Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Laos).

Asia (South-eastern Asia).

Lao.

6,800,000 (2009 est.).

Abolitionist de facto.

The last known execution took place in 1989. Lao government representatives have stated to the UN that no execution had “ever” taken place in the country, but this comment could be understood as referring to the era inaugurated by the new Penal Law, which was promulgated in January 1990.

Shooting.

Executions can be carried out by shooting.

315.

Amnesty International reported that at the end of 2018 there were 315 people on death row, including 311 inmates who were convicted for drug-related crimes. Because of restrictive state practices concerning the release of information related to the death penalty, it is difficult to verify the number of people on death row.

(This question was last updated on June 5, 2019.).

No official moratorium is in place. The Lao government said in May 2010 that it has upheld a moratorium “for many years,” and has not carried out an execution since 1989. During the Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review, Belgium recommended that Laos “impose an immediate de jure moratorium on executions;” Laos rejected the recommendation. Thus, while there is an internationally acknowledged de facto moratorium in place, there is no official de jure moratorium on executions.

Article 6 states that “[all] acts of bureaucratism and harassment that can be detrimental to…[life]…are prohibited;” Article 42 protects the right to bodily integrity against unlawful search and seizure. While both provisions protect life from improper extrajudicial action, they do not explicitly limit a judicially applied death penalty.

Aggravated Murder.

Murdering a person after committing a rape; murdering several persons; murdering civil servants performing their duties; murdering a pregnant woman; committing murder “as a regular profession;” committing a “barbarous murder;” murdering a person to conceal another offence; or committing a planned murder.

Other Offenses Resulting in Death.

Hostage-taking: Taking many persons hostage and causing them to die is punishable by death. Robbery of the state: Committing acts of robbery against the state or against “collective assets,” with the robbery resulting in loss of life, is punishable by death. Obstructing an officer in the performance of his public duties and causing his death is punishable by death. Trafficking in women or children and causing the death of a victim is punishable by death.

Terrorism-Related Offenses Resulting in Death.

Hijacking: Using force to hijack an airplane, ship or car or to destroy an airport or harbor, and causing “large damage to life”, is punishable by death. Hostage-taking: Taking many persons hostage and causing them to die is punishable by death.

Terrorism-Related Offenses Not Resulting in Death.

Terrorism related to transport: Using force to hijack an airplane, ship or car, or to destroy an airport or harbor, and causing “large damage to […] health or property,” is punishable by death. Causing “severe damage” to the “security” of airplanes, boats or cars, or airports or harbors, in violation of regulations, is punishable by death.

Acts of terrorism against the national economy: Committing any of the following acts, with the intent of undermining the national economy, is punishable by death: damaging factories, roads, communications equipment, or other elements of the state’s economic infrastructure; releasing toxic chemicals or viruses among communities or animals; or disrupting industry, trade, agriculture or other economic activities.

Attacking detention centers with the intent to liberate prisoners is punishable by death.

Use of chemical weapons designed to harm human beings and resulting in “large damage” is punished by death.

Robbery Not Resulting in Death.

Robbing the state or “collective assets” as part of a regular profession, as part of an organized group, or where the robbery results in severe injuries or substantial damage, is punishable by death.

Kidnapping Not Resulting in Death.

Taking many persons hostage, torturing or physically harassing them, or causing them to suffer harm, is punishable by death. Trafficking in women or children and causing a victim to suffer a lifetime incapacity, or to be infected with HIV/AIDS, is punishable by death.

Drug Trafficking Not Resulting in Death.

Producing, distributing, or transporting more than five hundred grams of heroin, more than three thousand grams of amphetamines or other psychotropic substances, or more than ten thousand grams of precursors for the production of narcotics.

Drug Possession.

Possessing more than five hundred grams of heroin, more than three thousand grams of amphetamines or other psychotropic substances, or more than ten thousand grams of precursors for the production of narcotics.

Economic Crimes Not Resulting in Death.

Disrupting industry, trade, agriculture or other economic activities with the intent of undermining the national economy is punishable by death.

Treason.

Acts of treason are punishable by death. Committing an assault on a state leader or state official with the intent of undermining state authority, with the assault resulting in death, is punishable by death. Committing an assault on a foreign dignitary or a representative of an international organization with the intent of undermining international relations, with the assault resulting in death, is also punishable by death.

Espionage.

Acts of espionage are punishable by death.

Other Offenses Not Resulting in Death.

