In this second part we will take a deep, honest look at Death Penalty, and its consequences, including the way society and people accept, approach or reject it. In most cases, we will resort to the recent Ajmal Kasab, Afzal Guru and Veerappan gang death sentences to test the arguments, both for and against.
It is easier to justify ‘For’. Every protest can be brushed aside as one of crocodile tears, or that the law says so. But that is not the way we should look at it. So we are going to scrutinize the ‘Against’ and see whether the ‘For’ is justified.
The call for abolishing or doing away with death sentence broadly falls into:
The rants by politicians are the easiest to disregard. Even in the matter of death and safety of society, the politicians typically do what they do best - play politics.
The Akalis do it with the mercy plea of B.S. Rajoana. V. Gopalswamy or ‘Vaiko’ has been for ages trying to protect the Tamil terrorists from death and circumstances have forced him to adopt a position of a total No to capital punishment.
The declaration by DMK chief M. Karunanidhi on capital punishment was met with a smirk. The feeling is that his senior party men got away in the murder of T. Krishnan and Dinakaran office burning, but now with Pottu Suresh murder, the old man wants to cover all his bases.
The ADMK has its own problems with party workers facing death in Dharmapuri bus burning.
The BJP wanted Afzal Guru’s head, but ducks the question on B.S. Rajoana. The Congress, after warming their backsides for 8 years, now wants to execute the convicts.
But the most blatant display of sectarian politics was by Omar Abdullah, ‘Why hang only Kashmir terrorists? Execute Tamil and Sikh terrorists too’.
So what this says is we should nod, smile, smirk and take the politicians arguments with a pinch of salt, decide for ourselves without any heed to their rhetoric.
individual calls and opinions
The opinions of individuals are again of 2 kinds.
Completely unwarranted and ill-informed comments like the one by NHRC member Satyabrata Pal that hanging of Afzal Guru is barbaric and death penalty is an abomination is one kind. There was also a remark by someone else that the rejection of mercy petitions reminds him (her?) of the kangaroo courts of Maoists. Some say these commentators should be pulled up and told to shut up, perhaps by courts.
But let them be. These idiotic utterances only highlight their ignorance of the justice delivery system and judicial process in India. Afzal Guru, Veerappan gang and Rajiv killers have all had their cases heard multiple times from trial courts (special courts) to the Supreme Court of India. There is nothing barbaric or abominable in awarding death sentence, in the ‘rarest of rare’ cases.
But all these chaff serve one purpose. Hearing them repeated often has had an effect on even eminent jurists, not to mention a section of public and the media.
The jurists perhaps subconsciously disliking to be associated with a profession to which barbaric, brutal, abominable and other adjectives (or are they interjections?), come out with some statements, which even to them must sound absurd, in hindsight.
End of part-2.
(image courtesy MacGregor @ news-press.com)
It is easier to justify ‘For’. Every protest can be brushed aside as one of crocodile tears, or that the law says so. But that is not the way we should look at it. So we are going to scrutinize the ‘Against’ and see whether the ‘For’ is justified.
The call for abolishing or doing away with death sentence broadly falls into:
- individual calls and opinions;
- political leaders and their antics;
- human rights and civil liberty activists;
- systemic failure;
- international pressure groups; and,
- international treaties, laws and recommendations.
The rants by politicians are the easiest to disregard. Even in the matter of death and safety of society, the politicians typically do what they do best - play politics.
The Akalis do it with the mercy plea of B.S. Rajoana. V. Gopalswamy or ‘Vaiko’ has been for ages trying to protect the Tamil terrorists from death and circumstances have forced him to adopt a position of a total No to capital punishment.
The declaration by DMK chief M. Karunanidhi on capital punishment was met with a smirk. The feeling is that his senior party men got away in the murder of T. Krishnan and Dinakaran office burning, but now with Pottu Suresh murder, the old man wants to cover all his bases.
The ADMK has its own problems with party workers facing death in Dharmapuri bus burning.
The BJP wanted Afzal Guru’s head, but ducks the question on B.S. Rajoana. The Congress, after warming their backsides for 8 years, now wants to execute the convicts.
But the most blatant display of sectarian politics was by Omar Abdullah, ‘Why hang only Kashmir terrorists? Execute Tamil and Sikh terrorists too’.
So what this says is we should nod, smile, smirk and take the politicians arguments with a pinch of salt, decide for ourselves without any heed to their rhetoric.
individual calls and opinions
The opinions of individuals are again of 2 kinds.
Completely unwarranted and ill-informed comments like the one by NHRC member Satyabrata Pal that hanging of Afzal Guru is barbaric and death penalty is an abomination is one kind. There was also a remark by someone else that the rejection of mercy petitions reminds him (her?) of the kangaroo courts of Maoists. Some say these commentators should be pulled up and told to shut up, perhaps by courts.
But let them be. These idiotic utterances only highlight their ignorance of the justice delivery system and judicial process in India. Afzal Guru, Veerappan gang and Rajiv killers have all had their cases heard multiple times from trial courts (special courts) to the Supreme Court of India. There is nothing barbaric or abominable in awarding death sentence, in the ‘rarest of rare’ cases.
But all these chaff serve one purpose. Hearing them repeated often has had an effect on even eminent jurists, not to mention a section of public and the media.
The jurists perhaps subconsciously disliking to be associated with a profession to which barbaric, brutal, abominable and other adjectives (or are they interjections?), come out with some statements, which even to them must sound absurd, in hindsight.
End of part-2.
(image courtesy MacGregor @ news-press.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment