I didn't think China could possibly sink any lower, but...

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Shiny Noctowl

Go! PikaBot!
Joined
Jun 11, 2008
Messages
554
Reaction score
0
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/29/akmal-shaikh-execution-china

China was this morning condemned for its human rights record after a British man who, his supporters say, had mental health problems, was executed for smuggling drugs.

Akmal Shaikh, 53, was put to death at 10.30am local time (2.30am British time) after frantic last-minute pleas for clemency by the Foreign Office failed.

Britain had demonstrated its anger with Beijing over the treatment of Shaikh, who had smuggled 4kg (8.8lb) of heroin into China, when it summoned the Chinese ambassador for a diplomatic dressing down at the Foreign Office.

In what was described as a "full and frank exchange of views", the Foreign Office minister Ivan Lewis asked Fu Ying for clemency and outlined Britain's concern that China had not taken Shaikh's mental health into consideration.

Hours before the deadline – and after voicing Britain's opposition to the death penalty in a telephone call to his Chinese counterpart – Lewis told the ambassador that it was "not right" that Shaikh's mental health had been overlooked by the court that sentenced him.

Speaking after meeting the ambassador, in Britain's 27th representation to China on the case, Lewis said: "China fully understands the strength of feeling in this country and around the world."

But the ambassador made clear that the Chinese judiciary was independent of the government and that the supreme court had made its decision. On Shaikh's mental health, she said all his paperwork had been fed into the judicial process, which had now taken its course.

As MPs lined up to criticise China's action, a spokesman for the embassy said Shaikh had been found with more than 4kg of heroin, and being caught with 50g of heroin was enough for the death penalty under Chinese law.

Downing Street said Britain had done "everything within its power" to secure a fair trial and clemency for Shaikh, who was found guilty of drug smuggling in 2007. "The prime minister has intervened personally on a number of occasions: he has raised the case with Premier Wen [Jiabao], most recently at the Copenhagen summit, and has written several times to President Hu [Jintao]," a spokesman said.

MPs were scathing about China. Ken Purchase, a former Foreign Office ministerial aide and a member of the Commons foreign affairs select committee, called China's actions "absolutely regrettable", adding that the country was trying to position itself in the mainstream of international affairs while persisting with "barbaric actions".

Gisela Stuart, a former Labour minister who also sits on the foreign affairs select committee, said: "When it comes to questions of human rights in China there is still the most enormous gap."

Shaikh was informed of his death sentence yesterday when British consular officials accompanied two of his cousins Soohail Shaikh and Nasir Shaikh, to the secure hospital in Urumqi where he was being held. His death sentence marks the first time an EU national has been executed in China in 50 years.

In a statement after the meeting, they said: "He was obviously very upset on hearing from us of the sentence. We strongly feel that he's not rational and he needs medication. We feel a pardon would allow Akmal to get the medical assistance he needs." The family filed a last-minute petition for a stay of execution and an application for a special pardon to China's supreme court, to the president, and to the standing committee of the people's national congressNational People's Congress orthe parliament.

Shaikh, a father of three, was arrested in Urumqi in September 2007 and charged with drug smuggling. He lost a final appeal last week, but campaigners claim his mental illness was not taken into account.

The anti-death-penalty organisation Reprieve said it had medical evidence that Shaikh believed he was going to China in 2007 to record a hit single that would usher in world peace. It said he was duped into carrying a suitcase packed with heroin on a flight from Tajikistan to Urumqi.

As the hours counted down to his execution, witnesses gave more evidence of Shaikh's strange behaviour in the past.

Paul Newberry, a British national who lives in Poland, described how Shaikh while there had lived in a fantasy world: "He had no money but was never desperate for it. He was clearly not desperate enough to smuggle heroin to China."
Click to expand...
 
...*braces self for the flames* I don't see how this makes China so bad.

The guy was caught smuggling heroin into the country. His mental health shouldn't have come into it at all, unless he was so mentally ill that someone in Britain came up to him and handed him a bag saying "This is sugar, take it onto the plane." or something; and if someone is THAT mentally deficient, it would be obvious.

I know China isn't exactly a role model when it comes to human rights, and that a death penalty seems a little severe a punishment (especially given that he's already spent about 2 years in jail), but the fact remains that he broke the Chinese law. I interpreted the article as saying that Britain's basic argument was "He's retarded, so it's okay for him to smuggle massive amounts of heroin." Uh, no.
 
I'm no supporter of the death penalty, but I fail to see how this constitutes China "sinking lower".

This is nowhere near even the top-1000 of the worst things China has done. If this wasn't a citizen of a western country, nobody would be talking about it.
 
I'm with agreement with Edo-Kun, when you're in a foreign country, you don't have diplomatic immunity 99.9% of the time and are fully subject to the host countries laws. I don't agree with China's death penalty use, but have to respect the fact that's their way of doing things there.

I read elsewhere that the man in question suffered from bipolar disorder, though don't quote me on that.
 
