African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies ACJPS | المركز الافريقي لدراسات العدالة و السلام
UPDATE: On 28 November 2013, the North Darfur Appeal Court overturned the amputation sentence of the three men under article 173 (penalty of capital theft when the hud is remitted) of the 1991 Sudanese Penal Code, which allows for hudud penalties to be remitted in capital theft cases where extenuating circumstances, listed under article 172, can be proven.
(5 April 2013) On 31 March 2013 Judge Abazar Hamid of El Fashir Criminal Court, North Darfur, sentenced three men to amputation of the right hand from the wrist. The court hearing failed to meet the most basic fair trial standards.
Abdulatif Ahmed Ibrahim, Ahmed Idris Salih, and Ali Salih were found guilty of Capital Theft under Article 170 of the 1991 Sudanese Penal Code and sentenced to the amputations in the absence of a defence lawyer.
The three men, accused of stealing cooking oil worth 14,700 Sudanese Pounds (approximately 3,300 US dollars) from a factory in El Fashir town on 26 December 2012 are currently detained in Shala Prison, North Darfur. Their families have retained a lawyer to submit an appeal to the North Darfur Appeal Court.
Judge Abazar Hamid handed down the sentence in contravention of Sudanese law, which requires the accused in amputation cases to be represented by a defence lawyer. Amputation penalties contravene the absolute prohibition on torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishments under international law, and underscore the urgent need to reform Sudanese law in line with Sudan’s international human rights commitments.
The African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies (ACJPS) condemns the sentences and calls on the Government of Sudan to:
- Commute these and all corporal punishment sentences;
- Uphold the right of the accused to receive a fair trial and have adequate legal representation in accordance with Sudanese and international law;
- Immediately stop imposing amputations and all other forms of corporal punishment, such as stoning and flogging, and bring Sudanese laws in line with Sudan’s international law commitments to prohibit torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Background
The three men were accused of Capital Theft under Article 170 of the 1991 Sudanese Penal Code (police case file number 3218-2012). Article 171 (a) of the Penal Code sets out that, “[w]hoever commits the offence of capital theft shall be punished with amputation of the right hand, from the wrist joint”. Article 135(3) of the1991 Sudanese Criminal Procedure Code requires the Sudanese Ministry of Justice to appoint a defence lawyer for any person accused of an offence that carries a punishment of 10 years or more imprisonment, amputation or death.
Amputation as a form of corporal punishment was incorporated into Sudanese law in 1983 when then-President Gaffar Nimeiry introduced Islamic reforms known as the “September laws.” Although amputation sentences have been handed down under these laws, until recently human rights campaigners had hoped that a de factomoratorium on the implementation of such sentences operated, as there had been no reported cases since 2001.
However, on 11 March Sudan’s Deputy Chief Justice Abdul Rahman Sharfi held a press conference boasting that 16 cases of amputation had been carried out by the authorities since 2001.
The press conference was held in response to international and domestic outcry concerning the reported implementation of a penalty of cross-amputation (amputation of the right hand and left foot) against 30-year old Adam al-Muthna by doctors at a state owned hospital in Khartoum the previous month. Human rights campaign groups expressed deep concern that doctors had implemented the penalty in contravention of medical ethics which prohibit them from engaging in acts of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In response, Sharfi reportedly stated that the Sudanese authorities “cherish the book of Allah [Quran] and not the Hippocratic Oath”. He further added that if doctors refuse to implement Sharia (Islamic law) punishments, they would face prosecution and that the government could train and qualify judges to perform court-ordered amputations instead.
As a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Sudan has made a commitment to an absolute ban on torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In 1997, the UN Human Rights Committee called for Sudan to abolish flogging, amputation, and stoning because they are incompatible with Sudan’s obligations under the ICCPR. The government of Sudan did not comply.
Sudan is also a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. In the case of Doebbler v Sudan, concerning the use of flogging as a punishment in Sudan, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights ruled that: “there is no right for the government of a country to apply physical violence to individuals for offences. Such a right would be tantamount to sanctioning State sponsored torture,” contrary to article 5 of the African Charter.
Contact: Osman Hummaida, Executive Director, African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies (ACJPS).
Phone: +44 7956 095738 (UK).
E-mail: osman@acjps.org.
End.
This post is also available in: Arabic