Obstructing an officer in the performance of his public duties, and causing him to be physically disabled, is punishable by death. (See comments.)

Trafficking in women or children and causing a victim to suffer a lifetime incapacity, or to be infected with HIV/AIDS, is punishable by death.

Comments.

The offenses of obstructing an officer in the performance of his public duties, trafficking in women or children, robbing the state and taking many persons hostage.

On the one hand, Amnesty International reports that in 2001 Laos amended its Penal Law to make the death penalty mandatory for drug trafficking and drug possession above certain quantities. In 2008, Amnesty reported that a woman would have otherwise faced the mandatory death penalty if she had not been pregnant. Moreover, while most death-eligible offenses list a range of sentencing options, three list only death: use of chemical weapons against persons, and drug trafficking and possession above certain quantities. On the other hand, Article 40 describes how courts may consider mitigating factors in determining penalties, without any statutory exceptions. Furthermore, in Orobator v. Lao PDR, the People’s Court suggested that Article 40 could allow permissive reduction of a sentence of death for drug trafficking, although the Court could have relied completely on Article 32 (prohibiting the death penalty against pregnant women) to rule out the death penalty.

Terrorism-Related Offenses Not Resulting in Death.

Use of chemical weapons designed to harm human beings and resulting in “large damage” is punished by death. (See comments."

Drug Trafficking Not Resulting in Death.

Producing, distributing, or transporting more than five hundred grams of heroin, more than three thousand grams of amphetamines or other psychotropic substances, or more than ten thousand grams of precursors for the production of narcotics is punished by death. (See comments.).

Drug Possession.

Possessing more than five hundred grams of heroin, more than three thousand grams of amphetamines or other psychotropic substances, or more than ten thousand grams of precursors for the production of narcotics is punished by death. (See comments.).

Comments.

We are unsure whether Laos applies a mandatory death penalty. On the one hand, Amnesty International reports that in 2001 Laos amended its Penal Law to make the death penalty mandatory for drug trafficking and drug possession above certain quantities. In 2008, Amnesty reported that a woman would have otherwise faced the mandatory death penalty if she had not been pregnant. Moreover, while most death-eligible offenses list a range of sentencing options, three list only death: use of chemical weapons against persons, and drug trafficking and possession above certain quantities. On the other hand, Article 40 describes how courts may consider mitigating factors in determining penalties, without any statutory exceptions. Furthermore, in Orobator v. Lao PDR, the People’s Court suggested that Article 40 could allow permissive reduction of a sentence of death for drug trafficking, although the Court could have relied completely on Article 32 (prohibiting the death penalty against pregnant women) to rule out the death penalty.

Individuals Below Age 18 at Time of Crime.

The death penalty is not applicable to individuals who are less than 18 at the time of the offence. In addition, Laos is party to the ICCPR and to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which prohibit the execution of individuals for crimes committed while under the age of 18."

Pregnant Women.

The death penalty is not applicable to women who are pregnant at the time the offence is committed, when the court makes its decision, or when the sentence is imposed. Additionally, Laos is party to the ICCPR, which prohibits the execution of pregnant women. In 2009, British national Samantha Orobator was found guilty of trafficking 680 grams of heroin, an offense normally punished by death. Her pregnancy led the court to pronounce a reduced sentence of life imprisonment.

Intellectually Disabled.

Some exceptions based on mental competence could apply to the intellectually disabled. The Penal Code states that an offender must be “mentally competent” for an offence to be constituted.

Mentally Ill.

An offender must be “mentally competent” and “not insane” for an offence to be constituted. An offender who is “under a state of mental disturbance” at the time of commission of the offence or at the time of sentencing may benefit from medical treatment and be sent to a psychiatric hospital. Normal sentencing procedures resume after the offender has recovered. The duration of treatment must be included in calculating the punishment. If “the accused has lost control of his mental faculties” and there is confirmation from a doctor or the prosecutor or the court request it, the offender’s case is suspended and he is sent for treatment. The suspended case is dismissed if the limitation period for prosecution expires.

Comments.

None.

In Orobator v. Lao DPR, the People’s Court sentenced a pregnant defendant to life imprisonment rather than the death penalty for trafficking 680 grams of heroin, an offense which is believed to carry the mandatory death penalty. In sentencing, Article 32—a mandatory prohibition against pronouncement of the death penalty on pregnant women—may have been of overriding importance. However, the court also referenced Article 40, a universal permissive mitigation permission, as a reason for not applying the death penalty. This could suggest a willingness to consider broadening the application of Article 40.

