“May” 3, 2013 (JUBA) - South Sudan will keep the capital punishment in place unless amendments are introduced in the country's constitution, the chief justice said today.
![JPEG - 34.2 kb]()
- South Sudan's chief justice, Chan Reec Madut (AP)
“The transitional constitution does not have a provision that prohibits [the] death penalty. This means that our judges will continue to rely on current laws until when constitutional amendment [are] made through an act of parliament", the country's Chief Justice, Chan Reec Madut said.
Madut was speaking at an inauguration function of the new office belonging to Constitutional Review Commission whose mandate has been extended for up to two years.
The chief justice appeared to be reacting to recent reports by different civil rights activists acting together with the international human rights organisations, which called for capital punishment to be abolished.
Meanwhile, Nyok Monyrac, the Warrap state Acting President of the High Court, who in April, presided over murder related cases in Kuacjok, capital of the state, said in a separate interview that there was no alternative to avoiding capital punishment "by hanging" unless a constitutional amendment is made.
“There are three people who have been convicted in Kuacjok. They are now awaiting execution. All the processes are completed. The hearings have taken place and judgment which established reasonable grounds for sentence has been made. They have now been sentenced to death by hanging in the proceedings because it has been provednbeyond reasonable that the killings were deliberate. The convicts also accepted. In fact one of the convicts said he had wanted to kill one of his targets but ended up mistakenly killing another innocent person”, Judge Monyrac explained.
Two others, he said, were sentenced for jointly stabbing a person to death with a spear in Majokanyar, a local market under administrative and territorial jurisdiction of Tonj North County, Warrap State. He cited the 206 and 207 sections of South Sudan Penal Code Act 2008 which he said states that people convicted of intentional murder should be sentenced to death or life imprisonment.
After the country gained independence in 2011, South Sudan was among the 111 members of the United Nations that supported a resolution passed by the United Nations General Assembly that called for the removal of death penalty.
Despite the move courts in South Sudan have continued to sentence convicted murders to death rather than opting for life imprisonment.
“We have read a lot from the media and the activities of the human rights groups. There have been reports after reports but what can the judiciary do without laws. Our current Transitional Constitution allows death penalty because it has not amended. We cannot do anything because cases are judged based on articles relevant to certain provisions in the constitution. Yes we are aware that our country was one of the member states of the United Nations which endorsed removal of death penalty but there is a need to amend the constitution to reinforce what the signed at the United Nations otherwise it will be a spoiled vote”, Monyrac narrated.
He explained that Criminal procedure Act 2008, section 275, states that when a person is sentenced to death they are to be hung by the neck until he or she is pronounced dead.
The Warrap state-based judge said little was likely to change until the law is changed. He said records at his disposal show that levels of crime have increased in Warrap state so far this year with over 40 murder and rape cases already reported.
There were only 20 reported cases of murder and rape in the whole of 2012, he said, adding that Tonj East, Tonj South, Gogrial East and Twic had the highest crime rates.
In a separate issue, Chief Justice Madut said he had ordered the establishment of special mobile courts tasked with identifying and trying cases.
"This will help reduce concerns about cases that take long to be tried due to lack of judges or availability of defense lawyers. These courts move with advocates and team of defense lawyers for those who could not afford to hire lawyers who would [otherwise be forced to] represent them[selves] in court”, Madut said.
(ST)