This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2013/may/22/bali-death-penalty-appeal

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Judges give reasons for rejecting Bali Briton's appeal Judges give reasons for rejecting Bali Briton's appeal
(4 months later)
Three leading judges have expressed "great sympathy" for a British grandmother facing the death penalty in Indonesia as they announced their reasons for rejecting her appeal against a refusal by the UK government to pay for her legal representation.Three leading judges have expressed "great sympathy" for a British grandmother facing the death penalty in Indonesia as they announced their reasons for rejecting her appeal against a refusal by the UK government to pay for her legal representation.
Giving their court of appeal ruling in the case of Lindsay Sandiford, the master of the rolls, Lord Dyson, Lord Justice Elias and Lord Justice Patten said the government's policy of not providing funding for legal representation to any British national who faces criminal proceedings abroad – even in death penalty cases – was not unlawful.Giving their court of appeal ruling in the case of Lindsay Sandiford, the master of the rolls, Lord Dyson, Lord Justice Elias and Lord Justice Patten said the government's policy of not providing funding for legal representation to any British national who faces criminal proceedings abroad – even in death penalty cases – was not unlawful.
Last month, Sandiford's lawyers challenged a high court ruling that the government was not legally obliged to pay for "an adequate lawyer" to represent her. But the three judges dismissed the appeal on 22 April, saying they would give their reasons at a later date.Last month, Sandiford's lawyers challenged a high court ruling that the government was not legally obliged to pay for "an adequate lawyer" to represent her. But the three judges dismissed the appeal on 22 April, saying they would give their reasons at a later date.
Announcing those reasons on Wednesday in a written judgment, Lord Dyson said: "One is bound to have great sympathy for the appellant.Announcing those reasons on Wednesday in a written judgment, Lord Dyson said: "One is bound to have great sympathy for the appellant.
"She is seeking to challenge a decision which, if not overturned by the supreme court of Indonesia, will mean that she will be executed, unless she is pardoned."She is seeking to challenge a decision which, if not overturned by the supreme court of Indonesia, will mean that she will be executed, unless she is pardoned.
"The death penalty is, in my view, rightly regarded by the government as immoral and unacceptable.""The death penalty is, in my view, rightly regarded by the government as immoral and unacceptable."
He said Sandiford had argued that the policy of the foreign secretary of not providing funding for legal representation in criminal proceedings abroad, even in death penalty cases, was unlawful.He said Sandiford had argued that the policy of the foreign secretary of not providing funding for legal representation in criminal proceedings abroad, even in death penalty cases, was unlawful.
But he said the high court was "right to conclude that it is not".But he said the high court was "right to conclude that it is not".
Lord Dyson said it was the "longstanding policy of the UK to oppose the death penalty in all circumstances as a matter of principle".Lord Dyson said it was the "longstanding policy of the UK to oppose the death penalty in all circumstances as a matter of principle".
He went on: "As the secretary of state concedes, it would be possible to produce a policy under which funds for legal representation were made available to British nationals in certain defined circumstances.He went on: "As the secretary of state concedes, it would be possible to produce a policy under which funds for legal representation were made available to British nationals in certain defined circumstances.
"The practical problems identified by the secretary of state are not insurmountable."The practical problems identified by the secretary of state are not insurmountable.
"But the question is not whether the secretary of state could produce a different policy which many would regard as fairer and more reasonable and humane than the present policy. It is whether the policy that he has produced is irrational."But the question is not whether the secretary of state could produce a different policy which many would regard as fairer and more reasonable and humane than the present policy. It is whether the policy that he has produced is irrational.
"I am in no doubt that the policy is not irrational. It is based on reasoning which is coherent and which is neither arbitrary nor perverse.""I am in no doubt that the policy is not irrational. It is based on reasoning which is coherent and which is neither arbitrary nor perverse."
Sandiford, 56, was sentenced to death by firing squad by a court in Bali for taking £1.6m of cocaine to the island.Sandiford, 56, was sentenced to death by firing squad by a court in Bali for taking £1.6m of cocaine to the island.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.