British
woman facing execution in Indonesia makes last appeal for UK government to fund
her defence
theguardian.com,
Steven Morris and agency, Wednesday 4 June 2014
 |
| Lindsay Sandiford at her trial last year. Photograph: Sonny Tumbelaka/ AFP/Getty Images |
A British
woman facing execution by firing squad in Indonesia for drug smuggling has no
funds to mount a legal challenge against her sentence, the UK's highest court
has been told.
Lawyers for
Lindsay Sandiford, 57, from Cheltenham, are arguing at the supreme court that
the government's policy not to provide funding for legal representation to
Britons facing capital charges abroad is unlawful. The court of appeal rejectedthis argument in May last year.
Her
barrister, Aidan O'Neill QC, told five supreme court judges that previously
Sandiford had been able to fund her legal fight against the death sentence in
the Indonesian courts through donations.
He said the
only two chances left to her now were appealing against her sentence at the
Indonesian supreme court or submitting a petition for clemency to the country's
government. The first course required "detailed knowledge of Indonesian
law", the second "close knowledge of the Indonesian judicial and
political situation and environment".
O'Neill
added: "The appellant is however effectively without legal representation
in Indonesia and she has no access to any further private funding which might
otherwise allow her to instruct a suitably qualified lawyer."
Sandiford
was found with cocaine worth an estimated £1.6m when she arrived in Bali on a
flight from Thailand in May 2012. She has claimed she was forced to transport
the drugs, believing her son would be targeted by gangsters if she refused, but
in January 2013 she was sentenced to death by firing squad by a district court
in Bali.
Her
supporters say she has been hampered throughout by a lack of access to an
effective legal team.
The Foreign
and Commonwealth Office has said the government does not fund legal
representation for British nationals abroad but has supported Sandiford through
diplomatic channels.
In written
submissions opposing Sandiford's appeal, Martin Chamberlain QC, for the foreign
secretary, William Hague, said: "The death penalty is among the
punishments to which the government is opposed in all circumstances as a matter
of principle."
But
Chamberlain said the legal aid scheme extended only to proceedings in the UK,
and the government "has not established an analogous scheme to cover legal
expenses for British nationals involved in criminal proceedings abroad, even
where the proceedings may result in the imposition of punishments to which it
is strongly opposed".
He told the
judges the policy did not allow funding to be given, even in exceptional
circumstances, but added: "However, that does not mean that the
appellant's individual circumstances have been ignored."
Speaking
before the supreme court hearing, Maya Foa, death penalty director of the human
rights campaign group Reprieve, said: "Lindsay was only sentenced to death
because she didn't have funding for an adequate lawyer.
"Her
co-defendants, all of whom had competent lawyers and funds at their disposal,
received sentences of one to seven years. Lindsay, who had neither, was
sentenced to death.
"British
nationals who find themselves facing a death sentence in Indonesia also find
themselves at a disadvantage compared to other European nationals whose home
governments provide assistance.
"Had
Lindsay been Dutch, Austrian, Swedish or German, she would have been
represented by well-respected local counsel – and very likely have avoided a
death sentence in the first place.
"The
Indonesian government also takes this position – admirably, they provide legal
assistance for their nationals facing a death sentence overseas, from Florida
to Saudi Arabia."
The hearing continues.
Related Articles:
 |
Capital punishment 2013
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.