Sc notice to centre over transfer of rajiv gandhi assassinat

In India capital punishment is limited to what are known as “rarest of the rare” cases. No definition of “rarest of the rare” has been given. When a murder takes place the State is the aggrieved party and not the relatives of the deceased. Feelings of revenge and emotions have no place in the matter of the philosophy of “crime and punishment”. Punishment is supposed to be  a deterrent for potential criminals. Many countries have abolished capital punishment altogether because they have found capital punishment did not serve the purpose of deterrence as the number of murders did not decrease because of the provision of capital punishment in the statute book.

When we speak of deterrence they are of two types. In the case that is normally assumed it means a message for other potential murderers. In the second case, which is perhaps a recent concept, deterrence of the same person from repeating the crime, if left free.

Now coming back to the first question, how to decide whether a case is rarest of the rare? Do political assassinations come under this category?  I know there will be a chorus of affirmation to this question. But public outcry is an emotional response. It has no place in a matter of judicial decisions. In the case of Nalini, in the Rajiv Gandhi case, it is said that her sentence was commuted to life-imprisonment at the instance of Sonia Gandhi. Does this not smack of the obnoxious concept of blood money practiced in some countries? The case of Nalini should have been decided on merits. Such a decision can be made only by a court of law and not by individuals, in any case, not by the relatives of the deceased.

There are three cases of capital punishment pending at present. They are Rajiv Gandhi assassins, Ahzal Guru and Ajmal Kasab.

Let me consider the last case, Ajmal Kasab first. If  Kasab is punished that is not going to stop other terrorists. A fear may have crept into Kasab’s mind at the prospect of being hanged, notwithstanding the fact that he had come expecting certain death like his other nine colleagues. But still other prospective terrorists will not see the difference between dying fighting and dying being hanged by the neck till death occurs. What if he is just let off? He may be one more to return with an AK47. Still no one will agree if he is let off.

What about life imprisonment? As the Judge, who sentenced him said, there can be another Kandahar. It is not necessary to discuss again the case of Afzal Guru. Whatever said in the case Ajmal Kasab will apply to his case too.

Now we come to the Rajiv Gandhi Murder case. He was assassinated by the LTTE. Immediately thereafter LTTE was banned and declared a terrorist organization. An unnecessary and thoughtless political right-about-turn done by Rajiv Gandhi in 1987 has come to its logical conclusion, with the killing of Prabhakaran and elimination of the LTTE.  In fact even 20 years ago LTTE was not a threat to India. The threat to Rajiv Gandhi was for his person and not to India and the least to Tamilnadu. Why should they attack India? Absolutely there is no reason. They were a threat to Sri Lanka and it was foolish on the part of Rajiv Gandhi to send the IPKF to disarm the LTTE.

Now there has been a sea-change in the political scenario in 20 years. A political assassination should not come under the “rarest of the rare” category on its own. There was no threat to India at any time from the Rajiv Gandhi assassins, and not at all after 20 years. Now the Government should gracefully at least commute the sentence to life-imprisonment. Only sycophants of the Congress and ignoramuses of the North Indian Party BJP will insist that Rajiv assassins should be hanged.