Previous 1 / 6 Next

http://www.drxsfd.com/xf/houtai/xx_anli_sj.asp?bh=3457 相关案例－［第1220号］依斯坎达尔·艾海提等组织、领导、... 1 of 6 ［第1220号］依斯坎达尔·艾海提等组织、领导、参加恐怖组织，故意杀人案——如何把握恐怖活动组织成员的罪责认定及暴恐犯罪的死刑适用？发布单位：《刑事审判参考》总第112集判决日期： 2018/5/31 整理者：窦振东［第1220号］依斯坎达尔·艾海提等组织、领导、参加恐怖组织，故意杀人案——如何把握恐怖活动组织成员的罪责认定及暴恐犯罪的死刑适用？一、基本案情被告人依斯坎达尔·艾海提，男，1991年12月3日出生。2014年3月29日因本案被逮捕。被告人吐尔洪·托合尼亚孜，男，1990年8月20日出生。2014年3月29日因本案被逮捕。被告人玉山·买买提，男，1993年11月5日出生。2014年3月29日因本案被逮捕。被告人帕提古丽·托合提，女，1992年4月2日出生。2014年3月29日因本案被逮捕。云南省昆明市人民检察院以被告人依斯坎达尔·艾海提、吐尔洪·托合尼亚孜、玉山·买买提犯组织、领导恐怖组织罪，故意杀人罪，被告人帕提古丽·托合提犯参加恐怖组织罪、故意杀人罪，向昆明市中级人民法院提起公诉。昆明市中级人民法院经公开审理查明：受宗教极端思想的影响，2013年12月以来，被告人依斯坎达尔·艾海提、吐尔洪·托合尼亚孜、玉山·买买提、帕提古丽·托合提和阿卜杜热伊木·库尔班、艾合买提·阿比提、阿尔米亚·吐尔逊、盲沙尔·沙塔尔8人伙同依明·毛拉、玉苏甫·牙森、巴拉提·阿卜杜赛麦提、艾力·伊敏、萨拉木·马木提（该5人另案处理），为非法出境、实施暴力恐怖活动，相互纠集，先后在广东省广州市、珠海市，河南省南阳市，甘肃省兰州市，云南省景洪市、个旧市沙甸区等地，进行推选头目、训练体能、准备凶器等活动，逐渐形成了以依斯坎达尔·艾海提为首、以实施暴力恐怖活动为目的的暴力恐怖组织。依斯坎达尔·艾海提等人多次向组织成员播放暴恐音视频，宣扬宗教极端思想，传授杀人方法；吐尔洪·托合尼 27/02/2025, 12:18

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Iskender Ehet (依斯坎达尔·艾海提)

CASE BRIEF

Jurisdiction

China

Nationalities

Chinese

Case Title: Iskender Ehet et al. – Organising, Leading, and Participating in a Terrorist Organisation, Intentional Homicide Case (“3·01” Kunming Station Incident)

Age at Offence: 22

Age Group at Offence: Adult (18 to 59)

Gender: Male

Religious Group at Offence: Islam

Vulnerable/ Marginalised Group

Minorities: Ethnicity
Minorities: Religion

Jurisdiction - Geolocation

Latitude: 35.8617

Longitude: 104.1954

Jurisdiction - Geolocation (linked CASE BRIEF): China

Contributing TRP Partner

The Rights Practice (United Kingdom)
The Rights Practice Partner (China)

Latest Country's Death Penalty Status

Retentionist

Case Current Status: Closed: Executed

Year when sentenced to Death Row: 2010s: 2014

Method of Execution: Unknown

Rights Allegedly Violated

Fair Trial and Due Process: Fair investigation & fair disclosure
Fair Trial and Due Process: Right to fair hearing by impartial, independent tribunal

Nature of Offences for Death Penalty

Murder: Multiple Victims
Terrorism / Threat to National Security

Case Background (300 words max): On March 1, 2014, a knife attack occurred at Kunming Railway Station, left 31 dead and 141 injured. Police killed five attackers on the spot and arrested one. The attack was shortly classified as terrorist attack. The defendant was detained two days earlier for illegal border crossing and was held as the principal of the attack despite not directly participating. Ultimately, the defendant, along with two other co-defendants, were sentenced to death on 12 September 2014, and executed on 24 March 2015 upon the approval by the Supreme People’s Court. According to official reports, court-appointed interpreters ensured the defendants could use their native language during the trial, and state-appointed lawyers provided their defence. The case occurred amid escalating ethnic tensions and is regarded as a turning point in China’s national counter-terrorism policy and the ongoing crackdown in Xinjiang. In 2009, a factory dispute in Guangdong led to Uyghur worker injuries, sparking the “July 5 Incident” in Urumqi and escalating ethnic tensions. From 2012 to 2014, China linked several attacks to Uyghur separatists, with Kunming being the deadliest, and had executed 13 individuals in 2014. In response, the government launched a nationwide anti-terror campaign, including a year-long crackdown in Xinjiang, later institutionalized.

The court ruling was not publicly available. Therefore, the case brief is based on information reported by state media disclosed, and an analysis of the verdict by a judge served at the Supreme People’s Court, both of which failed to provide information on the evidence. The analysis, although non-binding, serves as a reference for judges in convicting terrorist organisation members and applying the death penalty in terrorism cases.

Defence Arguments (200 words max.): The defence arguments remained unavailable, as neither official announcement or judge’s analysis provide information on defence arguments.

Judgement with Headnotes (200 words max): The court found the defendant, influenced by religious extremism, had formed a terrorist group, recruited members, disseminated extremist content, and planned the attack along with other co-perpetrators.

As the court ruled, after being detained on 27 February, two days before the attack, he refused to disclose information, actively pursuing terrorist objectives. As the organiser and leader of the terrorist organisation, Ehet played a key role of organising and leading the attacks.

The Defendant's offence of intentional homicide met the criteria for a death sentence. His role in organising and leading the terrorist organisation, along with the deadly consequences of the attack, further aggravated the seriousness of his convictions. As he demonstrated deep criminal intent, posed significant harm to society, and committed crimes of extreme severity, the court sentenced him to death. Therefore, he should be held responsible as one of the organisers, despite not directly participating in the attack.

Legal Representation Received

Pre-trial: Unknown
Trial: Unknown
Appeal: Unknown
Second Appeal: Unknown

Legislation Related to the Offence(s)

Article 232(Intentional Homicide), and Article 120 ( Organising, Leading Terrorist Organisations) of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China.