Danish company supplies drug for death penalty in the U.S.

The European Union frowns on the death penalty and almost all European countries have banned state- sponsored killing. In Denmark, the last time the death punishment was meted out was in 1892 and the Scandinavian country completely abolished the death penalty for all crimes in 1978. Despite the ban on the death penalty in Denmark, a Danish pharmaceutical company, Lundbeck, supplies a drug used for the death penalty in the U.S.

H. Lundbeck A/S, commonly known as Lundbeck was founded in 1915 and became pharmaceutical in 1924. The research-based company produces a drug called pentobarbital which is used for executions in the U.S.

According to The New York Times, Lundbeck has sold pentobarbital to four major U.S. executioners: Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma and Texas. The Lundbeck-produced drug has replaced sodium thiopental which was once the drug of choice for the U.S. killing machine.

Italy, Austria, Germany and Britain have stifled the supply of sodium thiopental which was widely used for executions in the U.S. Due to the limited supply of sodium thiopental, U.S. executioners have switched to Lundbeck-produced pentobarbital.

Amnesty International has called on the European Commission to stop the trade in torture and death penalty equipment. You're encouraged to sign the petition urging the President of the European Commission, José  Manuel Borroso, to effectively ban the trade in "tools of torture" by European companies. This would go a long way to prohibit the use of pentobarbital produced by Lundbeck for executions in the U.S.

Lundbeck claims the death penalty is against what the company stands for. If this is the case, the company should take concrete steps to ensure that its drug is only used to safe life as it was intended, not claim life.

A legal action charity known as Reprieve notes that Lundbeck is the only supplier of pentobarbital in the U.S. The organization has repeatedly slammed Lundbeck for not doing enough to keep its drug out of death chambers. The execution of Jeffrey Moths on 6 May 2011 in South Carolina brought the number of persons killed in the U.S. with the drug supplied by Lundbeck to seven. The Danish company has apparently chosen big business over respect for human life.

Share

Tweet

Denmark: Man found guilty of racism against Muslim men

At a time when xenophobia is on the rise in Europe, a 68-year-old Danish man has been found guilty of racism by a court in Denmark. Lars Hedegaard, a proclaimed "free speech advocate", was found guilty for making offensive and denigrating comments against Muslim men.

In December 2009, Lars Hedegaard granted a 35 minutes interview that was published on a Danish blog. Here's what he said during the interview, amongst other things:

"Girls in Muslim families are raped by their uncles, their cousins, or their fathers," and "when a Muslim man rapes a woman, it is in his right to do so." [Source].

Lars was dragged to court for comments depicting Muslim men as rapists  and "warriors" who believe that "women have no value, they are not human beings. Their function is to be wombs - they bear the warrior's offspring and create new warriors..." [Source].

The free speech advocate was acquitted in January 2011 by a lower District Court on grounds that he didn't know his offensive comments would be published.

The decision to acquit Lars was appealed by the state prosecutor and on 3 May 2011, the Eastern High Court found Lars Hedegaard guilty of racism. He was fined 5000 Danish Kroner (about 985 U.S. Dollars as of today) for his derogatory comments against Muslim men.

Lars Hedegaard is said to be a free speech advocate and President of the Danish Free Press Society. In this capacity, he's expected to know that the right to free speech has limitations prescribed by law and should not be used to insult, defame or instigate hate against a group of people.

Article 19(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) provides for the right to freedom of expression and many proponents of "hate speech" in the name of free speech often invoke Article 19(2) of the ICCPR, but fail to put into perspective Article 19(3) of the same Covenant that provides "certain restrictions" to free speech "provided by law."

At the level of the European Union, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) guarantees free speech. Article 10(2) on its part lays down duties and responsibilities in the exercise of free expression.

Section 266b of the Danish Penal Code provides certain limitations to free speech in Denmark. It states:

Whoever publicly or with the intent of public dissemination issues a pronouncement or other communication by which a group of persons are threatened, insulted or denigrated due to their race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin, religion or sexual orientation is liable to a fine or incarceration for up to two years.”

