Skip to main content

26/11 Trial, Media and Capital Punishment


The 26/11 trial is barely over. People are patient. But the media isn't.

The shrill voice of news readers wants punishment to be delivered in the manner of 24X7 reporting. While waiting for the judgment, hysteria is being orchestrated more or less demanding a time table to hang the only 26/11 terrorist captured alive.

At the final stage of the trial, while the arguments are being heard on the punishment for those found guilty, an unseemly ‘debate’ is being carried on almost non stop in some of the TV channels. This borders on baying for blood, almost equating justice to revenge.

Debate on death penalty is relevant. In a very large number of democracies it is not on the statues.

But, in the present debate anyone who takes a moral position against capital punishment is almost made to look unpatriotic.

The discussion is not about leniency to a particular criminal. It is not on showing mercy or a lesser punishment.

Debate is not whether this particular criminal deserves capital punishment. It is for the court to decide on the quantum of punishment. Surely, not on public demand! Not by SMS polls!

And, it is certainly not right for the media to attempt influencing the judiciary - directly or indirectly.

Discussion is about capital punishment itself, in absolute terms: whether it should be there in the statutes at all. It is not about patriotism.

It is commendable that India, without dithering, tried the terrorist under the normal judicial process and brought the trial to a successful conclusion, at great cost. In contrast, USA finds it difficult to adequately deal with the terrorists within its judicial system.

There is no justification to whip up emotions while the Honorable Court is about to pronounce the verdict.

It will be a grave mistake to incite the public into thinking that executions must be carried out in the shortest possible time and preferably, it would appear, within days after the trial court gives the verdict. This is not how a sound justice system is supposed to work.

Once we accepted that a normal trial will be conducted and the due process of law will be allowed to take its course, we must have the trust and patience to allow that to run its full course.

The media must stop baying for blood and get back to the task of reporting and informing, seriously. That is surely more challenging and useful than orchestrating calibrated melodrama in an emotional news room.

PS:

Perhaps, it makes sense to keep the young terrorist to be condemned for a life in prison. Capital punishment may turn out to be the spurious martyrdom that the terrorist longs for. A quick and violent death is the easy way out: to escape from facing the reality of misdeeds and its personal consequences.

Note

According to Amnesty International, more than two-thirds of the countries of the world have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. While 58 countries retained the death penalty in 2009, most did not use it. [http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty]

Many countries, such as Mexico, Canada and most European nations, will not allow extradition if there is likelihood of death penalty for the suspect… [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extradition]
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Welcome LibreOffice! A time to move on

For some time I have truly been a bit out of touch with developments in Open Source software. To me, the flagship Open and Free application was OpenOffice. There are of course, mightier and more beautiful ones like MySQL. But this one is closer to one's finger tips, purring on our Laptops and Desktops. Quite unlike others enthroned on the arrogant servers or known only to developers. OOo (OpenOffice.org) was for me a good enough substitute for MS Office. It was steadily improving. But sadly, our worst fears – of commercial greed choking this great effort – seemed to have come true. As many are aware, Oracle, the database major, acquired Sun Microsystems some time back. Sun had developed Java. Sun had placed the licensing of its Java implementation under the GNU General Public License in 2006. Java had, by then, already become the hot favourite on the web and on all sorts of devices – from big computers to cell phones. Hmm, Yes! I do mean – Java everywhere! It was too true. ...
1 comment
Read more

Is there a Spartacus out there? Among the IPL gladiators?

The irony is that film stars 'own' the team – i.e., the players! Our sports icons are now like gladiators. May be, not so brave. In awe and with fluttering hearts they mix with the glamorous stars of the show business and real business. Occasionally they remember: Hey boy! This one really owns me, my God! What have I got into? The gladiator partying with his owner! They do it, not because they always like to party after a bad defeat, but so be it, it is part of the deal, you know.  It is the new Compulsive Relaxation Therapy, prescribed by the IPL. Partying in prescribed doses is a lot more than mere fun. Also, it is good to party if the defeat was, perhaps, well and truly expected. May be, even anticipated. You know why! No rewards for guessing! If still in doubt, ask your bookie. It just happens that the celebrations get a bit wilder when the results go against the odds! In this format of the game, both losers and winners can rejoice! It is a great game, come o...
1 comment
Read more

India's Bullet Train - A Misplaced Priority

Hastily putting together some of my scattered comments on the Bullet Train project into one single note. Bullet trains are not the kind of infrastructure India needs now. Incidentally, globally nobody wants these expensive bullet trains that are not economically feasible anywhere, including Japan. Reports note that nowhere in the world is a bullet train profitable on its own. To make it profitable, a company that runs it must also develop land around the train stations to make it work financially. India surely has the need for both fast and high-speed trains on a large number of routes across the country. Criticism of the bullet train does not mean a negation of that need. The ultra-high speed trains (bullet trains) that are not economically feasible do not fit into the kind of infrastructure development required. The bullet train will have to be subsidised for ever. Instead of such trains, by spending equivalent sums, taking loan from multilateral agencies if need be, there a...
Post a Comment
Read more