Did Yakub die a stronger man? Did he die as a man who listened to his conscience 21 years ago and returned to his country to face trial? Or as a man who repented his role in the 1993 Mumbai bomb blasts that killed 257 innocent people? Or did he breathe his last as a man who felt betrayed by the investigating officials who had promised him leniency in exchange for his surrender?
Irrespective of whether or not you supported capital punishment for Yakub, it is undeniable that we have witnessed a momentous occasion in the history of crime and jurisprudence in India. His case has forced us to re-examine the death penalty, and strengthened the movement for the abolition of capital punishment in the country. Ironically, Yakub, who was buried on the same day as former president APJ Abdul Kalam, would probably have lived another day had Kalam still been the president.
Yakub has paid for his crime with his life, but India will need to answer the questions raised by his hanging: How are we as a nation going to deal with the politics of capital punishment where a death row convict’s religion and political support?and not the gravity of his crime?can lead to the annulment of the death sentence?
What about the possibility?as revealed in former RAW official B Raman’s letter?that Yakub was promised a lighter sentence by Indian intelligence agencies in return for his surrender and cooperation during the investigations into the 1993 blasts case?
If such a promise was indeed made to Yakub by top intelligence officials who had brought him to India, was he then betrayed by the Indian establishment which failed to bring this fact before the courts?
Barring one instance where Justices AR Dave and Kurian Joseph differed on capital punishment for Yakub, the Supreme Court repeatedly upheld the death penalty and consistently rejected petitions challenging that decision.
The judicial bench decided on the basis of the evidence?or lack thereof?placed before it. However, should the bench have gone the extra mile to look into the emergence of new evidence through B Raman’s letter, the unusual circumstances of Yakub’s return to India, and the assistance provided by him in the investigations? Were these factors, in addition to his good conduct during the 21 years of his incarceration, not mitigating enough for the commutation of his death sentence?
There is no doubt about Yakub’s criminal involvement in the Mumbai blast case. But the failure to commute his death sentence will always be questioned amidst the examination of the circumstances of his return.
Wrongful executions and miscarriages of justice have occurred all over the world from time to time. In the United States, the Death Penalty Information Center published a list of 10 inmates who were "executed but possibly innocent", and has also cited 39 other executions where there were serious doubts about the guilt of the convicts, and the emergence of evidence of innocence. Apart from the US, wrongful executions were also reported from Australia, China, the United Kingdom and Taiwan.
Political compulsions and the fallibility of individuals and institutions, including the highest court of the land is always a real possibility resulting in the miscarriage of justice. That is part of the rationale for the call to abolish of the death penalty.
India, which along with the US, China and Japan, is among the 50-odd nations upholding the death penalty, was perceived as moving towards a moratorium on capital punishment. This was because of just one execution in the 13 years between 1999 and 2011. That perception changed with three executions in the last four years (Ajmal Kasab, Afzal Guru and Yakub).
The controversy around the third of these executions has been the most intense since Independence, significantly bolstering the call for the abolition of the death penalty. India has always had a small, but influential set of people calling for the abolition of capital punishment; that number has now expanded significantly.
No comments:
Post a Comment