‘f, ; ..' : . .. .‘‘, -‘‘ : , , , ,‘“‘ . . ;‘ ; ‘ : :‘. ‘ ‘ ; ‘ ‘
          The only allegations of a&ich't were informed appear 6 n ase 18 of a report
          issued in i 72 by Amb Sty”Iit rriatian l. . . ?,‘ ‘ ‘ ,‘ ‘. . , ‘ ‘ : .f' ‘ S ” . ; , ;“
          The Special Rapporteur will, am, sure, be kind enough to provide us with ,, ,
          further details. Does Mr. Wako have, in addition to the information from
          ; Amnesty International referring to a now—distant period, accusations against
          Burundi emanating from other sources and covering more recent times? If's'o,' ‘t4 ''” ‘
          should be grateful if he would communicate them to us. If not, we shall be obliged
          to seek clarification from him as soon as we have completed our statement at this
          meeting.
          j jI :. .
        
          
          E/CM 4Il984/29
          Annex IV
          page 2
          Our statement will focus on two conflicting factors. On the one hand, the
          creation of a situation of which the premises call in question, not to say falsify,
          circumstances in Burundi. . On the other hand, the need far Burundi' to invoke the
          right to the restoration of its hqnour, which the assertiops made in the report
          submitted to the Commission on Human Bights, perhaps in good faith, have
          compromised. OEe detrimental effects of the document in question for Burundi will
          cease only with the verification of the treatment really accorded to the human
          beings of whom the present Regime has the charge. -
          We hereby invite the Commission to give the closest scrutiny to every section
          of this speech ‘in defence of our country's gpod name, . ...
          It goes without saying that we are aware of the legal maxim “nerno jUd . ,
          “. causa sua” (no—one may be judge in his own cause). We wish, however, to invoke
          another generally—accepted legal rule, ‘to the effect ut audiatureta1tera,P L”
          (hear the /other side). ( . , . : .
          Our first point is that a comparison”rnust be made between the circumstances
          that actually prevail in: Burundi and; the allegations. made, against our country..
          For the reconciliation of those two II tiromous cases, ..Burundi. proposes and. .
          would welcome a close and objective examination of the prevailir3g situation by the
          United Nations and other organizations ‘of a truly; humanitarian calling,, th t';i5, to
          say, organizations-whose views are -ecempt from bia and dogma. . . :
          Now that we have, with no trace of tergiversation, declared our totak . , :
          determination to co—operate fully with all . the competent United Nations organs in
          re—establishing, the truth, . it is time fore us to, address the, essence of the., following
          points: : . . . . . ‘ , . . . . .
          ‘U). The procedure; : ‘ ‘ : ‘ . “ . , . . . . . . . .
          (ii) The discrepancy between the. period that the United. Nation had. in mind,.
          and the bar that applies in :tl'le case of Burundi;
          Ciii) The authentic facts;' ‘ ‘ . ‘ ( ., . . . ‘ ‘‘ H
          1. ‘Events during the first' decade ‘of national independence;
          2.. The..present circumstances in.Burundi; . . ‘ ‘ ;
          (iv) Official exoneration of Bur.undi:or disclosure of pbiectiyely;cOnClP Si.v! , ,.
          evidence. , : , . . S ,.' ; ..
          I. The: procedure , ‘ ‘ ‘ . ‘
          In view of the exceptional value that attaches to the good name of a State or
          political regime, a nation or. a people, the. Government of Burundi is of the. . .
          opinion that the greatest caution is required in investigations. where that good-...
          name is at stake..
          That entails, as regards written records, refraining from all' hasty.
          assumptions or mere cross—checking on the basis of potentially misleading testimony :,
          or information. . , . .. . ,. .‘
        