No.

The Secretary-General registered Laos’ accession to the ICCPR on September 25, 2009. The Human Rights Committee has not yet issued Concluding Observations on the state of human rights in Laos.

In the 15th session of the Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review, member nations recommended that Laos conform its law to its international obligations, ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, establish a formal, de jure moratorium on executions and the imposition of the death penalty and commute all death sentences. Laos responded positively to the recommendation that it conform its law to its international obligations, emphasizing its partnership with organizations in pursuing a Master Plan on the Development of a Rule of Law State. Laos rejected recommendations that it abolish the death penalty or institute a formal moratorium on its implementation and execution, while stating that it would review its laws with a view towards conformity to the ICCPR’s Article 6 restriction of the death penalty to the most serious offenses.

The law requires that defendants facing capital punishment be represented by a “protector”. A protector is defined as a lawyer, a representative of an organization, or a close relative of the accused who “participates in the proceedings to protect the rights and interests” of the defendant. Protectors have the same rights and obligations as legal counsel, including the right to appeal decisions. If a death-penalty defendant has no protector, the court is required to appoint a lawyer.

In practice, however, this legal requirement does not translate into effective representation. Incommunicado detention is a common occurrence, with prisoners unable to contact their families or lawyers. There are also a limited number of independent lawyers in the country. One defendant facing a mandatory death sentence, British national Samantha Orobator, spent months without being allowed to speak to any lawyer, despite consular pressure. She met her state-appointed lawyer only once, less than a month before her trial, and the meeting was not in private.

The United Nations Development Program for Laos is assisting in implementing a Master Plan for a Rule of Law State. In June 2010, the UNDP issued a memo outlining the initial stages of extending legal aid services. The “first legal aid clinic” had opened in the nation’s capital city, with a mobile clinic that visited villages in the capital region.

The law requires that defendants facing capital punishment be represented by a “protector”, including on appeal. A protector is defined as a lawyer, a representative of an organization, or a close relative of the accused who “participates in the proceedings to protect the rights and interests” of the defendant. Protectors have the same rights and obligations as legal counsel, including the right to appeal decisions. If a death-penalty defendant has no protector, the court is required to appoint a lawyer.

In practice, however, this legal requirement does not translate into effective representation. Incommunicado detention is a common occurrence, with prisoners unable to contact their families or lawyers. There are also a limited number of independent lawyers in the country. One defendant facing a mandatory death sentence, British national Samantha Orobator, spent months without being allowed to speak to her or any other lawyer, despite consular pressure. She met her state-appointed lawyer only once, less than a month before her trial, and never in private.

According to the Canadian Bar Association, which has participated in rule-of-law development programs in Laos, “there was effectively no legal profession in Lao” before the establishment of the Lao Bar Association in 1996. Consequently, there is a low level of practical lawyering skills in the country. Moreover, the concept of a lawyer as advocate is not widely understood by the public or within the justice system, including by judges, the police, and sometimes lawyers themselves. Because of the widespread perception that lawyers cannot affect court decisions, most defendants do not choose to be represented by professionals. There are a limited number of independent lawyers in the country.

The United Nations Development Program for Laos is also involved in drafting laws, codes of conduct and providing legal and professional training for lawyers and interns.

Defendants, prosecutors or civil plaintiffs may appeal a case to Court of Appeal, which considers facts de novo and may consider issues sua sponte. The Court of Appeal may confirm or reverse the decision or remand it for further proceedings. After appeal or for any disputed question of law during proceedings, any party may petition for cassation (review on questions of law) by the People’s Supreme Court. After an offender has exhausted all appeals and petitions, the President of the Supreme People’s Court must review whether the penalty is appropriate before issuing an order confirming the sentence of death. Deadlines for appeals or petitions may be waived, and the law anticipates approximately three months between each stage of the proceedings.

After a death-sentenced offender has exhausted all appeals, the President of the People’s Supreme Court issues the order to carry out the execution after reviewing the correctness of the sentence. The offender has 30 days from the issuance of this order to request a pardon from the President of the State. The execution is carried out one year after the decision not to grant a pardon, or one year after the People’s Supreme Court issues its order if there is no request for a pardon.

Given that there are currently at least 89 persons on death row, and that no executions have taken place in the past 21 years, it seems that the President may take an indefinite period of time to consider a petition. Comments from Lao government representatives suggest that pardons are granted on special national occasions.

