Friday, February 15, 2013

Death penalty debates: a note to the supporters

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/


No comments: