Afzal Guru

We have now done with one long-standing national obsession. Afzal Guru has been hanged, albeit in total secrecy and without giving opportunity to his close relatives to meet him one last time. Government may have its own reasons for being economical with legal requirements which may or may not be acceptable depending on one's view about the whole development.

Our country prides itself, and justifiably so, as a lawful nation where 'law takes its own (meandering) course'. Attack on parliament is a grievous act that calls for most stringent punishment including death as long as capital punishment is deemed legitimate.

The essential legal contretemps that needs to be addressed in this issue is whether Afzal Guru was found to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Even habitual critics like Arundathi Roy do not seem to question the gravity of offence but what almost everyone seems to wonder is whether the judicial authorities had ever clearly explained that their judgement indeed met this requirement.

It may be too much to expect the Supreme Court to revisit suo moto this limited part when the accused / guilty is no more and the damage, if any, cannot be undone, but it will be an exemplary precedent if the highest court of the land issues a 'white paper' justifying its judgement or regretting if and where it had gone wrong.

Delayed execution of death sentence

A lively debate is raging in the country regarding undue delays in execution of death sentences. There are people questioning the very wisdom of capital punishment. Since capital punishment is not (yet) outlawed in our country, the Supreme Court has wisely laid down that it is to be imposed only in rarest of rare cases.

Delays in implementation of any judicial decree are to be avoided. Whenever death sentences are awarded by the courts, the accused invariably go on appeals and if and when the judicial appeal process comes to an end they plead for mercy from the President. Delayed responses to such petitions has become the norm. Delays extending over a decade are pretty common.

Do such delays justify automatic commutation of death sentence into life imprisonment? Those who agree with this proposition argue that such inordinate delays are by themselves a cruel punishment and that the accused should not be subjected to another cruel punishment in the form of death by hanging. There is a logical flaw in this argument. The accused plead for mercy because they prefer to live as long as possible. When there is delay in response to their petition, they turn around and claim that not effecting the death sentence in time, that is allowing them to live longer, is a cruel punishment. This is a typical case of eating the cake and having it too.

Attributing cruelty to delayed response of the executive amounts to ignoring the cruelty suffered by the victims' families.