The family of Imam Samudra are intending to lodge a complaint in the event that he is executed. The complaint will be based on a claim that he has been murdered. There are interesting legal arguments relating to state sanctioned murder.
My personal view is that it is murder, it is a willful killing authorized by the state, and it is wrong. I am not arguing that Indonesia does not have the right to use the death penalty. The argument is a loser as international law permits a death penalty state to continue to use the death penalty. I am arguing on moral grounds that the death penalty is wrong. I am arguing that two wrongs will never make a right. Simply, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. I am arguing it is not a deterrent to crime.
Yet, with all those things said, it is unlikely that any claim submitted by Luluk Jamaludin (stroking his goatee in the photo), the younger brother of Imam Samudra, will have legal legs. The Constitutional Court has ruled that the death penalty is a valid form of punishment that does not breach any right to life protections provided for in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Furthermore, the Constitutional Court has also ruled that execution by firing squad is not cruel and unusual punishment.
I just do not see a claim making any headway in a system that seems to be aligned in favor of state sanctioned killings.
The Death Penalty in Indonesia
About this entry
Youre currently reading The Death Penalty in Indonesia.
- Published:
- at 07:27 on 04 November 2008
- Category:
- 1945 Constitution, Bali Bombers, Constitutional Court, Crime, Death Penalty, Deterrents, Imam Samudra, International Law, Luluk Jamaludin, Morality, Right To Life, State Sanctioned Murder
- Previous:
- Older Post
- Next:
- Newer Post
- 4 November 2008 12:16 PM
- 4 November 2008 12:19 PM
- 4 November 2008 4:11 PM
- 4 November 2008 4:13 PM
- 4 November 2008 4:23 PM
- 4 November 2008 4:33 PM
- 4 November 2008 8:09 PM
-
4 November 2008 11:07 PM
Tree...
Nah, we probably won't talk that much about it after the event. When it's done, it's done. It loses news value and discussability almost immediately.
The news value and the interesting discussion has been the process. To some the process has been an annoyance and overkill (no pun intended although it would be a good one).
The discussion of it has annoyed you and obviously Brett (Spruiked) and perhaps many many others. I even have had Brett suggesting I am baying for blood and others questioning my opposition to the death penalty. Such is life.
We probably do not need to have the debate on whether it is murder either. I have written stacks on this elsewhere (not on the blog) and cannot be bothered to publish it here.
Jaka...
Yes, it is a little ironic. However, in this case it is a little bit misleading and way confusing.
Their lawyers are wanting to use human rights mechanisms not so much to postpone the execution but rather to get a statement that says Muslims have a human right to be beheaded if they are sentenced to death.
Schmerly...
The treespotter is always good for links to lots of great stuff, his own included.
Tree...
I am not offended but I probably should be. Propaganda on what?
I am hardly trying to martyr these three and the suggestion that I am is a little bit out there, but to each their own! -
5 November 2008 4:37 AM
Ha! well, i'm aware that that wasn't your intention and most likely isn't what you're actually doing either. And therefore the allegation could've been completely baseless, but it's not really.
Propaganda is essentially the method - not the campaign. It's the repetitiveness of the message and the intensity of its broadcast - rather than the content of the message. Propaganda does not have a moral value, since it is an action. It could well be a good thing - discipline is a form of propaganda, civil obedience is implanted thru propaganda. It is often used for less noble cause however and had since been condemned as a Nazi instrument, but that's semantics.
to martyr someone is essentially to recognize the sacrifice human lives in order to maintain the freedom and keep the peace for the rest. Which is what you are doing - very subtly visible on your thoughts of capital punishment.
This is most likely because such conflicting values essentially makes you pay more attention to it, one would argue, you lose your objectivity over your subject. In a bigger picture, as Spruiked clearly elaborated - countries opposing the death penalties are the most intense in reporting about death execution in other places - because they no longer have the excitement themselves.
But then again, I also pointed out that the fascination is reaching an embarrassingly euphoria of the media in Indonesia. So maybe we're all just fascinated by death in the different ways. We all just need to talk about it - it's perfectly natural to talk about death, but most of us prefer that we don't do that too often.
So you see, I stand by my statement, Propaganda for Martyrs is probably not an entirely accurate terminology - but it is certainly not intended to be an allegation. It's an attempt to come for a term to describe an observation.
thx - 5 November 2008 4:55 AM
- 5 November 2008 8:06 AM
11 Words of Wisdom: