Indian convict faces May execution for drug offense

Indian convict faces May execution for drug offense

Apriadi Gunawan, The Jakarta Post, Medan, North Sumatra

Prosecutors here said on Friday that they would execute Ayodnya
Prasad Chaubey, an Indian citizen sentenced to death on drug
charges in the North Sumatra capital of Medan, by May at the
latest.

However, on the same day, the Medan District Court began a
hearing into the convict's request for judicial review of the
recent presidential rejection of his clemency plea.

Head of the general crimes section at the Medan Prosecutor's
Office Albert Siregar dismissed the judicial review request,
saying it would not change the decision to execute Chaubey, 57,
soon, as the convict had previously used a similar tactic.

"Based on Chapter 3, Article 268 of the Criminal Code,
judicial review can occur only once. So, we consider that today's
trial for the requested judicial review is a nonjudicial process
and will not affect the execution plan," he said.

President Megawati Soekarnoputri turned down earlier this
month the pleas for clemency sought by Chaubey and other
convicted defendants on death row.

In response, Chaubey filed a new request for judicial review,
despite the fact that he had already submitted a similar request
to the Supreme Court to counter his conviction.

He was sentenced to death by the Medan District Court in 1994
for attempting to smuggle into the country 12.19 kilograms of
heroin from Thailand.

The conviction was upheld by the North Sumatra High Court on
Dec. 14, 1994, and by the Supreme Court a year later.

Chaubey did not attend Friday's hearing of his judicial review
request after local prosecutors prevented him from showing up,
citing a security risk.

Director of Medan-based Legal Aid Institute Irham Buana
Nasution, a lawyer for Chaubey, criticized the prosecutors for
preventing his client from attending the hearing.

Irham accused them of failing to interpret properly Article
265, Chapter 2 of the Criminal Code, which states that such a
hearing should be attended by defendants, prosecutors and judges.

Responding to the criticism, prosecutor Anshari Siregar, who
attended the trial, simply denied having received a request from
Chaubey's lawyers to present their client to the hearing and that
his office did not want to bear any risk by taking the convict to
court.

Albert echoed Anshari's statement and said prosecutors were
present at Friday's hearing for "humanity considerations", but
insisted that the hearing outcome would be regarded as
nonjudicial.

"Whatever the outcome of the court decision, we shall proceed
with the execution (of Chaubey)," he added.

During the trial, Chaubey's lawyers provided the court with
what they claimed to be new evidence that their client was
arrested and charged without being accompanied by his attorneys,
and convicted without the 12.9 kg of heroin being presented in
court as hard evidence.

Albert dismissed the evidence, saying the lawyers had actually
presented it at previous trials. "So, there was no new evidence
because it had already been submitted in court before," he
asserted.

Apart from judicial review, Chaubey is seeking the help of the
Indian president, to try and acquit him of all charges via
diplomatic approaches.