A terrorist convict was executed in
India earlier this week after a two decade long trial. Some politicians and human
rights activists found the opportunity to appease their hunger for publicity
and flocked TV Studios. Some tried to project the convict as a victim and some
others questioned the validity of Capital Punishments. Statistics were
presented against Capital Punishment arguing that it did not help in reducing
the crime. Most of them advanced the argument that the state cannot take the
life of a person which it cannot give back in case at a later date it is found that
the person was wrongfully convicted. A former minister, two times MP, celebrated
author and internationally reputed orator termed Capital Punishment as “State
sponsored murder”.
The movement against capital
punishment is not new. The activists took their case to the highest level and
the Supreme Court of India maintained that Capital Punishment provision will
remain in the statute book. The Supreme Court ruled that though capital
punishment will remain constitutionally valid, it will be awarded in the “rarest
of rare” cases. It is therefore incumbent on every court in India to ensure the
capital punishment awarded by it passes the “rarest of rare test”. The very few
execution that has taken place in India under capital punishment is testimony to
the fact that the Courts are applying the “rarest of rare test”. People still continue to enjoy the right to campaign
for the abolition of capital punishment. However, until capital punishment is not
erased from the statute book, it is a valid law and the Courts ruling in
accordance with the law should be respected.
A former minister, two times Member of Parliament, a celebrated
author and renowned international speaker took the discussion the a new
dimension by terming capital punishment as ‘state sponsored murder”. Campaign
against Capital punishment is one thing but terming it as a “state sponsored
murder” has more ramifications. Murder is defined as “the killing of another
person without justification or excuse, especially the crime of killing a
person with malice aforethought or with recklessness manifesting extreme
indifference to the value of human life”. This terminology if allowed legitimacy,
can be used against the army at the border and the law enforcing agencies maintaining
internal law and order at the state and central level. Both these forces follow
the instructions of the State and in their line of duty possibly take the life
of another person suspected to be an enemy or criminal. If this happens, they
cannot return or reinstate the lives taken. This is much more serious than the
capital punishment as the victim did not get the benefit of the due process of
law. So-
- · Can capital Punishment be termed as state sponsored murder?
- · Does it fall under the definition of murder when it is legal and the case was tried after following the due process of law?
- · Can a criminal justice system work on the basis of a likely error in judgment?
- · Isn’t the due process of law to insure error in judgment does not take place?
- · If a case was trialed for two decades, what new evidence could probably surface which could alter the case?
No comments:
Post a Comment