Man facing execution in China

[Tash.]

As I said before, people on this forum who are supporters of the European Union have argued that domestic positions of Europe can be best served as a collective voice in a world which is seeing the rise of China before its eyes; as shown by this example the EU is yet again proved useless. It can't even do what its supporters say it exists to do.

On China, China have harsh penalties for breaking the law, something maybe this country should take a look at again to stop the rise of crime and general breakdown in respect in this country. It is a joke to put it simply that a man like Gordon Brown can lecture the Chinese authorities on crime, punishment and justice when he and his own government have created a justice system which is the laughing stock of the world, where murderers get 'life' setences yet are out on the streets after a matter of years.

A government which lectures the Chinese on justice when Gordon Brown himself has blocked various inquiries relating to the Iraq War which could of possibly seen those who lied to us brought to justice over a war which cost over a million lives and for what? - no WMD existed as we all knew and Iraq is left a much worse place than it was under the Ba'ath regime.

I think what these people mean is on big big issues such as human rights (which I guess you might argue this would be included in) and climate change. This is an issue which many countries would have been able to solve between themselves, and would not have had to include a third party. Evidently this was misjudged as the Chinese did not respond to the pleas, but how was anyone supposed to know that this was the case?

So now you're saying that the Chinese judicial system is better than the one here in the UK? I am at a loss for words. The Chinese are known for repressing their own people (something which I remember you debating with me not so long ago) and now you're agreeing with their methods? Many people in China don't speak out against what goes on there because of the fear they will be exectuted. I do not have any desire to live in a country in which this is the case. If you want to perhaps China is the country for you? China impose the death penalty on many crimes, fraud for example, which I think personally is a little extreme. So you may want to laugh at our judicial system but i'm quite happy we don't kill people. And Gordon Brown nor this government created the laws of which you speak so blaming that on them is a little silly don't you think?

[-:Undertaker:-]

I think what these people mean is on big big issues such as human rights (which I guess you might argue this would be included in) and climate change. This is an issue which many countries would have been able to solve between themselves, and would not have had to include a third party. Evidently this was misjudged as the Chinese did not respond to the pleas, but how was anyone supposed to know that this was the case?

They mean China fully well, they have even said China.

So now you're saying that the Chinese judicial system is better than the one here in the UK? I am at a loss for words. The Chinese are known for repressing their own people (something which I remember you debating with me not so long ago) and now you're agreeing with their methods? Many people in China don't speak out against what goes on there because of the fear they will be exectuted.

It depends what parts of the system, yet again you generalise. It is like when people say the Third Reich gave a better life to its citzens intially than that of the Weimar Republic people jump on them and accuse them of being Nazis. I do believe parts of the Chinese justice system are better than that of the United Kingdoms, yes. China does not allow scum such as murderers, rapists, drug dealers and criminals in general to get away with it. They are put to death, justice served - compare this to the UK where we have Ian Huntley who has a Xbox put in his prison cell after murderering two innocent little girls.

I do not have any desire to live in a country in which this is the case. If you want to perhaps China is the country for you? China impose the death penalty on many crimes, fraud for example, which I think personally is a little extreme. So you may want to laugh at our judicial system but i'm quite happy we don't kill people. And Gordon Brown nor this government created the laws of which you speak so blaming that on them is a little silly don't you think?

Why not?

You only have to fear the punishment if you commit the crime.

On 'you are quite happy we don't kill people' - well if you believe people like Ian Huntley should not be punished properly for their crimes then so be it, but as I have said before - the issue of the death penalty should be put to a public referendum so its the people who decide, and not people who hold positions of power like yourself who have left wing views, ones which do not represent the public of this country and never have.

Gordon Brown and the Labour government were the ones who relaxed prison sentences, they were the ones who failed to build prisons so that courts are under pressue to allow people to be let off - the blame lies squarely at their feet, so no, I don't think its silly at all, I think its common sense. Labour have had over a decade in power now, its time for them to stop blaming everything they caused on the Tories and start taking some resposonsibility for once.

Of course they won't, because none of them understand the concept of serving the people. They exist to only serve themselves.

[AgnesIO]

Agreed. I think execution is a bit too harsh for drug smuggling. In the UK people who deal drugs get about 12+ years or so. Government wouldn't even think about giving him the death penalty. I guess all countries are different then? But still, a bit to harsh for drug dealing. If it was because of murder, I would understand it then.

That's only because the goverment here are ******* pathetic.

[Dragorn]

Wth, 'An English man', more like a man from pakistan!

[AgnesIO]

Wth, 'An English man', more like a man from pakistan!

He could ahev lived here all his life, and his parents could have lived here all there lives.

[Jordy]

Thank you for bringing the EU debate up once again whoever did this (I don't actually think it was Undertaker for once).

The EU has spoke out against China in this case much like the UK.

First of all there's this European Union statement: "The European Union condemns in the strongest terms the execution of Akmal Shaikh. It deeply regrets the fact that China has not heeded the repeated calls by the European Union and one of its member states for the death sentence passed against Mr Shaikh to be commuted."

And then, current leaders of the EU, Sweden, also spoke out: "The European Union is firmly opposed to the use of the death penalty in any case, whatever the reason for it. If anyone should be convicted for drug smuggling, they should be convicted for it and they should be given a prison sentence. That could be a long one – that's up to the individual countries to decide – but the death penalty is unacceptable in each and every case."

There you are, the EU did react. There's nothing else they can really do, and I'm sure if they were to sanction China or something (Which would be a silly thing to do anyway) you would only complain they're not only taking our sovereignty and creating our laws, they'd be representing the UK and creating sanctions too.

[Robbie]

@Dragorn - He migrated as a child, gained citizenship, so he is classed as a british national, which is just what the news has said.

[Tash.]

It depends what parts of the system, yet again you generalise. It is like when people say the Third Reich gave a better life to its citzens intially than that of the Weimar Republic people jump on them and accuse them of being Nazis. I do believe parts of the Chinese justice system are better than that of the United Kingdoms, yes. China does not allow scum such as murderers, rapists, drug dealers and criminals in general to get away with it. They are put to death, justice served - compare this to the UK where we have Ian Huntley who has a Xbox put in his prison cell after murderering two innocent little girls.

I'm not generalising at all, their whole system is corrupt and repressive and I think it's a little hypocritical of you to agree with them on issues when you're so against repression of freedom of speech. Obviously if you use murderers it changes things but this man did not kill anyone, and arguably he did nothing wrong and yet he was killed.

You only have to fear the punishment if you commit the crime.

Not at all true it would seem, this man may have smuggled the drugs but perhaps not knowingly and no matter what you say that's unjust. Not to mention that you also have to fear the punishment incase you get dragged into a situation in which you've done nothing and yet a miscarriage of justice gets you killed. To an extent you can undo some of the suffering caused if a person is jailed, but once you kill someone and realise that they were actually innocent, then what do you do? I want you to answer me that, what do you say to their family?

On 'you are quite happy we don't kill people' - well if you believe people like Ian Huntley should not be punished properly for their crimes then so be it, but as I have said before - the issue of the death penalty should be put to a public referendum so its the people who decide, and not people who hold positions of power like yourself who have left wing views, ones which do not represent the public of this country and never have.

I don't think killing Ian Huntley is the right course of action no, but that doesn't mean I agree with how he currently lives because I don't. I've said many times that prison needs to be tougher but killing him is what he want, he's tried several times so to me that indicates he's a coward. As for the whole left wing thing, yet again presuming my politics, if these opinions did not reflect the public they wouldn't have voted them in now would they?

Gordon Brown and the Labour government were the ones who relaxed prison sentences, they were the ones who failed to build prisons so that courts are under pressue to allow people to be let off - the blame lies squarely at their feet, so no, I don't think its silly at all, I think its common sense. Labour have had over a decade in power now, its time for them to stop blaming everything they caused on the Tories and start taking some resposonsibility for once.

Of course they won't, because none of them understand the concept of serving the people. They exist to only serve themselves.

And yes, the labour party itself has been in power for over a decade, but right there you just blamed Gordon Brown, who has been in power for nowhere near that amount of time and you know it. Yes he's been involved but ultimately the decisions have not been his for all of those 10 years.

Finally, no they don't have concept of serving the people, but there again neither do the vast majority of the human race, serving oneself is a primitive thing and it goes against what makes you up as a person to serve others above yourself. With this being true, no government will or has acted solely on behalf of the people.

Thank you for bringing the EU debate up once again whoever did this (I don't actually think it was Undertaker for once).

The EU has spoke out against China in this case much like the UK.

First of all there's this European Union statement: "The European Union condemns in the strongest terms the execution of Akmal Shaikh. It deeply regrets the fact that China has not heeded the repeated calls by the European Union and one of its member states for the death sentence passed against Mr Shaikh to be commuted."

