Death Penalty in India – should it stay or go ?

The Law Commission of India has recently recommended abolition of the death penalty except in terrorism-related offenses and waging war against the country.

There are dissent notes within the Law Commission itself…

Nevertheless, let me say that if I were to debate as a common man, then these points would be my fundamental questions to the Commission :

(1) To what extent do you define ‘terror’ ? Or is it only limited to ‘waging war against the nation’ ?

To cite some scenarios :

(a) “Terrified” by the frequent incidents of rapes and assaults on women (including acid-attacks), many women are unwilling or scared to travel alone !!!

(b) Senior citizens living alone are “terrified” to open their doors to domestic-services staff or friends or relatives because of incidents of murders or attempts to murder, for pecuniary greed by persons even very well-known to them !!!

(c) Parents in villages are “terrified” to send their female children to schools because of instances of luring by powerful men along the routes for their sexual gratifications !!!

(2) What about the rights and justice for the victims and their families ???

(3) When certain serious crimes (numbers or types) have increased, as against yet lagging Police and Judicial reforms, then should it not be the other way, i.e., to try continuing implementation of death penalty as a deterrent ??

It may not work for all cases but definitely, it deters many potential perpetrators !!

In this regard, I favor certain aspects of the Sharia Law like it happens in Saudi Arabia. We actually need those kind of justice system in some cases !!!!

(4) By abolishing death penalty in all other cases except “terror” ones, the maximum punishment then would be only life imprisonment : that means, we are rather going to feed, entertain and provide security to the criminals at taxpayer’s expenses !!!!!

And this term ‘life imprisonment’ (though the SC has said it means for the entire life) is still handled unclear, with regard to certain provisions of bail and constitutional powers of states !

(5) And in any case, if the imprisonment is merely limited by certain number of years, then you know what – anything can just go fatally wrong again, revenge or whatsoever !!!!!!!!

Wouldn’t this worsen matters, along with an increase in the number of litigation (which could be avoided) ??

(6) How do we then differentiate severity of various crimes and the appropriate punishments ? So, even the “rarest of rare” or “brutal” crimes like Nirbhaya’s case, would not be punished with death penalty ?? Is a rape-victim not “terrorized” in any way ????

Another heinous and rarest-of-rare example is the Nithari killings, where 19+ innocent children were killed and then raped.

(7) Our scriptures speak about punishing the evil… Particularly, then considering the numerous and ages-old preaching /illustrations /’gyaan‘ from the Vedas, Upanishads and Bhagvad Gita – all of them are utterly wrong ????

Forgive all criminals even if they have terminated lives and tormented souls forever !?!

Would then such a recommendation be apt ?

Eagerly waiting to hear the Hon’ble SC on this matter……………

 

Advertisements

Should India Accommodate More Refugees: A Common Man’s View

With the stable and able Government in New Delhi, and with India’s rising importance in world affairs, different sections of many neighbouring and other far-away countries are eyeing for taking refuge in India. Well, if India can accommodate others, it is well and good. It is nothing new for India; India has opened its borders for many in the past, since ancient times !

But how long and how many people can India accommodate ? This is definitely a major point of discussion at present, and many like me must be either debating it at heart (inner voices) or would have at least once thought about it.

Briefly, my opinion on incoming of refugees to India :

During the last General Elections, I am aware of a particular section of a refugee community residing in India since the last 4-5 decades that “conscientiously opted out” of voting because they believed that by doing so, their cause (fight for their political goals) would get derailed, and may even be forgotten by their next generations !

Is that right ?

Well, I think such refugees can pursue their cause (though the political scene of their  country of origin may have changed completely over time and got accepted by many including their top leaders in exile), and at the same time, when they are residing in a ‘receiving’ country and utilizing all its resources (equally as its nationals or foreign nationals visiting the ‘receiving’ country), then they should participate in its Elections. Whether this impacts the ‘receiving’ country’s administrative decisions or political strategies or social schemes, there could be many “key” factors or impacts related to it. What may appear trivial now can just blow up in huge proportions down the line.

The major concern in such circumstances is the “availability and distribution” of Land and Resources (by the ‘receiving’ country), absolutely vital to existence !!!! The resources could be natural or artificial. Let’s note that the same concern is put forth in many western countries while making policies or regulations regarding settlement of permanent migrants and even duration of stay of temporary foreign labourers – individuals or with families !!

In India, we are already burdened by our own population and also by our neighbours since years. Our own people are starving in many parts of the country; then there are other parameters of human development. These needy lives – some are known, some still unknown. There’s so much to identify alone !

Therefore, notwithstanding India’s famed history of tolerance and liberalism, at the present, I think it would NOT be a wise decision by any of our Governments to accommodate “all” the refugees in future, if any !! Since we are already over-loaded, why can’t that graceful obligation towards mankind be now shared by the entire globe ?.. A world sub-body (existing or new, under the vigil of U.N.O.)  must chalk out better, clearer rules and strictly monitor its implementation in this regard. After all, it would be in order to save human races and prevent fast exhaustion of resources of Mother Earth and of the ‘receiving’ country i.e. at a “single” location or region, within and up to which the borders of that mere single nation stretch.

Also, in these matters, I wish Land and/or Resources (natural /artificial) could be traded among affected countries in some form (e.g. carbon foot-prints), at least till a “feasible” solution is sought to resolve any refugee crisis, anywhere in the world ! Perhaps somewhere, that may set up the balance that is much required to s-u-s-t-a-i-n all lives. Human crisis is not always an over-night issue to be addressed; it may hold years of unrest, strife and survival !!!

So, while being generous, let’s also be practical with measured estimations of long-term fall outs and the respective check-and-balance approaches ! Let the rest of the secured world too shoulder this utter responsibility.

What do you opine, Aamjunta?

(Note: This post expresses a mere view of a common man in India. It does not include reference of any active laws or national policies or dialogue processes on international issues, human rights, etc.)

%d bloggers like this: