A UK drug smuggler was just executed early this morning for carrying 4kg of heroinin to China Urumqi. He was ended by lethal injection but the debate has never come to an end...
Mr. Brown:I condemn the execution of Akamal Shaikh in the strongest terms…
As a journalist with non-professional knowledge on law, I am not clear that if a person commit such crimes as smuggling in a foreign country, which country’s law should be used on him?
Well, my common sense tells me that he should obey the foreign country’s, like the saying, “when in Rome, do as the Romans”.
So death sentence to Mr.Shaikh is obvious not against laws for his 4kg heroin smuggling in China.
But why this case has been catching worldwide attentions including British leaders? Even British-Chinese relationship is under threats.
Death penalty
It is understandable that Shaikh family are keeping appealing to Chinese court to spare Shaikh’s life all these days.
However, Mr. Brown’s words are quite surprising. He, as the British Prime Minister, issues that, “ I condemn the execution of Akamal Shaikh in the strongest terms…”
I do not think it is appropriate for an office to express such words.
The possible result would be more hates and arguments.
It is really not appropriate for a president to issue such speech. His unreasonable behaviour just let the argument to a political level.
When it comes to next year’s election, Mr. Brown has a claim that he is the one who cares his people.
Actually, whether to abandon the death penalty is not easy to reach a consensus. People with different cultural background, values have different understandings on the death penalty.
In Chinese value, it is necessary to let people pay back what evil they have done. If they committed severe crime such as murdering, death sentence to them would comfort the victim’s family and educate the public.
In Western culture, it is important to forgive people no matter what he has done. No one has the right to deprive another’s life. They believe that consciousness would punish the criminal in his rest of life.
Obviously ,either one is not superior to the other.
Point fingers at Chinese law system
“Human rights” is a term used a thousand times criticizes China. It can easily irritate common hatred; then people in UK come launch campaigns against China in front of Chinese embassy.
Mostly, in the western’s eyes, China is a place where lacks human rights but full of restrictions of media. It is a country in great need of well-developed western interactions on its human rights..
The media have no patience to explain the differences between UK laws and Chinese laws. In China, if a person claims to have a mental problem, he should hand in relevant evidence.
Thanks to the powerful media stereotype, every peace-loving person becomes concerned about China’s development on human rights more than Chinese people do.
The politicians catch this opportunity to express their great “concern” too, but with some hidden purposes. They try to shift their people’s attention on their badly-performed economy, high rate of unemployment and wrong action of Iraq war.
First they create an excuse to invade Iraq by telling his people that Iraqis are suffering from Saddam’s bad rules.
Then, it is China’s turn. Since China is such a large and powerful-to-be country, they use numerous news which cover Chinese unsatisfied fields.
Also it is a fabulous moment to decline the taxation agreement with China with an excuse that “we do not see eye to eye”.
It seems that the economic turndown and the unsatisfying ends of Copenhagen Climate Conference have not been annoying enough. So point a finger on Chinese law system is really necessary to save them.
Now, what the media fail to tell us is that who gave Mr. Shaikh such a large amount of heroin? Who is the hidden leader of the global smuggling group? China is not a country which enjoys depriving lives. When it comes to criminal punishments, when in Rome, do as the Romans.
about Mr Shaikh's case
The followings are some comments from netizens