And then, current leaders of the EU, Sweden, also spoke out: "The European Union is firmly opposed to the use of the death penalty in any case, whatever the reason for it. If anyone should be convicted for drug smuggling, they should be convicted for it and they should be given a prison sentence. That could be a long one – that's up to the individual countries to decide – but the death penalty is unacceptable in each and every case."

There you are, the EU did react. There's nothing else they can really do, and I'm sure if they were to sanction China or something (Which would be a silly thing to do anyway) you would only complain they're not only taking our sovereignty and creating our laws, they'd be representing the UK and creating sanctions too.

Thank you, I can't wait to see what he has to say about this. It will be most interesting.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I'm not generalising at all, their whole system is corrupt and repressive and I think it's a little hypocritical of you to agree with them on issues when you're so against repression of freedom of speech. Obviously if you use murderers it changes things but this man did not kill anyone, and arguably he did nothing wrong and yet he was killed.

I don't, western democracy cannot be imposed on every nation. It does not work, again you need to get out of this mentality. On freedom of speech, freedom of speech has nothing to do with the Chinese executing a drug dealer, he dealt drugs in their country - he dies. It could not be more simple.

Not at all true it would seem, this man may have smuggled the drugs but perhaps not knowingly and no matter what you say that's unjust. Not to mention that you also have to fear the punishment incase you get dragged into a situation in which you've done nothing and yet a miscarriage of justice gets you killed. To an extent you can undo some of the suffering caused if a person is jailed, but once you kill someone and realise that they were actually innocent, then what do you do? I want you to answer me that, what do you say to their family?

The Chinese do not have to say anything to his family, he was caught smuggling drugs across the Chinese mainland and he got caught. I'd say he deserved it and I know if my father or member of family was caught smuggling drugs I wouldn't want anything to do with them.

On the death penalty in general, ok thats your opinion. Lets put it to a referendum and let the British public decide.

I don't think killing Ian Huntley is the right course of action no, but that doesn't mean I agree with how he currently lives because I don't. I've said many times that prison needs to be tougher but killing him is what he want, he's tried several times so to me that indicates he's a coward. As for the whole left wing thing, yet again presuming my politics, if these opinions did not reflect the public they wouldn't have voted them in now would they?

Let him kill himself, I couldn't care whether hes a coward or not aslong as he is dead. Again, let the British people decide whether or not they want people like Ian Huntley to face death or not. He is already a coward, he killed two little girls - now let him commit his final cowardly act which this time, myself and the majority of the public will be thankful for.

And yes, the labour party itself has been in power for over a decade, but right there you just blamed Gordon Brown, who has been in power for nowhere near that amount of time and you know it. Yes he's been involved but ultimately the decisions have not been his for all of those 10 years.

I can't believe i'm seeing this.

It may of flew over you but do you not reconisge the fact that Gordon Brown was Chancellor of the Exechquer from 1997 until Tony Blair resigned as Prime Minister?. Gordon Brown was second in command, nothing passed unless he allowed it. The Chancellor is the second most powerful person in government, if not on the same power level as the Prime Minister himself.

Finally, no they don't have concept of serving the people, but there again neither do the vast majority of the human race, serving oneself is a primitive thing and it goes against what makes you up as a person to serve others above yourself. With this being true, no government will or has acted solely on behalf of the people.

A government can act on behalf of the people, by giving the people a referendum on important issues such as the death penalty, you talk about serving ones own interests yet you do not seem to support giving people a fair referendum on issues that you don't agree with.

You just effectivly destroyed your own argument, you cannot argue that they do not understand the concept of serving people when you yourself do not seem to support letting the people vote on issues which you do not agree with, and issues that, if they went to a referendum - would most likely pass in the opposite direction of your points of view.

If the United Kingdom held a referendum on the death penalty, it would pass.

[Jordy]

If the United Kingdom held a referendum on the death penalty, it would pass.

It's difficult to tell seeing as whenever surveys have been done this, they've been done shortly afterwards the cases of things like Baby P which inevitably makes their decision more bias.

Every few years there is a free vote in parliament about restoring the death penalty and it's always overwhelmingly opposed. Elected politicians should make decisions on this not the general public. Elected politicians make informed decisions, hence why we vote them in and hence why it's a democracy.

If there was a referendum on whether to have VAT, probably about 90% of the population would vote to scrap it seeing as they'd save lots of money. The other 10% would realise that the treasury needs that money to function and would therefore vote to keep it.