          
          EICN.4 1 1984/29
          Annex IV
          page 3
          However hypothetical or questioning the manner of its expression-, any element
          incorporated, in documents of such importance already constitutes an assertion or
          creates a doubt that may undermine the credibility of a country which 4oes not “
          necessarily deserve to be penalized in that way or to suffer such a fate;','
          In the opinion of Burundi, the procedure most ar5propriate for obviating such
          an eventuality, for forestalling all unwarranted allegations, consists in first
          comparing the information obtained by the Special Rapporteur with that put forward
          by the Government under suspicion. -‘•- .. .
          Although the paragraph'in question clearly contains neither a substantiated
          judgement nor a mere expression of opinion, it remains true that the very fact of
          having, to however slight a degree, mentioned cases reduced to the level of mere
          hypotheses has given rise to un.)ustiified suspicions against Burundi. OEat damage
          OEcould have been avoided if someone had taken the trouble to check the situation
          through dialogue with the Perm%nent Mission, if there had then been obstructive
          behavi6ui' [ dlla ive replies bt' refusal to co—operate, the publication of
          information gleaned from third sources would have been justified.
          The approach that w advdcate revives the virtues or discreet diplomacy and
          has the merit of sparing States beyond all shadow of a doubt the damage that
          results from yielding to the temptatidn of more ,bstentatious prcicedures. It is,”
          moreover, in keeping with the diplomatic methods upheld by H.E.'t4r. Perez de Cuellar,
          the Secretary—General of our Organization. . .
          fl ” OEe discrepancS between the period that th United Nations had in mind
          and the bar that applies in the case of Burundi
          It is quite clear that, as indicated in paragraph 71 of the report in question,
          that document w s intended to cover the period frdm the end of 1980 to the prSent.'
          OEe choice of that period coincides with the wishes of the General Assembly and the
          other United Nations organs, including the Commission on Human Rights. It
          corresponds to the point at which they started taking a keen interest in “summary
          or arbitrary executions as phenomena in themselves”,
          OEat being so, the report departs from its terms of reference, pai'ticularly as
          regards time. By so exceeding the prescribed limits, it treats the case of Burundi
          differently from others — if, indeed, there are any iittiations to be investigated'
          at all. .
          We shair'i'efut the allegations by Amnesty International, even though they
          manifestly fall outside the bounds set by the General Assetnbly and, since they
          concern 1972, are time—barred'in relation to thsperiod for which the
          General, Assembly. issued instructions and that it intended should be studied.
          OEe allegatibns' are, therefore, invalid and cannot be the subject of an ‘
          investigation, supposed to cover the past two years. As for the present situation,
          there could be no plainer proof of the scrupulous respect for human rights in
          Burundi than the manifest absence of. revelations by the same Amnesty International,
          Which, although there is no reason to “suppose that it would be any more kindly ., 1 .
          disposed or less severe towards our country than in the past, reports not' even' the
          slightest anomaly in the conduct of the Government of Burundi foi 1981 or 1982.
        
          
          E/cN.4 11984/29
          Annex IV
          page 4
          III. The authentic facts
          Although the unjustified complaints made against Burunda fall outside the
          period under review by the United Nations, our Government is determined to resolve
          them by sheddirigthe necessary light on the dir6uII tancesII d by situati them in
          their context. If the true situation in Burundi is to be adequately illustrated,
          a dastinct on must be made between two succSsive phases
          1. The first decade of national independII ce . . . ,
          A national crisis broke out in 1972. Its principal causes were totally alien
          to Burundi, There is no need to go into details that would only be irrelevant.
          OEose who so exaggerate the number of victims would bd forced to adIIit the
          absolute impossibility of producing plausible evidence in support of their
          assertions. Such sourues confuM the approximations that are so oft n fallacious
          with mathematical precision. Amnesty Internatjonal “s logic becomes simply
          impenetrable when that organization attributes ethnic motives to the diflppearance
          of nationals. . - - - : . - - , . - -
          OEe4ns igators of internal rivalry in Burundi have not capitulated. They
          are strr ing to interfere in our internal affairs ‘not only by raising the bugbear
          of foreign—controlled ethnocentrism, but' also more surreptitiously, through the
          lure of dazzling advantages.
          An examination of the social substratum of Burundi iill reveal the ‘- .
          incontrovertible existence qf a Nation exempt from all trace of ethnic heterogeneity. .
          Scientifically, and therefore socio ogicafry, ethnic groups are distinguished' by
          culture, religion, life—style, ling i sti'oth its, a geographical demarcatidn line,
          etc. Disparities in these spheres are totally alien, to the Nation of Surundi,
          whoce constituent elements adhere to a common civilizztion, share a common cul!ture,
          : worship the same Iman Y'Burundi (the GosuiundiY -
          This postulate is borne out by the fact that the Burunda Nation speaks one
          single language, Kirundi, with no daalect pr variants, that is a virtually unique
          phenomenon in Africa for a country tifith a ‘population of close to 5 million.
          Moreover, Burundis subject to the same economic and social conditions are
          intermingled as chanbe or individual welfare dictates, with a total absence of
          ethnic, geographical c i ', institutional fi bntiers ‘ (bat is, frontiers decreed by the ‘
          authorities). - . “ - - .
          The ciyi .ization of the peeple of Burundi is unusual in that all citi ens .
          have an identical life—style.' ‘ Prior to the introductioti -‘of Christianity towards'
          the end of the last century — prior,' herefore, to all contact with the Christian - ‘ : ,
          faith — the l3urundis had, in the cult or a Supreme Being, monotheistic eligious ‘
          beliefs that were the same for all: Those factors ddmbined constituted the sturdy
          pillars and the imperishable cement that ut4erpinned their indissoluble unity. , ,
          Given this information, you will readily be ‘abLe to unmask the sinister - .
          designs behind the stories put about concerning the p ople of Burundi. The
          inadmissible aim of their authors is to' undermine the ‘country by creating
          artificial divisions through such means as livestock censuses or references to the
          morpholog .cal characteristics of }3urundis.
        
          
          E/CH.4/1984 129 .
          Annex IV
          ; ;ge 5
          The concrete expression of this policy of division was the sponsoring by
          foreign clrcles of 24 political parties throughout the period leading up to the . ,,,
          campaign for the general elections of 1961 and the campaign itself. In those . : :: - ..
          elections, the Unity' and National Progress Party (UPRONA), despite systematic
          harassment by the authorities of the time, won a e unding victory over its
          rivals by gaining 58 of the 64 seats. . . . , . .t.
          In percentage terms, this nationalist party won nationwide politidal ‘
          representivity by attracting 97 per cent of the votes cast in a secret ballot by
          direct universal suffrafl that wS'open to all Burundis of ‘either sex aged 18 or
          over. It.should'.be ndb d'that, sinde Burundi was at th 'tiSe a Belgian trust
          territory; those alectidns were held under the auspices &SIIe United N tions. .
          Ingiving the Unity and Natid6al Progress Party its historic score, the.,
          “i people did not vote under the impulse of tribal allegiance, but for the patriotic
          ideals ‘wh ch the Party”embodled. .
          Correspondence between the human monolithism and the political homogeneity .
          of Burundi..C :t:. . ‘ . : , : , . .
          There is in the case of Burunda a certain correspondence between the
          monolithic nature of the Burundi Nation (absence of tribe )' and its political ‘
          homogeneity (a single party). This homogeneity is a matter of popular, choice:
          it is the result of a massive expresszbn of suoport by Buruncli voters in national
          elections held with'th full knot4lSdge of the A'dministerihg Authority, Belgium, and
          of the United NatiorII;• ‘ . .
          The human symbiosis that characterizes Burundi society and the Burundi Nation
          Contrasts strikingly with the virtually automatLc tendency of those who live ‘on a.,.
          diet of cljch s and prejUdices const 'ntly to attribute the vicissitudes of Africian ,,
          life to tribal conflict ‘As if there was'an iiwariable and immutable equation, ‘,
          between the causes of the? crises that'oceur in all countries in that continent'. ‘
          To take such a view of life in Africa is to ignore the originality and specivici4' 2 r I
          ) of the variable nationaa contingencies in favour of generalization and :
          subjectivization. . ,. . .
          During the fii st decade of our national independence, that is from 1962 to , , , .,
          1972, there were r e'grettab1a'events, that alas, occasioned loss of life for ‘
          various reasons. ‘ . . . .
          The year 1972 was maHced by'the crystallization of the egocentric ideas and
          sentiments injected from abrcad into certain nationals. As adherents to a line
          incompatible with the mentality and the social substratum of the Natibn, those ‘“
          persons encountered strong resistance to their attempt to elintinatea section of
          the people. The machinations of'the auIIors' of the exterminatory plot' were
          thwarted by the people itself. . .. ‘ :
          It goes without saying that, by sowing panic among the population, the
          aggressors placed themselves in a position of the gravest danger. l hether it was
          to ensure. thein jndj idizai Surviv 1 or IIeir collective safety, the targets of the ., .
          aggres resisted the violent a!saults of their attackers. This resulted in
          numerous deaths on both sides. ‘: , , . . .
        
