Post by Anja Nieser on Sept 14, 2006 7:49:12 GMT -5
Kazakhstan: Court Issues Death Sentence
Vienna, 11 September 2006 –
The International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights (IHF) condemns a Kazakh court’s recent use of the death penalty as a violation of the right to life. On 31 August 2006, Rustam Ibragimov, a former security officer and one of two primary suspects in the murder trial of political opposition party leader Altynbek Sarsenbaev, was sentenced to death in Taldy-Qorgan, a city 250 kilometers north of Almaty.
The court also sentenced nine others, including the other lead suspect, Erzhan Utembaev, for their roles in Sarsenbaev’s murder to prison terms ranging from three to twenty years. All ten convictions came amid a great deal of controversy surrounding the court proceedings and investigations, raising further concerns about violations of due process and the right to a fair trial.
Sarsenbaev, the leader of the Naghiz Ak-Zhol opposition party, was assassinated in February. His murder trial began on 14 June, and on 10 August, state prosecutors demanded that Utembaev and Ibragimov receive death sentences while the other defendants receive prison sentences of anywhere from nine to twenty years.
Though there has been a moratorium on executions since December 2003 and life imprisonment has been a viable legal alternative to the death sentence since January 2004 – both developments welcomed by the IHF – this latest ruling signals that obstacles remain in Kazakhstan’s journey towards abating the use of the death penalty and, eventually, abolishing it. With the moratorium in place, Ibragimov now goes to death row, joining 27 other inmates and awaiting his death should the political will of the Kazakh government break and lift the moratorium.
The IHF supports abolishment of the death penalty throughout Central Asia for reasons well illustrated by the Sarsenbaev trial. The trial has been riddled with controversy. Relatives of Sarsenbaev have called it a “farce” and have launched an independent investigation, boycotting the final stages of the proceedings and claiming higher-ranked government officials were responsible for the assassination. Utembaev, accused of orchestrating the murder, has retracted his confession, expressed in a letter to President Narzarbaev. He claims to have been under duress and not fully conscious when he wrote it.
The trial has been marred by theatrics, with Ibragimov, on 2 August, accusing a group of high-ranking government officials—including a former security service chief and the Speaker of the Senate—of plotting the murder. The security service chief and Senate speaker were not called to testify in court though their subordinates are standing trial. Given such investigative miscues and according to many observers, the public has expressed concern that the investigation into the crime has not been thorough enough, considering the proceedings too hasty.
All of this considered, due process and the defendants’ right to a fair trial may have been violated. The Kazakh court, despite these legal failings, has issued a death sentence.
Aaron Rhodes, executive director of the IHF, expanding on the IHF’s opposition to the death penalty, said that:
“No matter how much legal reform is passed in Kazakhstan or any other state to ensure due process and fair trials, none of it will overcome the immorality of the death penalty and the fact that it violates the right to life. The only reform that can overcome these concerns is the abolishment of the death penalty and the commuting of all death sentences into prison sentences. Kazakhstan is one step away from completing a noble journey towards defending the right to life.”
The IHF, therefore, calls upon Kazakh authorities not only to apply the legally-viable alternative to the death sentence—life imprisonment—in Ibragimov’s case but also, more generally, to abolish the death penalty completely and take that final step towards defending the right to life.
Vienna, 11 September 2006 –
The International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights (IHF) condemns a Kazakh court’s recent use of the death penalty as a violation of the right to life. On 31 August 2006, Rustam Ibragimov, a former security officer and one of two primary suspects in the murder trial of political opposition party leader Altynbek Sarsenbaev, was sentenced to death in Taldy-Qorgan, a city 250 kilometers north of Almaty.
The court also sentenced nine others, including the other lead suspect, Erzhan Utembaev, for their roles in Sarsenbaev’s murder to prison terms ranging from three to twenty years. All ten convictions came amid a great deal of controversy surrounding the court proceedings and investigations, raising further concerns about violations of due process and the right to a fair trial.
Sarsenbaev, the leader of the Naghiz Ak-Zhol opposition party, was assassinated in February. His murder trial began on 14 June, and on 10 August, state prosecutors demanded that Utembaev and Ibragimov receive death sentences while the other defendants receive prison sentences of anywhere from nine to twenty years.
Though there has been a moratorium on executions since December 2003 and life imprisonment has been a viable legal alternative to the death sentence since January 2004 – both developments welcomed by the IHF – this latest ruling signals that obstacles remain in Kazakhstan’s journey towards abating the use of the death penalty and, eventually, abolishing it. With the moratorium in place, Ibragimov now goes to death row, joining 27 other inmates and awaiting his death should the political will of the Kazakh government break and lift the moratorium.
The IHF supports abolishment of the death penalty throughout Central Asia for reasons well illustrated by the Sarsenbaev trial. The trial has been riddled with controversy. Relatives of Sarsenbaev have called it a “farce” and have launched an independent investigation, boycotting the final stages of the proceedings and claiming higher-ranked government officials were responsible for the assassination. Utembaev, accused of orchestrating the murder, has retracted his confession, expressed in a letter to President Narzarbaev. He claims to have been under duress and not fully conscious when he wrote it.
The trial has been marred by theatrics, with Ibragimov, on 2 August, accusing a group of high-ranking government officials—including a former security service chief and the Speaker of the Senate—of plotting the murder. The security service chief and Senate speaker were not called to testify in court though their subordinates are standing trial. Given such investigative miscues and according to many observers, the public has expressed concern that the investigation into the crime has not been thorough enough, considering the proceedings too hasty.
All of this considered, due process and the defendants’ right to a fair trial may have been violated. The Kazakh court, despite these legal failings, has issued a death sentence.
Aaron Rhodes, executive director of the IHF, expanding on the IHF’s opposition to the death penalty, said that:
“No matter how much legal reform is passed in Kazakhstan or any other state to ensure due process and fair trials, none of it will overcome the immorality of the death penalty and the fact that it violates the right to life. The only reform that can overcome these concerns is the abolishment of the death penalty and the commuting of all death sentences into prison sentences. Kazakhstan is one step away from completing a noble journey towards defending the right to life.”
The IHF, therefore, calls upon Kazakh authorities not only to apply the legally-viable alternative to the death sentence—life imprisonment—in Ibragimov’s case but also, more generally, to abolish the death penalty completely and take that final step towards defending the right to life.