Should Md. Afzal be hanged?
This post is a side post of
Community members , pls comment on orkut.
Non-community members - can either join the community or comment here
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The parliament attack case: On December 18, 2002, the trial court awarded death to S R Gilani, Mohammad Afzal Guru and Shaukat Hussain Guru while Afshan Guru was sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment for conspiring in and abetting the attack.
Later on in 2003, the Delhi high court acquitted Gilani and Afshan Guru for lack of evidence, but the death sentence awarded to Shaukat Guru and Mohammad Afzal Guru was maintained. In August 2005, the supreme court of India again modified the death sentence to Shaukat Guru to ten years' rigorous imprisonment but the death sentence to Afzal Guru was upheld, following which the Delhi trial court on September 26, 2006 issued the execution order.
Voices have been raised from different quarters demanding that the death sentence of Md. Afzal should be revoked and he should be pardoned or given life imprisionment.
First of all, a look at the people demanding leniency for Afzal and the arguments put forward:
Argument 1: Afzal did not receive a fair trial.
Afzal in a letter written from his Tihar jail cell has said that “the session court systemically silenced my voice”(1). In another letter, written to his lawyer in Supreme Court he recounts the torture and pressure he was subjected to for making a confession and pleads innocent in the attack case.(2)
Advanced by
Mohammed Afzal, Nandita Haksar (civil rights activist and Supreme Court lawyer) (3), Arundhati Roy (4), Kashmiri Leaders - Syed Ali Geelani, Shabir Ahmad Shah, Mohammad Yaseen Malik, Mian Abdul Qayyoom, Nisar Ali (6) ; CPM leader in Kashmir - MY Tarigami, and various Kashmiri civil rights organizations (5)
Argument 2: Mohammed Afzal was not directly involved in the attack and so does not deserve the death penalty
This argument has been advanced in many newspapers and blog articles. The broad logic is conveyed by the following statement (7)
Later on in 2003, the Delhi high court acquitted Gilani and Afshan Guru for lack of evidence, but the death sentence awarded to Shaukat Guru and Mohammad Afzal Guru was maintained. In August 2005, the supreme court of India again modified the death sentence to Shaukat Guru to ten years' rigorous imprisonment but the death sentence to Afzal Guru was upheld, following which the Delhi trial court on September 26, 2006 issued the execution order.
Voices have been raised from different quarters demanding that the death sentence of Md. Afzal should be revoked and he should be pardoned or given life imprisionment.
First of all, a look at the people demanding leniency for Afzal and the arguments put forward:
Argument 1: Afzal did not receive a fair trial.
Afzal in a letter written from his Tihar jail cell has said that “the session court systemically silenced my voice”(1). In another letter, written to his lawyer in Supreme Court he recounts the torture and pressure he was subjected to for making a confession and pleads innocent in the attack case.(2)
Advanced by
Mohammed Afzal, Nandita Haksar (civil rights activist and Supreme Court lawyer) (3), Arundhati Roy (4), Kashmiri Leaders - Syed Ali Geelani, Shabir Ahmad Shah, Mohammad Yaseen Malik, Mian Abdul Qayyoom, Nisar Ali (6) ; CPM leader in Kashmir - MY Tarigami, and various Kashmiri civil rights organizations (5)
Argument 2: Mohammed Afzal was not directly involved in the attack and so does not deserve the death penalty
This argument has been advanced in many newspapers and blog articles. The broad logic is conveyed by the following statement (7)
“The mastermind of the attack was Maulana Masood Azhar. A simple test of the judgment is whether the same judgment would be meted out if Azhar stood there next to Afzal. Or, given the more egregious nature of Azhar's work, would Afzal be seen in a relatively less evil light? I suspect the latter would apply, and the 'rarest of rare cases' would then apply to Azhar, not Afzal.”
Argument 3: The Political argument: His hanging will derail the peace process and cause further alienation in Kashmir
In effect, this argument pleads that Afzal’s is a special case and his death will only result in more violence and fuel separatism. Parallel is drawn to the hanging of hanging of Maqbool Bhat in Tihar jail a couple of decades back. (a JKLF militant).
This argument is advanced by the political class - Syed Ali Geelani, Shabir Ahmad Shah, Mohammad Yaseen Malik, Mian Abdul Qayyoom, Nisar Ali (6), People’s Democratic Party president Mehbooba Mufti, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad, NC president Omar Abdullah, Raj babbar (8)
Argument 3: The Political argument: His hanging will derail the peace process and cause further alienation in Kashmir
In effect, this argument pleads that Afzal’s is a special case and his death will only result in more violence and fuel separatism. Parallel is drawn to the hanging of hanging of Maqbool Bhat in Tihar jail a couple of decades back. (a JKLF militant).
This argument is advanced by the political class - Syed Ali Geelani, Shabir Ahmad Shah, Mohammad Yaseen Malik, Mian Abdul Qayyoom, Nisar Ali (6), People’s Democratic Party president Mehbooba Mufti, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad, NC president Omar Abdullah, Raj babbar (8)
A Pakistani commentator almost sounded as if Afzal’s was the only issue outstanding between India, Pakistan and the people of Kashmir (9)
“Pakistan and India have travelled quite a distance with their peace process during the last few years. The two countries have made progress on a number of issues. The difference on Siachen Glacier has narrowed down to a workable solution. The Indian prime minister has held discussions with all the political groups including Hurriyat. Civil society and cultural and sports exchanges have increased, and so has bilateral trade. Let us not forget the recent agreement at the highest level to set up a joint counter terrorism mechanism. However, the future of all these encouraging developments is precariously hanging on to Guru's neck.”
A slightly different version of this argument is put forward by Khushwant Singh (10)
“by killing him we will make him a martyr in the eyes of a section of people blinded by fanatical hatred towards our country. Protests organised in Kashmir are proof that we are not short of such lunatics. People like Afzal Guru do not deserve to be remembered as martyrs but as villains who did grave disservice to their community and country. Let him languish in a high security prison for the rest of his life and let him do something constructive like teaching children and cleaning latrines morning and evening”
Argument 4: A more general argument: Death reforms none
Capital punishment is barbaric and should be used in rarest of rare cases.
Advanced by
Bhagat Singh’s nephew, Professor Jagmohan Singh, Amnesty International, Arundhati Roy, Karunidhi (11 and 12)
“Pakistan and India have travelled quite a distance with their peace process during the last few years. The two countries have made progress on a number of issues. The difference on Siachen Glacier has narrowed down to a workable solution. The Indian prime minister has held discussions with all the political groups including Hurriyat. Civil society and cultural and sports exchanges have increased, and so has bilateral trade. Let us not forget the recent agreement at the highest level to set up a joint counter terrorism mechanism. However, the future of all these encouraging developments is precariously hanging on to Guru's neck.”
A slightly different version of this argument is put forward by Khushwant Singh (10)
“by killing him we will make him a martyr in the eyes of a section of people blinded by fanatical hatred towards our country. Protests organised in Kashmir are proof that we are not short of such lunatics. People like Afzal Guru do not deserve to be remembered as martyrs but as villains who did grave disservice to their community and country. Let him languish in a high security prison for the rest of his life and let him do something constructive like teaching children and cleaning latrines morning and evening”
Argument 4: A more general argument: Death reforms none
Capital punishment is barbaric and should be used in rarest of rare cases.
Advanced by
Bhagat Singh’s nephew, Professor Jagmohan Singh, Amnesty International, Arundhati Roy, Karunidhi (11 and 12)
References
posted by The Argumentative Indian @ 9:55 AM
0 comments
