What are the legal grounds to halt executions of intellectually disabled individuals?

Question

Accepted Answer

Legal Grounds to Halt Executions of Intellectually Disabled Individuals

A court challenge was filed to halt the execution of Pausi Jefridin and Roslan Bakar, citing their intellectual disabilities as grounds for halting their scheduled hangings. Pausi Jefridin, a Malaysian citizen, has an IQ of 67 and is considered mentally disabled, while Roslan Bakar, a Singaporean citizen, is also reported to be mentally impaired. The legal arguments center on the prohibition of executing mentally impaired individuals under international human rights law, specifically the United Nations' Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), to which Singapore is bound.
Prohibition Under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Lawyers for Liberty and the Malaysian Bar have emphasized that Singapore's accession to the UN's Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) prohibits the execution of mentally impaired individuals. This international treaty establishes that persons with disabilities have the right to life and are entitled to be protected from execution if they are deemed mentally impaired. The core of the legal challenge is that carrying out an execution on individuals with significantly reduced intellectual functioning violates these established international obligations.
Incompatibility of the Death Penalty for Drug Offences with Human Rights Law

The United Nations Human Rights Office has stated that the imposition of the death penalty for drug-related offences is incompatible with international human rights law. This stance suggests that capital punishment should be reserved for the most serious crimes, typically involving intentional killing, and not for drug trafficking. This broader principle underpins arguments against the execution of individuals convicted of drug offences, particularly when coupled with evidence of intellectual disability.
Precedent of Similar Cases and Rushed Judicial Processes

The legal challenges also draw attention to previous cases, such as that of Nagaenthran K Dharmalingam, a Malaysian citizen with an IQ of 69 whose execution was stayed due to an ongoing court challenge concerning his mental disability. Lawyers for Liberty argued that it was unacceptable to proceed with the executions of Pausi and Roslan while the legality of executing a mentally disabled person with IQ levels below 70 was still under judicial consideration in Nagaenthran's case. Furthermore, concerns were raised about the expediency of the judicial process, with an appeal for Pausi and Roslan being scheduled for a hearing on the same day it was filed, which lawyers argued could undermine the right to a fair hearing and natural justice principles.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

What are the legal grounds to halt executions of intellectually disabled individuals?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends