[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 6459-6461]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




CONDEMNING THE PUNISHMENT OF EXECUTION BY STONING AS A GROSS VIOLATION 
                            OF HUMAN RIGHTS

  Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the 
concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 26) condemning the punishment of 
execution by stoning as a gross violation of human rights, and for 
other purposes.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                            H. Con. Res. 26

       Whereas death by stoning continues to be imposed as a form 
     of punishment in several countries, as documented by the 
     Country Reports on Human Rights Practices of the United 
     States Department of State;
       Whereas the brutal sentence of death by stoning is applied 
     to women who have been accused of adultery, some of whom are 
     coerced into prostitution, or even raped;
       Whereas execution by stoning is an exceptionally cruel form 
     of punishment that violates internationally accepted 
     standards of human rights, including those set forth in the 
     Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International 
     Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the United 
     Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman 
     or Degrading Treatment or Punishment;
       Whereas women around the world continue to be 
     disproportionately targeted for discriminatory, inhuman, and 
     cruel punishments by governments who refuse to protect the 
     rights of all their citizens equally;
       Whereas in some places stoning has also been invoked as 
     punishment for ``blasphemy'', thereby suppressing religious 
     freedom and diversity and stifling political dissent;
       Whereas, in July 2002, Amnesty International referred to 
     execution by stoning as ``a method specifically designed to 
     increase the victim's suffering'';
       Whereas, in 2002, the European Union, the Secretary General 
     of the Council of Europe, the Australian Government, the 
     Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade of New Zealand, the 
     President of Mexico, the Congress of the Deputies of Spain, 
     and other world leaders each condemned stoning and called for 
     clemency for individuals sentenced to stoning; and
       Whereas, in 2002 there were acquittals or dismissals of 
     sentences to death by stoning: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring), That Congress--
       (1) condemns the practice of execution by stoning, and 
     calls upon the international community to recognize this 
     practice as a gross violation of human rights;
       (2) requests that the President formally communicate this 
     resolution to governments imposing this cruel punishment and 
     urge the suspension of sentences of death by stoning; and
       (3) requests that the President direct the Secretary of 
     State to work with the international community toward the 
     repeal of stoning laws and adherence to international 
     standards of human rights.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Royce) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce).

                              {time}  1415


                             General Leave

  Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 26.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Terry). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution condemning the 
punishment of execution by stoning as a gross violation of human 
rights. I am a proud cosponsor of this resolution, and I commend the 
gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum) for her work on this issue. 
As chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa, I am pleased that the House 
is taking this action.
  Mr. Speaker, there can be no doubt that stoning is a gross violation 
of human rights. When someone is put to death by stoning, they are 
guaranteed a slow, painful, cruel death. Stones are carefully chosen so 
they are large enough to cause maximum pain, but not so large as to 
kill the condemned immediately.
  Stoning brings out the worst in human nature. It may surprise many 
that this barbaric practice has entered the 21st century, but it has. 
Sharia law governs family law in a wide range of countries. It is only 
applied to criminal offenses in a handful of states.
  In Nigeria, 12 of the country's 36 states put Sharia criminal law 
into effect in recent years, displacing Nigeria's secular laws.
  The case of Amina Lawal, a young woman sentenced to death by stoning 
for adultery, has brought international attention to Sharia-mandated 
stoning. Her case is pending. We all hope she is spared this brutal 
treatment.
  This resolution rightfully condemns the practice of stoning and calls 
upon the President and Secretary of State to work with their 
counterparts toward the repeal of stoning laws and adherence to 
international standards of human rights.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution.
  First I would like to congratulate my good friend and colleague, the 
gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), the principal author of this 
important resolution, for bringing it to our attention. She is a valued 
member of our committee, and I want to thank her personally for this 
important initiative.
  Mr. Speaker, it is a sad commentary on the 21st century that we have 
seen the resurgence under Islamic Sharia religious law of the practice 
of execution by stoning, where an individual is buried up to his or her 
neck in sand, and witnesses are invited to throw stones until that 
person is dead, while shouting, ``God is great.'' It is the ultimate 
oxymoron on the face of this planet that as a human being is buried up 
to her neck in sand and is pelted with stones, the phrase can be heard 
``God is great.''
  The stones in this vile practice are carefully chosen so that they 
are large enough to cause horrendous pain, but not so large as to kill 
the condemned individual immediately. Victims of stoning are guaranteed 
a slow, torture-filled death. Sometimes, Mr. Speaker, their children 
are forced to watch.
  This past year, the world was horrified as mothers were tried, 
convicted and subjected to this horrible death sentence. The fact that 
these women have been given the recourse to court appeals does not make 
the punishment any more acceptable. Execution by stoning violates all 
international standards of human rights and decency.
  We must let the world know, Mr. Speaker, that civilized nations and 
the United States in particular reject with disgust and horror this 
form of punishment. I urge all of my colleagues to support H. Con. Res. 
26.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend for 
yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, as the condemned, as I think the gentleman from 
California

[[Page 6460]]

(Mr. Lantos) pointed out so well and it bears repeating, prepare for 
their execution by stoning, they begin to pray, asking for the inner 
strength to endure with faith and fortitude what awaits them. They are 
wrapped head to foot in white shrouds and buried up to their waist, and 
then the stoning begins. The victims are guaranteed a very difficult 
and horrific death. In many cases kids have to watch this agonizing 
death.
  Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, this heinous practice is not limited to 
Iran, but is employed in so many other countries as well. Under the 
extremist interpretation of Sharia law, pregnancy alone is considered 
sufficient evidence to condemn a woman for adultery. Women in these 
countries who have been raped and want the state to prosecute their 
case must have no less than four Muslim men testify that they witnessed 
the assault. Absent these witnesses, these male witnesses, the rape 
victim has no case. If she cannot prove the rape allegation, she runs 
the high risk of being charged with adultery, as we all know an offense 
that is punishable by stoning.
  Although this heinous practice is disproportionately used against the 
female population of these countries, it is also used against men and 
also used to suppress political dissent and the activities of religious 
minorities.
  H. Con. Res. 26 is a resolution which reflects the full extent of the 
problem. As such, it calls on the United States and the international 
community to condemn the practice of execution by stoning as a gross 
violation of human rights and urges U.S. officials to work with their 
global counterparts toward the repeal of all stoning laws.
  Mr. Speaker, stoning sentences have been commuted in the last year 
due to the United States' and international pressure. Lives have been 
saved because we spoke out against this abhorrent practice, a method 
which, according to Amnesty International, is specifically designed to 
increase the victim's suffering.
  Today we have the ability, I would respectfully submit, to save more 
lives by rendering our strong support for this resolution. This measure 
can help deter the application of extreme Sharia law and execution by 
stoning in emerging nations, such as Afghanistan.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for H. Con. Res. 26.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield such time as she may 
consume to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), the author of 
this resolution.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to support House Concurrent 
Resolution 26, a resolution that I introduced to condemn the punishment 
of execution by stoning as a gross violation of human rights.
  I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the Committee on 
International Relations for their support and thank my colleagues who 
have cosponsored this measure.
  This issue was first brought to my attention over 1 year ago when I 
learned of a woman named Safiya Hussaini, who had been sense sentenced 
to death by stoning in Nigeria solely based on the evidence she was 
divorced and pregnant. Safiya was convicted of adultery, sentenced to 
be buried in a pit and pelted with stones until dead.
  The authorities ignored her claims that she had been raped. The 
father of the baby was acquitted of all charges, as the law requires 
the testimony from four male witnesses to prove him guilty of the same 
crime, a virtually impossible task.
  The international outcry helped save Safiya's life. Her sentence was 
overturned on a technicality. However, on the day that Safiya was set 
free, it emerged that another young Nigerian mother had been sentenced 
to death by stoning, Amina Lawal. She has also been convicted of 
adultery; her crime, giving birth to a child more than 9 months after 
divorcing her former husband. Unless Amina's sentence is overturned, 
she will be stoned to death in a public square as soon as her baby is 
weaned, about this time next year.
  At her trial, Amina had no legal representation. She did not receive 
an adequate explanation of the charges against her. Frightened and 
unaware of the consequences of her response, Amina confessed. However, 
not much of a confession was needed, as her newborn daughter was proof 
enough to find her guilty of adultery. The man Amina identified as the 
father of her child denied the charges, and he was set free.
  On the day that Amina's case was last heard on appeal, dozens of 
people crammed into the small village courtroom to observe the 
proceedings. Amina sat alone on a bench as her daughter slumbered 
against her back. When the judge announced that Amina would be stoned 
to death, observers shouted their approval, while Amina clutched her 
baby and wept.
  A court will hear Amina's next appeal on March 25, but it may be a 
matter of hours or months until they issue a decision. Until then Amina 
must wait. She is hopeful that her life will be spared, but worries 
about what might happen to her daughter. If the court determines 
stoning her to death is justified, it will happen.
  Tragically, Amina is only one of a number of individuals who are at 
risk of being executed by stoning. Laws authorizing this punishment 
remain on the books in a number of other countries. Until these laws 
are repealed, many more people could face this inhumane punishment. 
Women remain particularly at risk for receiving this sentence due to 
double standards that exist in these laws.
  This resolution is important because it will send a message to the 
most remote corners of the globe that the sentence of stoning, 
particularly when used as a tool of gender persecution to control women 
and girls, is far beneath any minimum standard of human rights 
recognized by this House, by the people of the United States and by the 
world community.
  At the same time this resolution is not intended to be disrespectful 
to any nation, religion or culture. But I do believe so strongly that 
the most basic rights of every woman, man and child on this planet must 
be respected, protected and defended. It is this belief of fundamental 
human rights that compels me to speak out and encourage my colleagues 
to join me in the effort to extinguish this brutal punishment from the 
face of the Earth.
  I do not know the women who have been sentenced to death by stoning. 
I will likely never visit their villages in Africa or the Middle East, 
but I will stand with them as my sisters, as my fellow citizens of the 
world. I will work to defend their rights, the most basic human rights 
we all deserve to enjoy.
  Safiya and Amina are just two women in a distant land, far away from 
us here and far away from my constituents in Minnesota. Nevertheless, 
these women are targets for abuse and violence, and wherever women are 
targets for abuse and violence or death simply because they are women, 
I have an obligation to speak up, speak out and to fight for their 
rights, because they are my rights and your rights, too.
  My home in the State of Minnesota has a strong tradition of defending 
basic human rights, from former Congressman Don Fraser to the late 
Senator Paul Wellstone and his wife Sheila. Minnesota also is proud to 
be the home for the Center for the Victims of Torture, the American 
Refugee Committee and the Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights. I am 
proud to stand here today to continue this tradition.
  It is high time that the United States join the many nations who have 
condemned the inhumane punishment of stoning. I am pleased that House 
leadership has brought this resolution to the floor for its 
consideration, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this measure, 
to send a clear and a powerful message to every nation that stoning is 
an extraordinarily cruel form of punishment, and it must end today.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no additional requests for time, but before 
yielding back my time, I want to join my colleague from Minnesota in 
paying tribute to the people of Minnesota for their extraordinary 
commitment to human rights and to their commitment to protecting 
victims of torture.
  I also want to make an observation concerning the absurdity of the 
current composition of the United Nations

[[Page 6461]]

Commission on Human Rights, where countries serve where the practice of 
stoning women to death is legal and practiced. This is just one more 
example of the absurdity of many of these international organizations, 
pretending to be something totally different from what they are.

                              {time}  1430

  Stoning women to death and serving on the International Commission 
for Human Rights are incompatible activities, and it is high time we 
focus on bringing some reality to international organizations.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Let me just echo the words of the distinguished gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos), the ranking member of the Committee on 
International Relations. It is indeed ironic that Sudan, a country that 
uses stoning, should serve on the Human Rights Committee of the United 
Nations. It is even more ironic that Libya should be the current 
chairman of that committee.
  Mr. Speaker, in 1999, along with Colin Powell, I had the opportunity 
and the privilege of coleading an election-monitoring team to Nigeria 
for its first democratic elections there in over a decade. After years 
of military rule, we observed a fair and free election; to wit, 
firsthand those exercising the simple virtues of democracy was truly 
inspiring. Along with other election monitors, I came away with great 
hope for Nigeria's future.
  Unfortunately, in the last 3 years, Sharia criminal law has swept 
through the northern half of Nigeria. The chief prosecutor of a Katsina 
state in northern Nigeria has even called Sharia law a ``dividend of 
democracy.''
  Mr. Speaker, since that election, 10,000 Nigerians have died in 
religiously inspired rioting across that country. Nigeria seems to be 
on the verge of being torn apart along Muslim-Christian lines. Besides 
being barbaric and being a gross abuse of human rights, stoning is 
fueling this religious divide, undermining Nigeria's democratic 
prospects. Stoning is not a ``dividend'' of any type of democracy that 
I know many Nigerians are struggling to establish.
  Nigeria is but one country of concern for us. It was only after 
September 11 that the American public began to learn about the brutal 
living conditions for women under the Taliban, including being subject 
to public stonings. Afghanistan remains a fragile state. Many parts of 
Afghanistan are struggling with the questions of how to govern. This 
resolution is our message that stoning should have no role in today's 
Afghanistan, or anywhere else in today's age.
  It is important for this body to bring attention to this abysmal 
practice. This resolution deserves strong support of all Members here.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 
26 to condemn execution by stoning as a gross violation of human 
rights. I want to commend my colleague, Congresswoman Betty McCollum 
for raising awareness of this issue by introducing this resolution. I 
oppose the death penalty in any instance, and I certainly oppose the 
cruelty of death by stoning.
  Execution by stoning is particularly cruel and discriminatory in that 
it is often used to punish women for adultery, even in cases where 
women are victims of coerced prostitution or rape. Women around the 
world, as well as in the United States, continue to experience 
horrendous acts of physical and sexual violence against them. It is 
absolutely unacceptable that some governments would then sanction death 
as a punishment for being a victim of such violence. Unfortunately, 
this continues to be the case in some countries.
  The United States has a moral obligation to speak out against 
violence, intolerance, hate, and discrimination throughout the world. 
Without clear, strong condemnation and action from the United States 
and all people of conscience, these violations of fundamental human 
rights will continue to occur.
  I urge my colleagues to support this resolution and to take a stand 
against all human rights abuses.
  Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Terry). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) that the House 
suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 
26.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of 
those present have voted in the affirmative.
  Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________