To play God or to reform?
Ranjana Kumari Vs Harish Khurana
=====================================
State must protect right to life - Ranjana Kumari
=====================================
It’s often difficult to put across ideas about abolishing death penalty becau-se the instinct of retaliation influences a majority of our population which has either witnessed violence or feels disgusted with the burgeoning crime all around. But I firmly believe that “an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind”. It will lead to destruction rather than bring any positive change in society. To view the death penalty as a deterrent to crime is to take a myopic view.
The execution of Yakub Memon, convicted for his role in the 1993 Mumbai bomb blasts, has again fuelled the demand to abolish death penalty in India. While his connivance in their act of crime against humanity cannot be denied, it’s high time we realised that capital punishment alone cannot deter the perpetrators of violence. It only has a symbolic significance.
We, as a society, need to channelise our thoughts to come up with a farsighted solution. To prevent crime, we need to think of reforms and punishments that can actually bring about a qualitative change in a criminal mindset and analyse and understand the reasons behind crimes. We also need to think about the after-effects of a judgment, instead of focusing only on the quantum of punishment.
Abolishing death penalty marks a radical overhaul of the existing attitude towards criminals, so the state needs to envisage the direction in which it wants to steer society’s view on treating criminals: a symbolic punishment or long-term reform.
It’s true that most convicts sentenced to life imprisonment or death are from the lower strata of our society. The state should dig deep into the root cause of this section’s involvement in criminal activities. Also, if the judiciary continues to punish the poor and let off the rich easily, then society will completely lose faith in the system.
Between 2004-15, there have been only four executions. This makes it clear that our judiciary exercises utmost caution in delivering capital punishments only in the “rarest of rare cases”. More than 95,000 cases are pending in various courts. Every day we come across cases of rape, murder and terror attacks. But death is not the right solution. Equivalent punishment is. As citizen of a democratic nation, one needs to evolve and think of bringing about qualitiative change in the criminal’s personality.
I firmly believe that the state is responsible for protecting basic human rights such as the right to life. Therefore, it should work to build a civilised society. Death penalty will take the society nowhere.
Dr Ranjana Kumari is director, Centre for Social Research
=====================================
There should be fear of law - Harish Khurana
=====================================
The execution of 1993 Mumbai serial blasts convict Yakub Memon has sparked a debate over death penalty. While the Opposition has joined some human rights activists in calling for a ban on capital punishment, some are giving it a religious angle. It is unfortunate that every time someone is awarded a death sentence, politicians start playing politics and often relate it with religion.
We should understand that terrorism does not have any religion. Our judiciary remains unaf-fected by the religion of the accused while delivering justice.
The arguments in favour of putting an end to death penalty are that India is a democracy and we should set high standards for human rights. And that, since everyone has the right to life, death penalty should be abolished. But we should take a few things into account. First of all, capital punishment is given only in “rarest of rare” cases. The Supreme Court has laid down clear guidelines un-der which death sentence should be awarded.
These are: manner of commission of crime, moti-ve for the commission of the crime, antisocial or social abhorrent act, magnitude of the offence and the victims involved in the crime. Secondly, the procedure of the execution is a lengthy legal process and executive clemency can prevent the government from taking the life of its own citizen.
This is the beauty of our judicial system — the accused has the right to appeal in the Supreme Court. S/he could file a review petition and then appeal to the President with a mercy petition. Yakub Memon got a chance to appeal. The bench heard his appeal at 2 am. He was given a fair chance and this happens only in India.
In the past 19 years, only four people have been given the death sentence. One was Dhananjoy Chatterjee in 2004, who was convicted for the rape and murder of a teenage girl in Kolkata. Ajmal Kasab for 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, Afzal Guru for 2001 Parliament attack and now Yakub Menon for 1993 Mumbai blasts.
When activists talk about the convict’s right to life, they often neglect the magnitude of their crime.
Their victims also had a right to life. What about those innocent people who died in 1993 Mumbai blasts or other such terror attacks? What about their families?
I am in favour of death penalty. It should be there in the statute book. There should be fear of law in society. Awarding capital punishment for heinous crimes will act as a deterrent. How can those who never acted in a humane manner be endowed with the same rights as dutiful, law-abiding citizens?
Harish Khurana is spokesperson for the Delhi BJP
