There has been quite a bit of chatter over the past few months over the execution of terrorists and criminals. The arguments are over the procedure, the politics, the decision making and even the law itself.
The murmurs started with the execution of Ajmal Kasab of 26/11 Mumbai attacks, though people were scared to come out in the open. With the hanging of Afzal Guru, the cacophony could be heard from Kashmir to Cape Comorin. With the rejection of mercy petitions of 4 conspirators of Veerappan gang last week, the stuff has really hit the fan.
The first bench of the Supreme Court of India is scheduled to take up a writ petition by lawyers (and human rights, civil liberty activists) on behalf of the 4 people convicted earlier by the Supreme Court of India in a landmine blast case which killed 22 people. The petition is to abrogate the death sentence.
In fact, the petition should not be seen in the lone context of Veerappan associates. The petition is one in a long line of such actions by the bleeding hearts’ actions to abolish death penalty, chiefly because one of their own (state) has been punished thus.
There are various, ingenious arguments put forward by these civil liberty, human rights, political, religious activists, whether in individual cases or broadly against the law as it stands now.
What I am going to do is take their arguments one-by-one and see whether we can find a solution, one way or other, on the merit of death penalty. To do that, I am really going to approach the problem and arguments with an open mind.
Writing down the arguments for and against the death penalty (especially in this case), a severe sinus infection with attendant raging fever, along with the drowsy medication for sinus forces me to postpone the concluding article.
That in part 2 will have to wait for tomorrow. If time, tide, my infected sinus and fever permits, you can read the conclusions, on which the court will have to take a final decision tomorrow, before the court is seized of the matter at 10 A.M.
For now, Good Night!
The murmurs started with the execution of Ajmal Kasab of 26/11 Mumbai attacks, though people were scared to come out in the open. With the hanging of Afzal Guru, the cacophony could be heard from Kashmir to Cape Comorin. With the rejection of mercy petitions of 4 conspirators of Veerappan gang last week, the stuff has really hit the fan.
The first bench of the Supreme Court of India is scheduled to take up a writ petition by lawyers (and human rights, civil liberty activists) on behalf of the 4 people convicted earlier by the Supreme Court of India in a landmine blast case which killed 22 people. The petition is to abrogate the death sentence.
In fact, the petition should not be seen in the lone context of Veerappan associates. The petition is one in a long line of such actions by the bleeding hearts’ actions to abolish death penalty, chiefly because one of their own (state) has been punished thus.
There are various, ingenious arguments put forward by these civil liberty, human rights, political, religious activists, whether in individual cases or broadly against the law as it stands now.
What I am going to do is take their arguments one-by-one and see whether we can find a solution, one way or other, on the merit of death penalty. To do that, I am really going to approach the problem and arguments with an open mind.
Writing down the arguments for and against the death penalty (especially in this case), a severe sinus infection with attendant raging fever, along with the drowsy medication for sinus forces me to postpone the concluding article.
That in part 2 will have to wait for tomorrow. If time, tide, my infected sinus and fever permits, you can read the conclusions, on which the court will have to take a final decision tomorrow, before the court is seized of the matter at 10 A.M.
For now, Good Night!
No comments:
Post a Comment