Posted on 12/14/2010 11:06:21 AM PST by James C. Bennett
The Indian government Wednesday said it would not abolish death penalty, but that capital punishment is awarded only to criminals involved in heinous crime considered as rarest of rare cases.
"There is no proposal under consideration of the government to abolish capital punishment," Minister of State for Home Affairs Mullappally Ramachandran told the Indian Parliament in a written reply.
Stating that since 2007, the UN General Assembly has adopted three resolutions titled "Moratorium on the use of the death penalty", the minister said that all these resolutions have been passed after a vote.
But, he said that 141 countries had abolished the death penalty in law or practice. Of these, 93 have completely abolished, 10 are abolitionist for ordinary crimes only and further 38 can be considered de facto abolitionist.
Though capital punishment is awarded, India hardly executes criminals.
The latest death penalty handed down by an Indian court was one for the Mumbai terror attacks convict, Pakistani national Amir Ajmal Kasab.
Mumbai, December 14, 2010
Lawyers of Pakistani gunman Ajmal Kasab on Tuesday urged the Bombay High Court not to make him a martyr by hanging him even as the state justified capital punishment saying he had committed heinous crime against humanity by participating in the 26/11 attacks. "Kasab was not the brain behind the attacks and also he had not taken active part in the conspiracy to destabilise India with terror strikes...it would suffice if he was given a lifer rather than a death sentence which would make him a martyr," argued defence lawyers Amin Solkar and Farhana Shah. Kasab had come here (to Mumbai) to die and by giving him death sentence you will make him a martyr, they argued.
However, government counsel Ujjwal Nikam said only death penalty was justified for Kasab who had mercilessly killed innocent people.
Kasab also wanted to gun down innocent patients at Cama Hospital but the gates were locked well in time by nurses thereby preventing his entry. Although Cama hospital was not on the radar of terrorists, Kasab and his partner had entered its premises only to gun down indoor patients, Nikam said.
Kasab's lawyers argued that he was not the kingpin of the conspiracy and at the most could be described as a contract killer. He had not planned the conspiracy and was perhaps brain-washed by conspirators to commit terror acts.
"Do not hang him, give him life imprisonment for this alone would serve as deterrent to others who may be planning to become 'fidayeens' (human bombs)," argued his lawyers.
This prompted Justice Ranjana Desai to ask, "Do you think by giving him life sentence we would be able to prevent terrorist attacks in future. What message would you like to give to the society," she asked.
Arguments on confirmation of death sentence awarded to Kasab as well as his appeal against his conviction, concluded today. The high court will now hear both sides on the appeal filed the state against the acquittal of Faheem Ansari and Sabauddin Ahmed on account of "doubtful" evidence.
Nikam argued that Kasab had voluntarily joined LeT for committing terrorist acts in India. When the plan of attacks was deferred by conspirators he became impatient and told them he wanted to strike terror.
Even at Chhatrapati Shivaji Railway Terminus, Kasab was in joyous mood after killing people. This was evident from the photographs taken by a journalist, Nikam said.
Kasab had told a magistrate while giving confession that he was voluntarily disclosing his role in the 26/11 attacks because he wanted to motivate other 'fidayeens' from committing similar terror acts, Nikam submitted.
“Indian Government Says It Will Not Abolish The Death Penalty”
How about torture’ when dealing with the the Indian call centers?
I had no idea that India had a death penalty. I know that Japan does.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.