A discussion group facilitated by a human rights non-governmental group in Penang concluded that those sentenced to death are often members of minority groups which include political and religious opponents.

Facilitator of the group, Anil Netto, who spoke at the "Amnesty International Film Workshop on the Death Penalty" last night said that those found guilty of the death penalty comprise mostly those from lower income group.

"You don't see rich tycoons getting executed. It is often those who have no proper legal representation who have to face the death penalty,"said Anil, a social activist with local reform movement, Aliran.

Core vision of AI

About 30 people attended the event, which kicked off with a documentary on executions, at the Penang Actor's Studio.

The 20-minute film addressed the issues of the death penalty and state-sponsored killing through the examination of social, political and moral impact of these methods of death.

Composed of genuine footage and statistics, the chapters presented were on various execution styles and uses the theme of humane death in every segment.

Abolishing the death penalty, which is practised in Malaysia for first degree murderers and drug offenders, has been a core vision of AI.

However, AI said that while the death penalty is central to the organisation's work, it also evoked sensitivity from the public that has, in the past, limited its approach to campaigning directly about the topic in Malaysia.
The group said during the period between 1970 and 2001, there had been 358 executions in Malaysia, the majority of which were for drug offences. As at December 2001, some 159 people were on death row.

Criticisms and justifications

Meanwhile, Anil took the group through the criticisms against and justification for implementing the death penalty throughout history.

Arguments for the penalty include the method of killing being used as a ''punishment and deterrent'' for crime that is beyond correction.

There are other justifications like executions were cheaper than keeping someone in jail and it is often thought as the best way to prevent social ills like drug abuse and rape.

Those who were of the opinion that the harsh penalty should be abolished said that the approach does not really solve the problem as it does not address the root of the crime.

However, Anil opined that human life was precious and ending someone's life was denying him or her the possibility of reform.

He said there were also the possibility of inaccurate testimony and fabrication of evidence that may lead to the killing of innocent people.

He cited the infamous British case of the "Guilford Four" where police were later found to have fabricated evidence during the trial to secure their conviction.

"For example, in the case of drug trafficking, we should address the root of the problem like what makes people take drugs, who are the traffickers and how come drugs are being distributed despite the heavy penalty," said Anil.

Past proposals

Speaking to malaysiakini later, AI coordinator Josef Roy lamented that one of the problems of the death penalty was the difficulty of getting information of those currently on death row.

He said that if one believes in the right to life according to the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it is against one's belief to support the death penalty.

There had been proposals in the past to amend the mandatory death sentence in Malaysia.

Last year, former Bar Council chairperson Raja Aziz Addruse urged the government to amend the law to give judges the option whether or not to pass the death sentence.

He said at present imposition of the penalty was not a choice for the presiding judge in cases involving murder and drug trafficking.

This means, he added, that anyone found guilty for murder and drug offences under the penal code would automatically join the death row.

"It is inherent in any judicial system that the innocent be found guilty and an innocent man may be sentenced to death," he said.