CALAMITOUS
CONSEQUENCES
are most likely to happen after, if not sure to forthwith
follow, the tragic end of Afzal Guru. Earlier, we had pleaded
for the commutation of his death penalty not only on humanitarian grounds but
also for reasons of prudent statecraft. The manner in which his hanging was done,
especially with the 24 hours prior intimation not given, and his near and dear
not informed in advance for a last interview, strikes all the more abhorrent in
the face of the exemplary conduct of the condemned prisoner vouchsafed by the
Tihar Jail personnel and co-prisoners. As far back as in 2006 [see our editorial in LAW, 31-08-2011] we counseled moderation in regard to Afzal Guru not only per se but also in the context of our
Indian Sarabjit Singh on the death row in a Pakistani prison, suggesting that “by statesmanlike conduct … an amicable settlement be arrived at so that
ultimately the sentences on both [Afzal Guru and Sarabjit] be
commuted first and later both of them be exchanged and thus set at liberty.” We also stressed that
Afzal Guru’s sentence should be commuted as a gesture of political goodwill
towards Kashmiri Muslims who are almost in one voice demanding the same. Even
our Apex Court, strangely contrary to its own guidelines that even if
aggravating circumstances are there for imposition of death penalty, mitigating
factors must be taken into account, and the holistic consideration of ‘crime
and criminal’ in a reformative perspective should guide the courts, has set a
wrong judicial precedent by talking about the need to satisfy “the collective
conscience of the society” in this case. In Kashmir
valley we have only the peace of the graveyard now and it is anybody’s guess
when ‘the ghosts’ will spring up and death-dance in all fury there. But we
snapped the psychological binding cord with this single blunder and Yasin Malik
of JKLF protesting along with Hafiz Sayeed of LeT in Islamabad Pakistan
due to like pressures of their ‘collective conscience’, it can/will alienate
the Sikh psyche in India