I concur with the decision of the Eastern High Court to fine Lars Hedegaard under Section 266b of the Danish Penal Code. There's a fine line between free speech and hate speech and it's important to ensure that the exercise of the right to free expression does not threaten, insult, denigrate or instigate hate against a group of people.

A lot has been written about the trial of Lars Hedegaard and comments on all the blogs and websites I've read reveal that many people are of the opinion that the conviction of Lars is an attack against freedom of expression. Some have labeled the trial a witch-hunt against truth-tellers. There's therefore a need to educate the public about the duties and responsibilities that go with freedom of expression.

*Photo of Lars Hedegaard.[Source].

Share

Tweet

Somalian imprisoned for attacking cartoonist in Denmark

A court in Aarhus, Denmark has sentenced Mohamed Geele, a 29-year-old Somalian man to 9 years in prison in relation to the attempted murder of Kurt Westergaard, a Danish cartoonist famous for drawing Prophet Mohammed. 

75-year-old Kurt Westergaard. Photo: BBC World Service.

In 2005, Kurt Westergaard's depiction of Prophet Mohammed angered the Muslim world and triggered protests and a diplomatic storm between Denmark and the Muslim world. The cartoon which was published in a Danish newspaper resulted in death threats against the cartoonist. 


As a result of all the controversy surrounding his work, Westergaard - the cartoonist - was placed under police surveillance - for his own safety.

Many people around the world, including Mohamed Geele considered Westergaard's cartoon an insult to islam. In January 2011, Mohamed Geele broke into the house of Westergaard, armed with an ax, in a bid to get "revenge", but the intruder was stopped by the police before he could reach his target.

Mohamed Geele was found guilty of attempted murder and terrorism on February 3, 2011. He was sentenced to 9 years in prison, after which he will be expelled and permanently banned from Denmark.

This court verdict upholds democratic principles of free thought, free speech and the right to hold and express opinions. Although I would not exercise these rights and freedoms in a way that would be considered offensive or insulting, any attempt to murder or silence anyone who chooses to do otherwise is unacceptable.

You might like to listen to Kurt Westergaard speak to the BBC about the attack.

Share

Tweet

Impunity for Sex Offenders in Scandinavia

For awhile, I've privately held the view that criminal laws in Scandinavia are for the most part - loose and do not adequately sanction offenders. No doubt this is the case because it's not uncommon for criminals to walk the streets because they have been handed down suspended sentences for the worst crimes. You might dismiss my view, but a credible international human rights organization - Amnesty International - shares the same view and has slammed Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden for allowing impunity for sex offenders. In many jurisdictions around the world, rape is a felony and offenders bear the full weight of the law, but in Scandinavia, the story is different.

In a report, entitled Case Closed: Rape and Human Rights in Nordic Countries, published on 8 March 2010, Amnesty International cited, with regret, the level of impunity for sex offenders in Scandinavia. The report documents a couple of disturbing cases of rape, including: The case of a man in Finland who forced a woman to have sex in a car park toilet by banging her head against the wall and twisting her arm behind her back. The court held that it was not rape because the violence was of a "lesser degree". The man was given a suspended sentence of 7 months in prison for coercion (...not rape).

Justice served?

Cases of rape in the Scandinavian countries are rarely reported and those that are reported rarely make it to court. The few that make it to court are commonly acquitted. In other words, rape victims are not adequately protected by law all across the region; instead the credibility of their complaints are more often than not - questioned.

In Finland, the level of impunity enjoyed by sex offenders is alarming. Victims of rape have little chance of seeing justice served, with only between 2% and 10% of rape cases reported. According to Amnesty International, Finland is at the bottom of the list of Scandinavian countries when it comes to protecting victims of rape and bringing perpetrators to justice.

The report highlights the fact that in Scandinavian countries - Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway, the definition of rape in domestic law is not in line with rape, as defined by the European Court of Human Rights and the International Criminal Court. According to the courts, the absence of consent is key, in the definition of rape. In sharp contrast, all four Scandinavian countries define rape as "the use of violence or threats of violence". Hence, in Scandinavia, violence and threats are the main ingredients that constitute rape as an offence. It goes without saying therefore that in the region, non-consensual sex without considerable violence does not constitute rape. This is clearly not in accordance with international law.

