Yesterday(28 Nov 2024) was a day of sad drama. I received news that there was going to be an open court hearing of an application for stay of execution filed by Masoud Rahimi who was scheduled to be hanged today. It was to be heard before a judge at 6pm in the Court of Appeal.
At 6pm, the public gallery of the court was almost packed. Then a security guard entered the court and announced that the hearing had been cancelled. She said she was just informed of the cancellation and apologised.
There was disbelief, disappointment and anger among the crowd waiting to see Masoud and hear him speak. But they did eventually leave the court.
Outside the courthouse, some voiced their frustration. Then someone gathered everyone for a photograph to remember that disappointing evening.
Late in the night, news that Masoud’s application had been dismissed without a hearing spread.
Masoud who spent 14 years on death row, was arrested soon after he completed national service. He was 20. He was executed at dawn today at the age of 34.
When I first received news that Masoud’s application was going to be heard in open court, I was skeptical. Singapore courts had in the past summarily dismissed applications filed before a scheduled execution. Judges had in written judgements called such applications an “abuse of process”. They had ruled that prisoners could be executed even though they had pending applications.
Masoud and other death row prisoners had filed a constitutional challenge in the High Court. The case is fixed for hearing in 2025. It apparently involves, among other issues, the constitutionality of double presumptions of guilt spelt out in the Misuse of Drugs Act. Despite this pending case, the judge dismissed Masoud’s application last night without a hearing. His family was told of the dismissal at about 9pm.
I do not know if the judge in dismissing Masoud’s application, considered his pending constitutional challenge. I do not know if any reason was given for disallowing a stay of execution.
What will happen to Masoud’s case when it is heard in 2025? Under normal circumstances, when a party to proceedings dies, his case is discontinued. Masoud’s case however poses a problem. He did not die a natural death. He was executed by the State and the State was represented by the Attorney-General, the party defending the pending constitutional case to be heard in 2025 as well as the party objecting to his application for a stay of execution. Can the court rule that because he is dead, the case is abated?
I think that such a ruling will be rejected by members of the public. They may conclude that Masoud was executed because the Attorney General wanted to prevent him from pursuing his case in 2025. They silenced him by executing him.
There may also be criticisms of the judiciary. Did it fail to exercise its independent powers when it refused to order a stay of execution?
Masoud was apparently the legal scholar who helped his fellow death row prisoners in their battles against the Attorney General. Now that he is dead, these prisoners will be greatly disadvantaged. Have they been treated like the scums of the earth, undeserving of justice?
Leave a Reply