          
          E/CN.4/l984/29
          Annex IV
          page 6
          Furthermore, the scale of the disturbances was such that the Burundi armed
          forces and the national youth movement against which Amnesty International has ,,
          made its accusations were far from engaging in any selective process on the Sa?ss
          of ethnic origin. Our army, conscious of its sacred mission to save the nation,
          displayed exemplary conduct. For it, ethnic identity had no place among the
          criteria employed in establishing guilt. OEe guilty were judged according to
          their own acts and not on any other consideration . .
          In- view of that- dual operation by the population and the, security forces, ..... .
          the loss of life can only i De seen, not as the result of cold calculation on the .
          part ft any government organ, but as the consequence of events that got out of
          hand. In many cases, the people's anger was such that the leaders of what was an
          ,. attempt that came close' to genocide did, not pass through the usual legal machinefl .
          ‘ but' were .the objects of direct popular ‘r venge. The public t,ould have seen any
          other procedure as equivalent to leniency towards the conspirators on the part of
          the keepers of public order. . ‘ ,. .
          The people of Burundi are, indeed, so strongly attached to peace that the '
          have scant patience with those who disturb it. That being so, the sole
          explanation for. any. sporadic excesses lie 'in citizens' firm determination to
          eradicate disruptive influences. . . ‘ . . ...
          . OEer,.civilization of ‘l3urundi is' marked ‘by visceral revulsion for, &ruelty nd
          by;th4;i-utmost reverence for human' values.' In the general panic provoked bythreats
          to their lives, stampeding crowds and overworked security forces cannot pS ent
          tragic consequences even when, as was the case, there is no organized scheme of
          deliberate.killing; . , : . . .. ‘- . .‘
          OEus, in those.az'eas of th -country where there were attacks on peaceful
          inhabitants, the people ‘rose up in their own defenc . In other cases where .IIe..,, .
          police force rushed to the aid of the victims of aggression, its first duty was
          to disarm or to disable- thII -assailants' -- Any severity there may have been during
          ) this tragic period was' mdtivated sol l3i'by concern I I ‘safeguard and consolidate
          a national harmony going back several thousands of years. ,.‘ ‘
          Had it not been for the revival by the allegations of Amnesty International
          of situations now. more than a dicade' old, we would hive spared the Commissidn on
          Human Rights and the United Nations this treatise concerning the distressing
          events in our country. To our mind, Amnesty International's aim in evoking them
          is to reopen an old'wound. That being so, we cannot butask ourselves what are
          the real intentions of those who tak pleasure in resuscitating a problem that is .
          now a matter of past history. ‘‘ . ;. ‘ . . ‘
          As we see it, the objective set' for Mr. Wako is n t to assemble all the facts
          nor to evoke all the past events that foreign circles have, rightly or wrongly,
          dubbed bloody or mass executions. Such an undertaking would serve only to reawaken
          sterile and destructive animosity and resentment.
          ‘ In any case, if such were th attitude ai d approach of th Special Rapporteur
          or of Amnesty International, we should hiive to claim for Burundi the right to the
          same treatment as other countries. What would that mean? Well, while we would
          not wish to single out any particular country, we would have to say if all previous
          situations were to be taken into consideration irrespective of when they occurred,
        
          
          E/C L4fi9&4f29 -. ,
          Annex IV
          page 7
          that ca ws out of all proportion to that of Burundi have, arisen-and peczisted II
          many k eg ons of our planet. Should they -be re exatcined, enumerated and displayed
          once, again to the eyes c C the or1d? & h a retrospect uould. not be wtIIout riSk.
          The approach, then, is not one that can he applied solely t .PurUndi.
          What 'th&General . seEII1y had -in mind in its resolution. Il72. are cases that .
          occurred in the recent past' ( nce IIC&id of 1960) br are “stilt topica1 . ‘The-
          purpose in revealing them is not to transform the United NatIons into a ‘sort of
          universal pub-lie prosecutor or omnipresent secular arm for the pursuit of revenge.
          On the contzllan3' th Is universal Qrganization seeks c-o dIscover Sects and,,, by taking
          them ttx their sources to deterwine thei -causes and then help to. .remed ' thepi by
          empl ying its good, offices of conciliation and persuasion — if necessary,, .ax qng all
          IIe partIes invo1ved .but -tirst and foremost t4ith States. :, . . . . : :
          2. OEe sanctification of h iIIan rights by the Second Republic of Burundi - .
          We shall now co sIde- the case of such abuses as may have been committed under
          the ‘:rsgimea preceding the present Bepub1ic that was proclairn U on 1 November 1976.
          No doubt has been expresaed;”-cancerning.' -the present regime' a succession to i s two
          predepessors' under therules f.4nternaticna1 law that gove ,n,.the concept otthe.
          State and ensure its perpetinty.. Those legal prtnciples would, noMeVer 1 be invalid
          if IIere had been infringam nts of I undamental human rights. In that respect, the
          Second Republic. rather than assume responsibIlity for wrongs it dI sapproved, ‘has
          espoused.IIe1claansJ.ate pr3 qipie ., - . . . --* ,- . . . .
          It considers that the u stitunon of a new order in 1976 sIgnIfied a complete
          break with earlier acts-of State contrary to IIe welfare of society.
          - . . ; . . . - ‘ 7-' . ‘ ,. . ‘ : . ,, .
          A new order having replaced the old and negligence or Irresponsibility with,
          respect t the protection of eittzens' lives having been. among the primary causes
          of the Call of the previous governments, the eradication of the causes of anomalieS
          or abuses has been a priority objective in the legal instruments of the present
          - regime - . . . . . - . - - ,.
          On 3. NovetIIer l9T6, a day marked by total absence not only of bloocahed but
          also of pofitica arrests and by singularly considerate conduct towards the .
          a—holders of- power, none Qf the auIIori.ties ns troubl4d 9 eithei' 1n his person or.
          In his property. Moved by a spIrit of dignity and magnanimity, the agents f
          change incorporated virtually all the former high offIcials jp the new system.
          The . army and the people,, being of lIke mind and aspiring to the same objective,
          chose a the Read of State Colonel Jean—Baptiste Bagata.. : H 9 has been ptesiding -
          over the fate of the nation for sfl years, during tihich peflqd profound qhaes
          have occurred in the mechanisms of State and ‘in Burundi society. The fIrst .
          Mational Congress of the Unity and Progress Party ratified the army's decision by ‘
          appointing Colonel 8agaza head cf the Party and by conferring upon him a
          President Ial mandate running for five years from December1979. . The pepple adopted
          by referendum a Constitution taIlored to national ccntin encies, realitIS, attit i'des,
          needs and aspirat ion s,
          The process of deaoc at_Zat!ofl reached Its peak with the legj.slative eiect&onz
          of October 1982. OEe unicameral National Assembly resulting from that uninominal
          ballot Is already at workb ThIs information constitutes a detailed rebuttal of
          the biased theorists who have displayed such ingenuity in pronouncing on incurable
          internal problems. .
          , -
        
