Let's not punish anyone

By M H Ahssan

The travesty of the Bhopal verdict — where seven former Union Carbide executives were given a two-year prison sentence 25 years after the murderous gas leak killed thousands in December, 1984, and several more thousands later — is completely in keeping with our national character. While fulminations in the media are par for the course, the fact is that we as a people are never serious about punishing the guilty. We believe that punishment is someone else’s job, something the karmic cycle will take care of.

This is why midway through the Bhopal trial, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seems to have given up trying to bring the former CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson, to justice. The Rajiv Gandhi administration, which negotiated the financial settlement with Union Carbide, meekly accepted a $470 million payoff, enticed by the prospect of earning greenbacks at a time when foreign exchange was scarce. We were more interested in the moolah than in bringing the culprits to justice. It’s the same today, and the US government knows it. When asked whether the US government would allow Anderson to be extradited, the official spokesman was non-committal and hoped that nothing would be done to damage improving Indo-US economic relations.

The story is the same in all high-profile cases. Another horrific crime committed in the same year as Bhopal — the anti-Sikh rioting in Delhi — hasn’t even got to the Bhopal stage of convictions. The pace of justice may have quickened somewhat in the television age, but even so it’s obvious that we as a people are uncomfortable with decisive verdicts and punishment.
Afzal Guru — sentenced to death in the 2001 parliament attack case — is exhibit 1. The Congress does not want to hang him for fear of losing Muslim sympathies; the BJP is beating the justice drum to score political brownie points, but if it were in power today, it may not have done anything different. It is, therefore, no surprise that even as the party is frothing at the mouth about the delay in dealing with Afzal’s clemency petition, it has readmitted Ram Jethmalani, the man who defended him.

Equally interesting is Jethmalani’s explanation on how he reconciles his opposition to the hanging of Afzal with the party’s bloodthirsty cries for the same. Jethmalani said that he wanted the convict to rot in an Indian prison rather than have a ball in heaven with the several score virgins promised for Allah’s martyrs. This is ingenious, but partly true. The real terrors of the Indian judicial system relate to its traumatic processes and horrendous prison conditions, not the speed of justice or execution of sentences.

Which brings me to the larger question: what is it about us that makes us so squeamish about prosecuting and punishing the guilty? There are three reasons I can adduce. One is the level of systemic corruption in the justice system, which allows the rich and powerful to get away (almost literally) with murder. The second reason is that we are incredibly lazy — we don’t want to do the hard work needed to bring the guilty to book. We would rather sort it out through a quick encounter or a make-believe “confession” that won’t stick in court.

The third reason is fundamental: it emanates from the Hindu belief in karmic justice. We have less faith and interest in a manmade system of retribution, where the guilty must be punished. We believe in the doctrine of individual dharma, and prefer to leave the job of delivering justice on earth to cosmic forces.

In contrast, the Abrahamic traditions are very clear about the need for retribution, and an eye-for-an-eye. The Bible and Koran are full of stories about blood-curdling justice and divine wrath. Hindu gods, on the other hand, are customised entities created for personal ends. They are little more than human characters with divine attributes. In Hindu stories, the gods are often doing their own thing; in the Abrahamic stories, the gods are fighting on the side of believers and punishing Satan’s cohorts. Punishment is central to Abrahamic systems.

In contrast, whenever a criminal is arrested or faces sentencing, Indians momentarily welcome the same, but soon lose interest in taking the issue to its logical conclusion. In case after case, while the urban media bays for blood, the corrupt and the criminal elements talk about how they are being victimised because of their caste or religious beliefs. After a successful conviction, public sympathies often move in favour of the accused. Often, a single expression of public contrition is enough for the public to forgive anyone any sins, as it happened when the PM expressed regret for the anti-Sikh riots of 1984. We are a people always willing to forgive and forget. We believe the retribution lies in public ignominy and harassment, not in convicting and punishing the guilty. We are like that only.