Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 9:23 pm
Time: 9:23 pm
Results for death penalty (india)
1 results foundAuthor: Asian Centre for Human Rights Title: The State of Death Penalty in India 2013: Discriminatory treatment amongst the death row convicts Summary: Asian Centre for Human Rights (ACHR) opposes death penalty by any State and for any crime. The execution of Afzal Guru who was convicted for the 13th December 2001 attack on the Indian parliament at Tihar Jail, New Delhi on 9th February 2013 has exposed the discriminatory acts of the Government of India with respect to the treatment of death-row convicts. The circumvention of the Prison Manual by the Ministry of Home Affairs by the effective failure to inform the family members prior to the execution and subsequent imposition of curfew and ban on the right to freedom of association and assembly in various parts of Jammu and Kashmir since 9th February 2013 once again call for abolition of death penalty in India. As ACHR goes to the press, President Pranab Mukhejee has rejected mercy petitions pending of four accused namely Gnanprakasham, Simon, Meesekar Madaiah and Bilavendran who were sentenced to death by the Supreme Court in January 2004 in connection with the killing of 21 policemen in a landmine blast at Palar in Karnataka in 1993. These convicts were given life imprisonment but the government had moved the Supreme Court, which awarded them the death sentence. It appears that the Government of India in its attempt to address political fallout of the botched up execution of Afzal Guru and the expressed position of the members of the United Progressive Alliance government on death penalty in certain cases will carry out further executions of death row convicts not connected with political sensitivities. According to the National Crimes Records Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, a total of 1,455 convicts or an average of 132.27 convicts per year were given death penalty during 2001 to 2011. This also implies that on average one convict is awarded death penalty in less than every third day in India. During this period, the highest number of death penalty has been imposed in Uttar Pradesh (370) followed by Bihar (132), Maharashtra (125), Karnataka and Tamil Nadu (95 each), Madhya Pradesh (87), Jharkhand (81), West Bengal (79), Delhi (71), Gujarat (57), Rajasthan (38), Kerala (34), Odisha (33), Haryana (31) etc. During the same period i.e. 2001 to 2011, sentences for 4,321 convicts were commuted from death penalty to life imprisonment. This clearly indicates that thousands of convicts remain on death row. The highest number of capital punishment commuted to life imprisonment was in Delhi (2462), Uttar Pradesh (458), Bihar (343), Jharkhand (300), Maharashtra (175), West Bengal (98), Assam (97), Odisha (68), Madhya Pradesh (62), Uttaranchal (46), Rajasthan (33), Tamil Nadu, Punjab and Chhattisgarh (24 each), Haryana and Kerala (23 each), Jammu and Kashmir (18) etc. Asian Centre for Human Rights urges the Government of India to abolish death penalty, among others, for the following reasons: First, there is no scientific or empirical basis to suggest that death penalty acts as a deterrent against any crime. The execution of Nathuram Vinayak Godse for assassination of none other than the father of the nation, Mahatma Gandhi, has not acted as a deterrent against assassination of many prominent political leaders including former Prime Ministers Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi, former Chief Minister Beant Singh, Member of Parliament Lalit Maken and many other prominent political leaders. On the other hand, though no execution had been carried out since the execution of Dhananjoy Chatterjee on 14 August 2004, the number of murder cases have been reducing. According to the National Crimes Record Bureau, in 2001 a total of 36,202 murder cases were registered in India. Though the population of India increased from 1.028 billion in 2001 to 1.21 billion in 2011, the murder cases indeed reduced to 34,305 in 2011.1 Second, death penalty is irreversible and irrevocable. Judges are human beings and to err is human. India is replete with erred judgements. Therefore, death penalty must be abolished to ensure that no innocent person is executed. Third, as Mahatma Gandhi said, “An eye for an eye will leave everyone blind.” Justice must not be seen to be retributive. Fourth, justice is meant for reform. Death penalty denies the opportunity to reform. Fifth, justice is not synonymous of death penalty, and death penalty cannot be the only means or form of justice. Sixth, about 140 countries have abolished the death penalty by 2012. These countries have not become more vulnerable than India or any other country which retains death penalty. Finally and most importantly, India must follow its own civilisational values. Mythologies of India are full of stories of criminals being reformed. Valmiki, the author of the epic Ramayana, was a highway robber known as Ratnakara until he came under the influence of Maharshi Narada to leave the paths of sin. Similarly, according to Buddhist literature, Daku Angulimala (“dacoit who wears finger necklace/garland”) was a ruthless killer who was redeemed by a sincere conversion to Buddhism. Details: New Delhi: ACHR, 2013. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 16, 2013 at: http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/IndiaDeathPenaltyReport2013.pdf Year: 2013 Country: India URL: http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/IndiaDeathPenaltyReport2013.pdf Shelf Number: 129415 Keywords: Capital PunishmentDeath Penalty (India)Human Rights |