It is a great and perhaps bitter irony that the Indonesian courts continue to entertain the endless appeals that these self-confessed criminals lodge or have lodged on their behalf. If they truly were keen to become martyrs to the cause then they would not have too much riding on the method of their execution.
The latest appeal seeks to have the manner of execution changed from a firing squad to a beheading as this is less cruel. The lawyers for Amrozi, Imam Samudra, and Mukhlas have challenged the firing squad as being an inhumane method of execution. These three terrorists did not give much thought to the humanity in the manner of their execution of 200 plus innocent civilians. So, this begs the question, "why are the courts continuing to entertain these appeals and why doesn't Indonesia just get on with the show and execute these felons?"
If they want to be beheaded then so be it. I would think that there would be plenty of people lining up to take responsibility for swinging what would hopefully be a blunt sword.
I have written on this many times before, but it never ceases to amaze me that the judicial process when it comes to these three is bending over backwards to accommodate their every whim. Yet, the Poso Three were never afforded such appeal opportunities. I wonder if a Christian death row inmate could get their lawyer to lodge an appeal saying that the firing squad was unconstitutional and inhumane and that a crucifixion would be a more religiously acceptable means of execution?
For the victims and their families -- the process is long and drawn out but judgment day is nigh for these mass murders. Patience is a virtue. The Constitutional Court will not uphold the appeal. Yet, even if it was to do so it only changes the method of execution and not whether the execution takes place. It might delay it a little while as the State will need to train up a swords person for the task.
3 comments:
As far as I know, the Poso three had the same appeal rights. They just didn't use them and the question is, who would? My guess is that this is nothing more than a well-postured use of the judicial system to promote these murderers and their jihad. Who's doing it? Probably the very people who are funding the appeal.
Gawd, just get it over and done with! Beheading, schemeading, firing squad.. who cares!
And I just don't understand the people's fascination with Ryan the mutilator.
For all I know, Amrozi and friends have killed many more, and yet people are more keen for Ryan to be given the death sentence, except that that the same thing cannot be said about Amrozi the Bali bombers.
Maybe someone should spread stuff about Amrozi being gay then the death sentence can actually happen? LOL
Brett...
Perhaps I did not write or express teh sentiment on the Poso Three very well. In theory they had the same rights, it is debatable as to whether they chose not to exercise those rights.
Prior to the execution there was a significant claim that additional evidence had come to light that might have had an impact on the sentence. However, the system did not allow that evidence to be presented.
My point really was that with the "finality" of a death sentence that it makes sense to cross all the t's and dot all the i's.
In this sense the way the Bali Bombers' appeal process is playing out is not all that surprising.
If I was defending them I might be making some of the very same calls as a defence lawyer.
That said, appeal after appeal on suspect legal grounds has a similar ring to it of that of a vexatious litigant. Simply, launching legal action for the sake of launching legal action. In this regard, I think that the legal team of the Bali Three are launching appeal after appeal just to delay the sentence.
Nevertheless, this is an appeal not against the death sentence but against the manner of execution. To my mind there is nothing in the Constitution that says that a firing squad would be a constitutionaly invalid way of execution a convict sentenced to death.
I guess if you recruited a rag tag group of shooters who managed to shoot you everywhere but somewhere that would kill you instantly then perhaps I would agree it would be a cruel and unusual form of punishment.
However, if the government recruited an amateur swords person then the result might be similar in that death may not be instantaneous and thus cruel and unusual.
My point in this long-winded reply is that the appeal lacks serious merit. Besides I would have thought that an inhumane death at the hands of the government would have fed into the claims that the Bali Three are martyrs for the cause.
Therry...
Serial killers always attract the fascination of the masses. I am not convinced that people what to see Ryan shot because of some gay thing.
You kill a lot of people and that might be enough to get the masses claiming that an eye for an eye is the right way to go in terms of punishment here.
Post a Comment