Kind of torn on this one, for one this seems to be a statement from China's Government of "We can do what ever we want" it seems like the best and wisest thing to do would be to send him back to the country of origin and say "He is your problem if he is caught in China again with drugs we will kill him"

That being said, unless the man was strictly a mule, then he was smart enough to know that it is illegal to take drugs into China. Aka if he didn't know that he wouldn't have been trying to smuggle it in. That in and of itself requires some higher level planning and thought process especially with 8.8 lbs of cocaine.

Now while I am for the death penalty I tend to shy away from killing mentally ill people, unless they do a crime so horrible that it is deserving no matter your mental condition. That being said when faced with the death penalty you would be surprised how many people feign some kind of mental problem to get out of it. And on the other hand as others have said this is the law in China, and above all else laws must be respected when you enter a country.
 
Yeah, I don't agree that this is "sinking lower" either. While the death penalty might be a little too harsh, I can at least understand the reasoning behind it in this case.

And honestly, mental health? What mental illness would justify bringing in a drug that kills so many into China?
 
I don't care if I get flamed(more then half of you fail at it anyways) but I don't really see a problem in that at all. And I have to agree with Satoshi and a the others, I don't see how it's "sinking lower" either.
 
Never thought I'd side with China on anything but...

The man broke their law and he should be subject to the penalties that are in place for breaking Chinese law.

Even though I have some issues with how the actual execution was done and with the whole mental health issue, I don't hold it against China more than any of the other things they've done. A lot less in fact.
 
It would be like sending someone from Amsterdam who was vacationing in the US to jail for smoking a joint on the street (well, not exactly I guess, what this cat did was illegal in both countries, but you know what I mean). You have to play by the rules of the country you are in, and you have to face the penalties for not.

Now, if they were going to sentence a guy to death for having a book about how their government is shit in their messenger bag, that would be completely different... but we're talking heroin here. I can't really begrudge a government for doing their best to tackle the problem of illegal drugs that can kill their users very quickly, or at least render them unable to perform in society all too quickly.
 
I'm with everyone else, there's not really a 'right' side in this debate. The man broke their laws* and was subsequentially punished. His mental capacity isn't a line of defense, as it doesn't defend the fact that he did break their laws. I don't agree with China's laws either, the death penalty is overkill considering that he served 2 years in jail and was not a Chinese citizen.

*Random tangent: "Laws" probably isn't the best word to use, since the Chinese government can pretty do whatever they want. Laws are more of a front for them doing whatever they want.
 
This is pretty bad and inexcusable, but as far as "sinking lower" goes, I have one name for you to look up:

Mao Tse-Tung.
 
Well the Chinese People's Supreme Court apparently asked for papers that proved his mental illness. But alas this happened.

Meh. I don't want to get into the whole Death penalty thing. :T
 
He was mentally ill, damn it. You can't kill someone for being mental, can you? Thank god we in Britain demolished execution years ago.
 
Disagree with the penalty (jail would be sufficient, but I'm against the death penalty all together too), but when you do break another nation's laws, then you deserve to be punished for doing so.
 
You break something, you pay for it =] Nothing else to it, thats what I learnt when growing up. I mean, even if the person was mentally ill...Shouldn't he have someone to go with him? I mean, what if some mental person started to roam your streets with a heroine? You'll be scared shitless. But, a mental person with GUIDANCE you'll be happy. I mean come on...If it was your country, what would you do? Life sentence is only 25 years here in Australia...
 
Shaikh was mentally ill, the Chinese Supreme Court refused the British government's requests to even test him. In fact, the Chinese Supreme Court denied Shaikh an appeal, despite the fact that the Chinese Constitution grants an automatic appeal to anyone convicted of a capital crime. Furthermore, Shaikh was the victim of a confidence trick, and he didn't know he was carrying heroin.

If you doubt that Shaikh was innocent, read this article, specifically this part:

Back in 2007, "Carlos" told him that he knew people in the music industry that could assist and in September that year paid for a flight for Shaikh to Kyrgyzstan. There, his passport was taken by a gang of men – an act which did not unduly worry Shaikh, who believed he would soon be so famous that he would be recognised at every border crossing. When his passport was eventually returned, he was introduced to a man called Okole. This man, Shaikh claims he was told, ran a huge nightclub in China that would be the perfect venue for the debut performance of Come Little Rabbit.

En route to China, the two men stopped in Dushanbe, in Tajikistan, where they stayed in a five-star hotel – which Reprieve say Shaikh believed was a sign of his celebrity status. There, Okole told him he would have to fly to China alone as the flight was full. Shaikh claims Okole gave him a suitcase and promised to follow on the next flight.

On 12 September 2007, Shaikh flew into Urumqi and was stopped by customs officials on arrival. He was searched and his baggage scanned. Two packets containing around £250,000 worth of heroin were found in his luggage.
Click to expand...
 
Well, unless he didn't know that it was heroin, it's his own fault that he was killed. Of course, I am against the death penalty but I think that he shouldn't have done it if he didnt want to feel the punishment.
 
Here is something that was printed in a local newspaper in my city. Its a quote by Jia Qinggao, a Peking University Official.

"When governments in the West turn down China's request for extradition of suspects, they cite the importance of judicial independence and a separation of powers. But when it comes to there own citizens, they ask the Government to interfere with judicial independence"
Click to expand...

IMPORTANT: I do not know the accuracy of this statement.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom