http://www.cybervictims.org
Since the news of execution of death
sentence of Afzal Guru, one of the prime accused of Indian Parliament attack
case came out, India as well as the world seems to be divided into two groups:
one who is saying no to death penalties, and the other who is saying yes to the
death penalties. Unfortunately India is witnessing a killing spree which has
become almost viral right from 16th December,2012 when the Delhi gang rape victim was brutally raped. The 23 year old young woman was raped,
stripped off and thrown out of the bus where she was raped. Huge numbers of protesters showed their protest against this cruel torture on the woman by saying yes to
the death penalty. Internet was swept by such ‘demands’. One experienced woman
journalist of a national news channel shared with me personally her fear that from now on all news
papers/media channels will show case rape cases and their handling by the
government agencies. She sadly told me that most media houses will go ahead
with such news mainly to grow their TRP rates, but at the same time she feared
that the result would be devastating. She was true! Anger of people kept on
rising whenever there was any news of sexual assault and related death of the
victim. The last was none other than the acid attack victim from Chennai who
succumbed to death just a few days ago. Unfortunately there
is an extremely dark history in our country which would show that many raped
and subsequently dead women victims are extremely neglected by the criminal
justice machinery. The Mathura rape case stands as the ugly evidence of abuse
and misuse of power when it comes to
providing justice to rape victims such as Mathura. The law has been amended
time and again to test the strength of S.376 IPC which prescribes punishment
for rape and its series which includes intercourse with a woman misusing the accused
person’s designation (even that of a husband
when he involves in intercourse with the wife during separation ) and its punishment. .While in some cases of brutal rape and then subsequent murder of the victim, the lawyers appearing for the victim (as well as the State) could actually convince the judges to award the death penalty (see Dhananjay Chatterjee Alias Dhana vs State Of W.B. on 11 January, 1994, 1994 (1) ALT Cri 388, 1994 (2) BLJR 1231), with the help of S.302 of the Indian Penal Code, S.376 originally did not prescribe death as the ultimate punishment for violent rape. As it can be seen, India does have
death penalty and it is used for rarest of the rare cases. The language
of Section 302 of the Indian penal Code prescribes death penalty as the first
preference for punishment for murder. The second preference remains life
imprisonment which is shown as a substitute to death penalty by adding an “or” in front of the words “life imprisonment”.
The pecuniary punishment of fine comes as an added prescribed punishment with it. While this provision is a common
punishment provision for ‘cold blooded’ murders (which actually excludes
culpable homicides not amounting to murder, or cases of causing death by
negligence etc), S.121 of the Indian Penal Code also prescribes death penalty
as the first preference (again linguistically) and life imprisonment with fine
as the second preference for (i) waging war against the government of India, or
(ii) attempting to wage such war, or (iii) abetting the waging of such war. It was not till the recent Criminal law(amendment )ordinance,
2013 which mention awarding death penalty for brutal rape
which would leave the victim dead or in a vegetative condition(see s.376A of
the Indian penal code of the Criminal law (amendment ) ordinance,2013, published
on 4th February,2013 in the Press Information Bureau of India, available
@http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=91979) that death penalty was accepted
as the extreme punishment for rape of such nature. On a personal note, I actually support inclusion of this penalty as
the last option especially for rarest of the rare cases if taken in its true
meaning (the framers of the this ordinance has kept the option of ‘death’ as
the last option in line, beginning with prison sentence for twenty years as the
first option, which may extend for life). The ordinance made a sect of people
happy as it carried out the retributive aspect of sentencing violent crimes
against women. Apparently this section comprised of people who went for on-line petitions, debates and write-ups which actually wanted the prime accused of this rape case to be hanged or chemically castrated. The ordinance simultaneously made another sect of people disappointed as it
upheld ‘constitutional murder’. Immediately after the publication of this
ordinance, came the ‘shocking news’ of execution of Afzal Guru which was done
without any prior publicity. Actually it was highly speculated in the internet
especially after the hanging of Ajmal Kasab in 2012. I came across so many
cartoon and images, short notes and write-ups
in the Facebook itself and also in the Twitter which indicated that many people
wanted to see the terrorists hanged. The on-line debates brewed up on the
sentiments of people. Undoubtedly the demands of hanging of the brutal rapists and dangerous terrorists
who have caused bloody death to many found their own ways of convincing ways. Such
posts in the social media did not get removed, but it was seen as a plain case
of freedom of speech and expression which
expressed anger and frustration over the delayed process of law in seeing the
result of the rape law amendment or parliament attack case or
26/11 case. These demands of death penalty especially for the gang rape
accused got almost viral in the social media. I find the supporting grounds
behind this ‘desperateness’ in some of the land mark death penalty verdicts which
considered rarest of rare cases to award the penalty such as in Machchi Singh Vs. The state (1983)3SCC,470
etc.
I sadly observe that this turn of events actually
made some people or groups of people obsessive with death penalties. Many are
attacking activists who are against death penalty with harsh and extremely humiliating
words in the web platforms such as Twitter. Such activists, especially women
activists are targeted by trolls in very offensive words. It needs to be
remembered that if supporters for death
sentence can use their freedom of speech and expression in the social media,
supporters against death penalty are no aliens who would be rejected this prime
right. This pseudo anger over non supporters is carried out through peculiar
ways ; some call these non supporters ‘traitors’, some openly throw challenges
to breach the dignity of the person (this especially happens for women
activists). While all of these sorts of speeches can actually be booked under
S.66A of the Information Technology Act, I am yet to research on how many
targeted non-supporters have actually taken this path. But at the same time, I
would not be surprised if any of the non supporters is again dragged to the
police station for expressing his/her views against death penalty as had happened
for the Palghar girls’ case who was arrested for their Facebook remarks against
the Mumbai shut down due to the death of veteran political leader BalSaheb Thackeray.
Judicial
investigation revealed how the law was misused by political goons who forced
the police to book the false case.
But, one serious note for the supporters of death
penalty: stop throwing threatening /humiliating words to the non supporters. If
they are really “traitors” let the court( and not the police only) decide it. Instead
of taking law in your own hands or throwing it aside for the sake of hailing
the capital punishment , test the power of the law to judge whether their ways of protesting
the death penalties really attracts the ‘protected speech’ category or not.
Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to
use informations provided in this blog for your own
assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2013), “Death penalty debates: a
note to the supporters”,
16thFebruary,2013, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/”
