R.A. JAHAGIRDAR
I have already written on death sentence. My said article has been published in Radical Humanist. I have shown, in that article, how all over the world, public opinion is veering against death sentence. Humanists, by their philosophy, are against death sentence.
Amnesty International is, from the beginning, against it. Human rights activists are against death sentence. The U.N. General Assembly has asked for a moratorium on death sentence. India is one of the countries that still retains death sentence. Statistics show that 138 nations have so far abolished death sentence. Our own neighbours, Nepal and Bhutan, have joined the abolitionist camp. Philippines and South Korea have also joined abolitionist camp. Japan, which at one time was zealous about death sentence, has recently abolished it.
A report called “Lethal Lottery: the Death penalty in India” compiled jointly by Amnesty International and People’s Union of Civil Liberties” (Tamilnadu and Puducherry) has, apart from other points, mentioned lack of uniformity and consistency in awarding death sentence.
To repeat, the Law Commission of India has opined that death sentence deserves to be retained. In the year 2005, A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, who apparently is against death sentence, called a public debate on the subject.
In 1980 the Indian Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of death sentence. Firstly the Constitution itself mentions death sentence. Secondly, law in fact lays down life sentence first and then death sentence. It laid down that death sentence should be given in the rarest of rare case, a feature not uniformly followed by all. In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court has clarified that if the accused is not of criminal mind and could be rehabilitated; his life should not be eliminated.
[Justice R.A. Jahagirdar (Retd.), former President of Indian Radical Humanist Association and former Editor of ‘The Radical Humanist’ is now one of the members of the Contributing Editorial Board of The Radical Humanist.
I have already written on death sentence. My said article has been published in Radical Humanist. I have shown, in that article, how all over the world, public opinion is veering against death sentence. Humanists, by their philosophy, are against death sentence.
Amnesty International is, from the beginning, against it. Human rights activists are against death sentence. The U.N. General Assembly has asked for a moratorium on death sentence. India is one of the countries that still retains death sentence. Statistics show that 138 nations have so far abolished death sentence. Our own neighbours, Nepal and Bhutan, have joined the abolitionist camp. Philippines and South Korea have also joined abolitionist camp. Japan, which at one time was zealous about death sentence, has recently abolished it.
A report called “Lethal Lottery: the Death penalty in India” compiled jointly by Amnesty International and People’s Union of Civil Liberties” (Tamilnadu and Puducherry) has, apart from other points, mentioned lack of uniformity and consistency in awarding death sentence.
To repeat, the Law Commission of India has opined that death sentence deserves to be retained. In the year 2005, A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, who apparently is against death sentence, called a public debate on the subject.
In 1980 the Indian Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of death sentence. Firstly the Constitution itself mentions death sentence. Secondly, law in fact lays down life sentence first and then death sentence. It laid down that death sentence should be given in the rarest of rare case, a feature not uniformly followed by all. In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court has clarified that if the accused is not of criminal mind and could be rehabilitated; his life should not be eliminated.
[Justice R.A. Jahagirdar (Retd.), former President of Indian Radical Humanist Association and former Editor of ‘The Radical Humanist’ is now one of the members of the Contributing Editorial Board of The Radical Humanist.
From my point of view as secular humanist death penalty shud be banned as a form of punishment .
ReplyDeleteIt is incomprehensible that we are still advocating the death penalty in 21st century.
ReplyDeleteRight Bff. I am with you. @ Leilani Reyes.
ReplyDelete