Amnesty International criticized Finnish legislation, which defines rape as "coercion into sexual intercourse". As if this definition is not flawed enough, the punishment is remarkably lenient - usually a fine or a few months in prison.

In Finland and Denmark, non-consensual sex with a drunk victim is not rape. This explains why a Finnish District Court sentenced a man to 8 month [suspended] imprisonment for non-consensual sex with a drunk woman on board a ferry from Finland to Sweden. The perpetrator was convicted for sexual abuse; not rape.

In my opinion, in a civilized society, non-consensual sex with a drunk victim should be ruled as rape and heavily sanctioned. Do you or do you not agree?

Did you notice that not much has been said about Sweden so far?

Well, let's say I was saving the worst for last: Sweden tops the European Rape League - recording the highest number of reported cases of rape in Europe (46 cases per 100,000 residents). This makes Sweden - the "rape capital" of Europe. The record high rate of rapes in Sweden is accompanied by a record low rate of convictions. Amnesty International noted that Sweden's rapists enjoy impunity and criticized Sweden's record low rate of rape convictions. It is worth mentioning that the United Nations is also alarmed by Sweden's over-the-top rape record.

Although Scandinavian countries pride themselves with the attainment of gender equality in many aspects of daily life, they have failed so far to protect women from rape and other forms of violence.

Share

Tweet

A Controversial Tradition of Whaling in the Faroe Islands

I received a shocking and graphic email on 1 Febuary 2010. It was a mail protesting against whaling in Denmark (the Faroe Islands, precisely). I was particularly shocked because Denmark is a country where there's a lot of talk about global warming and saving the planet - why would the State turn a blind eye to such a controversial tradition?

There's a brutal tradition in the Faroe Islands, which has outraged nature activists, animal rights activists, environmental activists and might be outrageous to you, as well. Every summer, in the Faroe Islands, hundreds of pilot whales are savagely slaughtered in the sea. How is it done? When a school of whales is located, local inhabitants, in small boats drive the whales ashore (to shallow water), where they are killed by waiting islanders. Special hooks are used to cut the whale near the dorsal fin. The whales that are not beached are stabbed with hooks and pulled ashore. Although it has been written that whalers now implore "less brutal" techniques, it is worth mentioning that the whales don't die instantly and because of the large number of whales targeted, the sea in the area is stained red - polluted with blood. It's alleged that the "celebration" is to show that the main participants - mostly teens, are mature and adults. By brutally killing whales? Now, this sounds weird, doesn't it?

Whaling in the Faroe Islands has been a long standing tradition and it's considered to be an important part of the culture of the local inhabitants. Is this enough reason for it to be tolerated? Have you heard about it before? Surprisingly, I heard about it just a few days ago and I don't have much of an opinion about it, apart from the fact that it's cruel and environmentally unfriendly (for lack of a better word).

Some have argued that the pilot whale is not an endangered specie and is far from extinction and that the cultivation of vegetables and fruits is almost impossible in the Faroe Islands because infertile soil (Tholeiitic basalt lava). Hence the inhabitants (the Faroese) are forced to depend on a major food source - which happens to be the pilot whale. They kill to eat, not for commerce or for pleasure.

Many people mistakenly blame Denmark for not outlawing this controversial tradition. The truth is, the Faroe Islands has been an autonomous province of Denmark since 1948. If you understand what autonomy is all about, you'd agree that the Kingdom of Denmark cannot interfer in the internal affaires of the Faroese. Thus, you can't blame Denmark for the controversial tradition in the Faroe Islands.

The protest email I received earlier this week, contains the following graphic pictures. Viewer discretion is advised!

No doubt, there's a controversial tradition of whaling in the Faroe Islands, but the question is - do you advocate the saving of the whales and let a unique people - with a population of only 48,353 (as of 2004), go extinct?

Share

Tweet