No. Jury trials do not exist in the Lao criminal justice system. Defendants facing capital punishment are tried by a panel of judges.

Criminal trials in Laos do not meet the fundamental requirements of fairness. By law defendants enjoy a presumption of innocence; however, judges often decide the outcome of a case in advance, based on police or prosecution reports, and most criminal trials are described as “pro forma examinations of the accused.” One defendant facing potentially capital charges, British national Samantha Orobator, spent months without being allowed to speak to her or any other lawyer, despite consular pressure. She met her state-appointed lawyer only once, less than a month before her trial, and not in private. Her lawyer did not conduct any investigations or gather any witness testimonies. At her trial in June 2009, she was unable to enter a plea, was questioned only by the prosecution, and was sentenced in half an hour.

There are reports of corruption in the police and in the judiciary. The law provides criminal penalties for corruption, but these provisions are not enforced.

All of the country’s judges are members of the ruling party, and most have had “only basic legal training”.

In mid-2010, the United Nations Development Program for Laos reported some progress on drafting laws and codes of conduct and educating the public on legal matters in conjunction with the Lao Bar Association.

Our research did not reveal a specific death row prison. Foreigners, including one charged with a crime punished by death, have been detained in Phonthong Prison, in the capital Vientiane. Political prisoners are often detained in Samkhe Prison, 3km outside of Vientiane. The Foreign Prisoner Support Service website provides a list of Lao prisons.

The government does not permit regular independent monitoring of prison conditions. However, credible reports have emerged to indicate that prison conditions in general are harsh and at times life threatening. Beatings, long-term solitary confinement in completely dark rooms, and the chaining and manacling of prisoners are reported to be frequent punishments, especially in larger prisons. Reports indicate overcrowding, a shortage of food and clean water, and lack of medical treatment, especially for serious ailments. Most prisoners rely on their families for sustenance, but visitation policies are set by prison wardens, and thus vary considerably. Male and female prisoners are generally detained separately, but some juveniles are held with adults. Prisoners in the larger state-run prisons located in the capital generally fare better than those detained in provincial prisons.

By December 2010, we had not found any reports of foreign nationals being on death row. We note, however, that it is difficult to answer this question conclusively in the negative, since there are serious allegations of foreigners being detained, sometimes for years, without their consular representatives being informed.

No foreign nationals are known to be currently on death row.

By December 2010, we were unable to find any data about the gender composition of death row. However, we believe that there is at least one woman currently under a sentence of death. She was sentenced to capital punishment for a drug offence in 2005, and we found no reports of executions or commutations since.

By December 2010, we were unable to ascertain whether there were any juveniles currently under sentence of death.

The Lao government does not make available any data on persons sentenced to death. The racial composition of death row is unknown. However, international organizations report that that ethnic minority prisoners are treated particularly harshly. The discrimination and human rights violations suffered by the Hmong people are widely documented, and evangelical Christians and Hmong people face persecution and indoctrination in Party ideology. We did not find reports that Hmong people or Christians are faced with capital charges, although they are detained arbitrarily.

At its Universal Periodic Review in May 2010, the Lao government expressed its intention to maintain the death penalty as “an exceptional measure of the punishment”[sic] because “it is an effective deterrent to most serious offenses,” such as drug trafficking. The Lao government added that it was not ready to consider ratifying the 2nd Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, stating that the recommendations to accede to this treaty did not “reflect the real situation of Lao PDR”.

However, the government also pointed out that although the death penalty “existed legally,” no execution had ever taken place (since 1989), and that it had “upheld a moratorium for many years.” While there is an internationally acknowledged de facto moratorium in place, there is no official de jure moratorium on executions. During the Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review, Belgium recommended that Laos “impose an immediate de jure moratorium on executions;” Laos rejected the recommendation.

Furthermore, the government stated that it was willing to consider limiting the scope of crimes to which the death penalty would apply in its next criminal law revision, with a view to bringing its laws into compliance with the ICCPR.

None.

Reprieve
PO Box 72054
London EC3P 3BZ
United Kingdom
Tel 020 7553 8140
Fax 020 7553 8189
info@reprieve.org.uk
http://www.reprieve.org.uk.

By the end of our research, we were unable to locate any publicly accessible source of Lao judicial decisions regarding the death penalty. Some criminal trials relating to national security and state secrets are closed to the public, but most cases that do not involve minors or disputes of a private, personal nature are open proceedings, according to law.

None.

None.