For all those who don't remember Dhanonjoy - here is the refresher.
Dhananjoy Chatterjee was executed by hanging for the rape and murder of 14-year-old Hetal Parekh on March 5, 1990 at her apartment residence in Bhowanipur.
That was then. That was a story of a rapist. A Criminal.
And a terrorist is also a criminal. So is Mohd. Afzal. And thus, here goes our story...
Mohammad Afzal is a Kashmiri accused and convicted of conspiracy to storm the Indian parliament in December 2001. In 2004, he was sentenced to death by the Supreme Court of India. And now, as the D-Day approaches, controversies erupt - clemency, Human Rights, et al.Recently, in an interview, Farooq Abdullah said that executing Afzal would mean:
(a) Threat to the judge and his family,
(b) And he said that killing him would make him a hero.
Well, for starters I do not agree to his first logic. It is such a defensive response. It is the same mechanism that we had followed during the IC-814 hijack from Kathmandu.
Look at the irony of the events. We said - let us save those 140 odd people on board. And let lose Mohammad Masood Azhar, who was the founder of JeM.
In a documentary on Al Jazeera TV network during the second week of September 2006, Abu Jandal (former bodyguard of Laden) recounted a "lavish" party that Laden threw for Maulana Masood Azhar, who was released by India in 1999. JeM incidentally is suspected to have closely worked with Lashkar-e-Taiba in carrying out planned attacks on the Indian Parliament (which killed 7 Policemen) on December 13, 2001 - the main accused being none other than our man of the moment - Mohd. Afzal. And now, there is so much hullabaloo on his clemency. I say, "Back to square one, folks".
My logic is very simple. All criminals should be punished. Especially, criminals who are hazardous to many - like a rapist, a murderer or a terrorist. A money launderer or a thief is not as much a social threat as a terrorist or a rapist is. And the punishment that should be meted out to these "social evils" should be the harshest ones. But definitely NOT Capital punishment.
And there is where I agree to Mr. Farooq Abdullah's rationale.
Capital punishment is legal in India although rarely used. Between 1975 and 1991, about 40 people were executed, though there was a period between 1995 and 2004 when there were no executions. In the 1983 Macchi Singh and Others v State of Punjab judgment, India's Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty is to be used in the "rarest of rare" cases. Capital punishment can be imposed for murder, instigating a child's suicide, treason, acts of terrorism, or a second conviction for drug trafficking.
It's just not the State but many citizens also believe that Capital Punishment is barbaric. Some Little Johnny asked me the other day, " How would you react if somebody murdered your friend or some relative of yours got killed in a terrorist act?
My first reaction would probably be a tough desire to rip his guts out and slaughter him.
But my subsequent response would be appreciation for living in a constitutional nation where the theory of private vengeance has been replaced by the society's responsibility to keep an eye on and govern an appropriate punishment and give me the necessary support to get a decent life in spite of my loss.
It seems that an increasing number of people in today's world realize that the principle of retribution and the legal homicide of human beings is not steady with the contemporary refined society.
But unfortunately they are being betrayed by immoral and deceitful politicians who care more about their private livelihood and authority than about the well being of the citizens.
I am not against Capital Punishment on moral grounds. Honestly, after the initial uproar, things would whimper out. No one would even recollect why they cried; or demonstrated; or protested. No one would lose anything - probably gain a few media exposures.
The reason why I am against Capital Punishment is two pronged.
(a) "If a criminal is hanged, then what exactly is the punishment?" I ask. He loses his life, you may answer. I say, ok. Agreed. But what if the person cares two hoots about his life? What if the man and his mind has been moulded accordingly by religious professors or political gurus? Then, practically, we are not punishing him at all. It is a lose-all situation.
Thus, in such cases, we should either try re-moulding him - make him understand his mistakes and the effects of his misadventures OR inflict upon him some harsh and rigorous long-term punishment - like a life-term in the somber palms of the jail. These would essentially make him realize or regret his actions - and would definitely deter probable actions from potential terrorists or murderers.
(b) Secondly, I vehemently feel that Mr. Abdullah is correct in stating that hanging Afzal would make him a hero - take Rang De Basanti, for an example. I know it's a long-drawn allusion - but as always, I would say, that films are a reflection of the happenings in the society. What they show (at least some of them) actually happen in our society.
When a gang of youth decides to cleanse the system by killing the corrupt minister they were proven wrong. Contrary to their mission, the minister was made out to be a slain hero. And am afraid that the same would happen to Afzal.
As Yasin Malik, chief of JKLF rightly said, that the hanging Afzal would "inspire youth to take up arms" ala after the hanging of Maqbool Bhatt in 1984, thousands of youth had taken to arms and violence - because they thought he 'died' for a cause.
I rest my case by passionately affirming that Capital Punishment is not the order of the day - we should all act a little responsible before committing such acts of barbarism - and rationalize each and every exploit of ours - so that our children do not pick up arms tomorrow and say that they found a "hero" in the criminal. Instead of "quick-death" techniques, we should impose punishments that would discourage and dissuade potential criminals to take up crime - thus nipping crime for once and for all.
About the AuthorAbhijit Bhattacharya The author is a Marketing professional in the field of broadcast media for more than 9 years now.
He was born in Kolkata, where he finished his hig...Read Morefirst published:October 17, 2006, 11:16 ISTlast updated:October 17, 2006, 11:16 IST
window._taboola = window._taboola || [];_taboola.push({mode: 'thumbnails-mid-article',container: 'taboola-mid-article-thumbnails',placement: 'Mid Article Thumbnails',target_type: 'mix'});
let eventFire = false;
window.addEventListener('scroll', () => {
if (window.taboolaInt && !eventFire) {
setTimeout(() => {
ga('send', 'event', 'Mid Article Thumbnails', 'PV');
ga('set', 'dimension22', "Taboola Yes");
}, 4000);
eventFire = true;
}
});
window._taboola = window._taboola || [];_taboola.push({mode: 'thumbnails-a', container: 'taboola-below-article-thumbnails', placement: 'Below Article Thumbnails', target_type: 'mix' });Latest News
I remember how many people had lined up to bid farewell to Dhananjoy Chatterjee. Probably, more than the number of people who had come to see off Bhagat Singh. Probably. For them, Dhananjay was a hero; a martyr but to me he would always remain a RAPIST.
For all those who don't remember Dhanonjoy - here is the refresher.
Dhananjoy Chatterjee was executed by hanging for the rape and murder of 14-year-old Hetal Parekh on March 5, 1990 at her apartment residence in Bhowanipur.
That was then. That was a story of a rapist. A Criminal.
And a terrorist is also a criminal. So is Mohd. Afzal. And thus, here goes our story...
Mohammad Afzal is a Kashmiri accused and convicted of conspiracy to storm the Indian parliament in December 2001. In 2004, he was sentenced to death by the Supreme Court of India. And now, as the D-Day approaches, controversies erupt - clemency, Human Rights, et al.Recently, in an interview, Farooq Abdullah said that executing Afzal would mean:
(a) Threat to the judge and his family,
(b) And he said that killing him would make him a hero.
Well, for starters I do not agree to his first logic. It is such a defensive response. It is the same mechanism that we had followed during the IC-814 hijack from Kathmandu.
Look at the irony of the events. We said - let us save those 140 odd people on board. And let lose Mohammad Masood Azhar, who was the founder of JeM.
In a documentary on Al Jazeera TV network during the second week of September 2006, Abu Jandal (former bodyguard of Laden) recounted a "lavish" party that Laden threw for Maulana Masood Azhar, who was released by India in 1999. JeM incidentally is suspected to have closely worked with Lashkar-e-Taiba in carrying out planned attacks on the Indian Parliament (which killed 7 Policemen) on December 13, 2001 - the main accused being none other than our man of the moment - Mohd. Afzal. And now, there is so much hullabaloo on his clemency. I say, "Back to square one, folks".
My logic is very simple. All criminals should be punished. Especially, criminals who are hazardous to many - like a rapist, a murderer or a terrorist. A money launderer or a thief is not as much a social threat as a terrorist or a rapist is. And the punishment that should be meted out to these "social evils" should be the harshest ones. But definitely NOT Capital punishment.
And there is where I agree to Mr. Farooq Abdullah's rationale.
Capital punishment is legal in India although rarely used. Between 1975 and 1991, about 40 people were executed, though there was a period between 1995 and 2004 when there were no executions. In the 1983 Macchi Singh and Others v State of Punjab judgment, India's Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty is to be used in the "rarest of rare" cases. Capital punishment can be imposed for murder, instigating a child's suicide, treason, acts of terrorism, or a second conviction for drug trafficking.
It's just not the State but many citizens also believe that Capital Punishment is barbaric. Some Little Johnny asked me the other day, " How would you react if somebody murdered your friend or some relative of yours got killed in a terrorist act?
My first reaction would probably be a tough desire to rip his guts out and slaughter him.
But my subsequent response would be appreciation for living in a constitutional nation where the theory of private vengeance has been replaced by the society's responsibility to keep an eye on and govern an appropriate punishment and give me the necessary support to get a decent life in spite of my loss.
It seems that an increasing number of people in today's world realize that the principle of retribution and the legal homicide of human beings is not steady with the contemporary refined society.
But unfortunately they are being betrayed by immoral and deceitful politicians who care more about their private livelihood and authority than about the well being of the citizens.
I am not against Capital Punishment on moral grounds. Honestly, after the initial uproar, things would whimper out. No one would even recollect why they cried; or demonstrated; or protested. No one would lose anything - probably gain a few media exposures.
The reason why I am against Capital Punishment is two pronged.
(a) "If a criminal is hanged, then what exactly is the punishment?" I ask. He loses his life, you may answer. I say, ok. Agreed. But what if the person cares two hoots about his life? What if the man and his mind has been moulded accordingly by religious professors or political gurus? Then, practically, we are not punishing him at all. It is a lose-all situation.
Thus, in such cases, we should either try re-moulding him - make him understand his mistakes and the effects of his misadventures OR inflict upon him some harsh and rigorous long-term punishment - like a life-term in the somber palms of the jail. These would essentially make him realize or regret his actions - and would definitely deter probable actions from potential terrorists or murderers.
(b) Secondly, I vehemently feel that Mr. Abdullah is correct in stating that hanging Afzal would make him a hero - take Rang De Basanti, for an example. I know it's a long-drawn allusion - but as always, I would say, that films are a reflection of the happenings in the society. What they show (at least some of them) actually happen in our society.
When a gang of youth decides to cleanse the system by killing the corrupt minister they were proven wrong. Contrary to their mission, the minister was made out to be a slain hero. And am afraid that the same would happen to Afzal.
As Yasin Malik, chief of JKLF rightly said, that the hanging Afzal would "inspire youth to take up arms" ala after the hanging of Maqbool Bhatt in 1984, thousands of youth had taken to arms and violence - because they thought he 'died' for a cause.
I rest my case by passionately affirming that Capital Punishment is not the order of the day - we should all act a little responsible before committing such acts of barbarism - and rationalize each and every exploit of ours - so that our children do not pick up arms tomorrow and say that they found a "hero" in the criminal. Instead of "quick-death" techniques, we should impose punishments that would discourage and dissuade potential criminals to take up crime - thus nipping crime for once and for all.
Comments
0 comment