          
          E/CN.4/l984/29
          Annex I V
          page 8
          Prejudicial actions are doomed to nullity and all reminders of then in the
          old legal and political order will, remain devoid of succession. Burundi society
          has changed its legal status. This change is, as has just been shown, reflected
          in the performance of the Party and the Government.
          V. Official exoneration of Burundi or disclosure of objectively conc jLve
          evidence
          The political and social conditions that prevail in Burundi are an
          encouragement to visits to the country by large numbers of high officials from
          governments, the world of business and international organizations , Those people
          can testify to the full enjoyment of human rights by all citizens. thOUgh they
          come from varying social and professional backgrounds, their opinions Ofl
          conditions in the country coincide.
          Whereas violations were formerly possible, as a result either of the actions
          of persons beyond the control of the authorities or of the exploitation by
          officials of the powerlessness of the government, not one single act of violence
          has been recorded from one end to the other of the national territory since the
          institution of the Second Republic in 1976. The setting in motion of the
          machinery of democratization makes impossible the recurrence even of simple
          excesses of the kind that have, in the past, been denounced as culpable acts.
          Although the report submitted to the Commission is, on the face of it,
          inoffensive, since its contents are limited to allusion and probability, It
          represents a danger that cannot be ignored. Being presented under the guise of a
          likely account of events, it may be taken for the truth by the credulous or by
          persons of good faith. It is all the more dangerous as it remains 5 rikingly
          silent concerning the present Republic's genuinely impressive record in the
          sanctification of human rights.
          It would have been normal, to say the least, if those charged with
          investigating our country had bowed to the obvious truth and recognized to the
          new regime the merit it has so undeniably won by its overriding concern for the
          consolidation of the peace and security of all nationals. As the document is
          likely to sustain confusion and leave doubt hanging in the air, the surundi
          Government believes that the situation must be fully elucidated.
          To this end it proposes:
          1. The opening of Burundi to every manner of verification of the status
          of human rights, including visits by those desirous of dispelling all doubt In
          that respect;
          2. That, if the information and evidence provided by ourselves or by other
          objective and impartial sources dispels all doubt and attests to the truth of the
          situation, Burundi should, as seems to us essential after the compromising of the
          country by the Wako report, be rehabilitated and exonerated by the international
          circulation of an official United Nations document to alleviate the effects of
          the allegations contained in that report.
        
          
          E/CN .4/1984/29
          Annex IV
          page 9
          Defamatory publications persist year—in year—out in efforts to tarnish
          Burundi's reputation. Such disparagement maintains in bad odour a country which,
          in many respects, deserves nothing but admiration and esteem. It is high time
          that country was accorded the standing in international public opinion that it so
          richly deserves.
          Even now, when our Republic's exemplary performance in support of human life
          deserves general praise, allegations are made against Burundi. that are as
          anachronistic as they are distorted.
          In order that such fabrications may be quashed once and for all, Burundi
          undertakes to do nothing whatsoever that will prevent the public demonstration
          of the facts through the application of the fitting solutions that have been
          offered to the United Nations on the initiative of our Government.
        
          
          EJCN.4/ 1984129
          Annex V
          page 1
          : . f ne c I T
          COMMUNICATION FROM THE GOVERNb NT OF THE PHILIPPINES IN REGARD TO STATEMENTS
          CONTAINED IN THE PREVIOUS REPORT .
          . . . [ 1 March..19833t
          I wish to refer to paragraphs 191, 192 and 193 of document No. E/CN.4/1983116
          entitled “Summary or Arbitrary Executions” and, invite attentiort to the contents of
          the attached.4ommunication dated 17 February 1983 from the Philippine Government .
          addressed to the Assistant Secretary—General, Centre for Human flights on the . . . .
          comments of the Philippine Government pursuant'toEconornic and Social Council-P ..
          R lution'19B2/35 on'' Summary or Arbitrary Executions”. ,
          The caSes referred to in the note. dated 19'NovSber 1982 from the ‘ . -
          United Nations Secretary—Goneral should be viewed in the c&ntext of the prtnci.pies
          , ... contained in the attached communication, particularly on th'e'rion—existence,and :7
          unconstitutionality of summary or arbitrary executions. In support -of the . .
          foregoing principles, I wish to refer to the summary of constitutional and..
          statiitok y provisions embodied in the fundamental law and relevant legislations
          of the Philippines transmitted to the Centre in the aforementioned: communication of
          17 February 1983. “ - : , ,
          The aforementioned cases are nevei- the1ess under ‘st idy by. the Philippine
          Government and replies relating to the specific cased ha11 be forwarded in due.:v.:
          time. It-is the hope of the Philippine Government that the United Nations
          Secretariat share the view on the need for ample time-to consjde - uch specific.
          cases. . ,
          Thd' Philippin Governmen.t wou1d wish to request that this prelirnianry report
          be published as revisions to paragraphs 191, 192 a:nd 193' of document E/CW.4/l983/16.
          : . - ,. ( Signed ) Hortencio ,J. BRILLANTES
          - — Permanent Representative
          .tT . ‘-‘ - - : , : ,
          4 . .
        
          
          E/CN .4/1984/29
          Annex V
          page 2
          . [ 17 February 1983]
          I have the honour to submit hereunder the comments of the Philippine Government
          on the occurrence and extent of the practice of summary or arbitrary executions
          requested by the United Nations Secretary—General pursuant to Economic and Social
          Council Resolution No; 1982/35 entitled “Summary or Arbitrary Executions,” to wit:
          Arbitrary and summary executions do not exist in the Philippines.
          Constitutior al and statutory provisions do not allow this type of penalty which is
          contrary to the basic requirements of due process of law and Constitutional
          prohibitions against cruel: and unusual punishment * . .
          The death penalty can only be imposed after judicial proceeding where all the
          rights of the accused are.protected. The jurisdiction to affirm a death' pen3lty
          H is constitutionally v sted in: the Supreme Court which is the highest tribunal in
          the country. The authority of the Supreme Court to review cases where death :
          penalty has been imposed is automatic. The Constitution furthermore empowers the-:, -
          President to commute a judicial death penalty or pardon the convict. ::
          There are at present 635 male and six -female -convicts. The -last execution': .
          of a death convict was in 1976. . . -
          The following are constitutional provisions and -legjslative-- and administrative
          measures that prevent arbitrary and summary executions:. - - - -- ‘.
          In the Ccnstitution of , the : . - -
          1. Article IV on the “BILL OF RIGHTS”
          “SEC. 17. No person shall be held to answer fort a criminal offence
          without due process of law.
          “SEC. 18. A1l,persons except those charged with capital offences when
          :oe evidence of guilt is strong, shall before conviction, be bailable by sufficient
          sureties . Excessive bail shall not be required. ,.‘(Underscoring supplied).
          “SEC. 19. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed
          innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be heard
          by himself and counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of the
          accusation against him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial to
          meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure
          the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf .
          However, after arraingment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of
          the accused provided that he has been duly notified and his failure to appear
          is unjustified.” (Underscoring supplied). -
          “SEC. 20. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
          Any person under investigation for the commission of an offence shall have
          the right to remain silent and to counsel and to be informed of such right.
          No force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate -s
          the free will shall be used against him. Any confession obtained in
          violation of this section shall be inadmissible in evidence.”
          (Underscoring supplied).
        
          
          EICN .4/1984/29
          Annex V
          page 3
          “SEC. 21. Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel or unusual
          punishment inflicted.” (Underscoring supplied).
          “SEC. 22. Nc person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for
          the sime offence . If an act is punished by ‘a law and an ordinance, conviction
          or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for
          the same act.” . H' : .
          ‘SEC. 23. Free accSs to the courts shall not be denied to any person
          by reason of “poverty” . (Underscoring supDliad). .
          Under the above qudted provisions of the Constitution of the Philippines,
          therights' of the ‘accused may be summarized as follows:, (1) the right to due
          process of law; (2) the right to bail; (3) the right to be presumed.innocent
          until proven otherwise; (4) the right to be heard by himself and counsel;
          (5.) therj ttb be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation
          against him, (6) the right tobeedy, .mpart al ano public trial, (7) the
          right to moat the witnesses face to face 1 (8) the right to havtrcompulsory
          process to secure the_..atAendance of t.r tnasses and the production of evidence
          an his behalf; (9) the ri ht against self—ancrim nation, (10) the right
          against ev cssive fines, (1l) the right against cruel and -unusual
          punishment; ‘‘(12) the ri ht-'against :d u5Ie 5ed rdy; IIid(l3) the right ‘
          against denial of free access to the courts by reason & poverty.
          2 , Article VII. on “TH PRESIDENT” . , , ,
          “SEC. 11. The President may , excapt in cases of impeachment, grant
          repcIIves ,pbmmutatibns and pardons , remit fines and forfeitures and, with
          concurrence of the Batasanq Pa'nbanba, raht arnnestt.” (Underscoring supplied).
          Section 11, above—quoted, authorazes tEe Presideffi , azcent in cases of
          impeachment, to grant renrieves, commutatiIIs and parcaorOE and with the
          concurrence of the Batasanq Pambansa, to grant amnest
          3 Article X on “THE JUDICIAB !” .
          “SEC. 5. The Supreme Court shall haye the foilowing.powers: .
          (2) Review and revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or
          certidhari, as the law oP the Rules of Court may provide, finaljudgments
          and decrees of inferior courts in — , . .
          d) All criminal cases in which the penalty .irnoosed is death or life
          “‘‘impr sonment.” (Underscoring supplied)..” . “ . . .
          Section 5, article of tntj Philippine Constitution, as amended likewise
          aboie—ouoted, authorizea tne Suprc.me Court, anter alia , to review anc revise,
          reverse, nocafy or c firm or appeal or certiorari, as the laws or the Rules
          of Court may provide, final judgments and decrees of inferior dourts in' ll
          criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is death or life im risbhment.
        
          
          E/CN.4/1984/29
          Annex V
          page 4
          On the -Revised Rules of Court . . :
          Rule 122 on “APPEAL”
          - ‘ “ di. Transcribing and filix g nbtes bf ‘stenographic reporter upon
          a peal. - When notice of appeal is filed by the defendant the trial court
          shall direct the stenographic reporter to transcribe his notes of
          proceedings. When filed by the People of the Philippines the trial court
          shall direct the stenographic reporter : transcribe such portion of his
          notes of the proceedings as the Court, upon motion haIl specify in writing.
          The stenographer shall certify to the correctness of the notes and the
          transcript thereof which shall consist of the original and four copies and
          shall file the original and four copies of the transcript with the clerk .
          without unnecessary delay. .
          ‘In case the death penalty is imposed, the stencgrapher shall wi 1fl.
          thirty (30) days after rendition or promulgation of the sentence, file the
          original and four copies of the duly certified transcript of his notes _
          the proceedings with the cleric, whether the defendant has appSled or not.
          No extension of the time for the filing of said transcript or stenog phic
          notes shall be granted except by the Supreme Court and solely upon . . .
          justifiable grounds . (As amended by Resolution'of the Supreme Court,;
          dated 5 September 1967). ‘ . . .. :.- ‘
          The same rule shall apply to appealed cases wherein the penalty of life
          imprIsonment (reclusion perpetua) has been imposed. (Underscoring supplied).
          “SEC. .9. Transmission of record in cases of death penalty or life .
          ‘“imprisonment. The records of all cases in which the death p' II1ty,sha
          have been imposed by a Court of First Instance, whether th d'ef&fd nt “
          shall have appealed or not, shall.be forwarded to the Supreme Court for
          review and judgmentS as law and justice. shall dictate. ;:The record of.st il
          cases shall be forwarded to the clerk tc: the- Supreme -Court within
          ) twenty (20) days, but not earlier than fifteen (15) days, after renditi2fl
          or promulgation of the sentence in the form prescribcd by Section 1]. ,- ..
          of Rule 41. The transcript shall also be forwarded as provided in
          Section 12 of Rule 41 within five (5 )w days after the filing thereof by
          the stenographer. (As amended by Resolution of the Supreme Court, dated
          5 September 1967).
          The same rule shall apply to appealed cases wherein the penalty of
          life imprisonment (reclusion perpetua) has been imposed.” (Underscoring-
          supplied).
          The second paragraph of Section 7, Revised Rules of Court, ve—quoted,
          directs that where the death penalty is imposed, transcription of the
          atenograph,jc.nqtes taken at the trial shall be compulsory whether the
          accused appeals or not. This is becaUse where the death penalty is imposed,
          review of the case by the Supreme Court is automatic. It is to ehsW 7 'e the
          correctness of the decision of the trial court stentencing him to. death.
          The Supreme Cburt under this power of automatic re-view is called upon -
          to scrutinize the record and look for any error committed by the trial court
          against the defendant. (People v. Bocarr, 97 Phil. 398/1955). In short,
          the law provides for the protection of the accused. (People v. Laguna,
          17 Phil. 520/1910).
        
          
          E/CN .4/1984/29
          Annex V
          page 5
          In the Revised Penal Code
          “ART. 78. When and how a penalty is to be executed. No penalty shall
          be executed except by virtue of a final judgment .
          k penalty shall not be executed in any other form than that prescribed
          by law, nor with any other circumstances or incidents than those expressly
          authorized thereby.
          ‘In addition to the provisions of the law the special regulations
          prescribed for the government of the institution in which the penaltiesh
          are . to be suffered shall bt observed with regard to the character of thd
          penalty to be performed, the time of its performance, and other incidents
          connected therewith, the relations of the convicts among themselves and
          other persons, the relief which they may receive, and their di t. .
          The regulations shall, make provision for the separation of the sexes
          in different institutions, or at least into different departments and also
          for the correction and reform of the convicts.” (Underscoring supplied).
          “ART. 79 . Suspension of the execution and service of the penalties
          incase of insanity. When a convict shall become insane or an imbecile
          after final sentence has been pronounced, the execution of said sentence
          shall be suspended only with regard to the personal penalty, the provisions
          of the second paragraph of circumstance”number 1 of article 12 being observed,
          inthe corresponding cases. ‘ . .. .
          If at. any time the convict shall recover his reason, ‘his.sentence
          shall be executed, unless the penalty shall have prescribed in accordance
          with the provisions af this Code. . . ‘
          The respective provisions of this section shall also be observed if
          . the insanity or imbecility occurs while the convict is serving his sentence.”
          oe . “ART. .81. ; When'and how the death penalty is to be .executed. The death
          J sentence shall,, be executed with preference to any other and shall consist
          in putting the person under sentence to death by electrocution. The death:
          sentence shall be executed under the authority of the Director of Prisons,
          endeavouringso far as possible to mitigate the sufferings of the person
          under sentence during the electrocution as well as during the proceedings
          prior to the execution.
          If the person under sentence so desires, he shall be anaesthetized at
          the'moment of the electrocution.”
          “ifiRT. 82. Notification and execution of the sentence and assistance
          to the culprit. The court shall designate a working day for the execution,
          but not the hour thereof; and such designation shall not be communicated
          to the offender before sunrise of said day, and the execution shall not take
          place until after the notification, but before sunset. During the interval
          between the notification and the execution, the culprit shall, in so far
          as possible, be furnished such assistance as he may request in order to be
          attended in his last moments by priests or ministers of the religion he
          professes and to consult lawyers, as well as in order to make a will and
          confer with members of his family or person in charge of the management of
          his business, of the administration of his property, or of the care of his
          descendants.”
        
          
          E/CN .4/1984/29
          Annex V
          page 6
          “ART. 83. Suspension of the execution of the deaII sentence. The death
          sentence shall-pot be. inflicted upon a woman within three years next following
          of' th sentence or while she is pregnant; nor upon any person, Over
          70 years of age . In this 1 it the death se tdnce shall & ommuted to
          the penalty of reclusion.perpetua with tM accessory penalties provided in
          Article 40.” (Underscoring: supplied). “
          Under Articles 79 and 83, Revised Penal Code, both above—quoted, the
          death'.sentence shall be suspended when the convict becomes insane after final
          sent nce'of death has been pronounced; upon a-woman:, within three years :
          following the date of the sentence or while pregnant; and when the accused
          is a,person over seventy (70) years of age. .: - - - ‘ :‘
          In Presidential Decree No. 603 (The Child and Youth Welfare Code ) ‘--.:
          “ART. 192. Suspension of Sentence and Commitment of Youthful Offender.
          If after hearing the evidente in the proper proceedings the court should find
          that the youth#ul. offender has committe4 ‘the- acts ch kgei gainst him the.
          court shall determine the imoosable penalty, includipg any & v1l liability
          chargeable against him. However,”instead of pronouncing judgment of
          conviction, the court shall suspend all further proceedings aqd ahall commit
          such minor to the custody or care of the Department of Social Welfare, or to
          any training institution operated by the overnm-ent, or duly licensed agencies
          or any other' res nsib1e pdrion, until h' hafl hne readhed 21 years of. age
          or for a shorter pe iod as t:he court may deem proper, after considering the
          reports and recommef dati6ns of the Department of Social Welfare or the agency
          or responsible individual under. whose care he has- been committed. :
          The youthful offender shall be subject to visitation and supervisionLby
          a representative of the Department of Social Welfare or any duly licensed
          agenpy or such other officer as, the court may designate subject to such
          .conditions as it may prescribe.” . . ,
          ‘ “ART. 193. Appeal — The youthful offender whose sentence is suspended
          cap. appeal from the order of the court in the same,,nianner as appeals in' ;'
          criminal cases.” .“ ‘ ‘
          ‘ . ; : ‘(Signed) Horteneio'.J; BRILLANTES
          ‘ - : . Permane nt Representative
        
  • Email to a friend Email to a friend
  • Print version Print version
  • Plain text Plain text

Tagged as:

Freedom of Religion, Executions