To kill or to commute
Monday, 4 January 2010
Maswood Alam Khan
AKMAL Shaikh, a 53-year old restless man reportedly suffering from bipolar disorder, who had often retreated into a world of fantasy that 'one day he would become a famous pop star' was killed in Urumqi, Xingjian, China on December 29 morning. Sentenced to death by a Chinese court of law for carrying four kilograms of heroin, Akmal, a Muslim born in Pakistan and domiciled in Britain, was executed by lethal injection in spite of passionate pleas for clemency from many including the citizens of Britain. But Chinese authority dismissed the pleas on the ground that the victim failed to present any concrete evidence of his mental incapacity.
Many observers and relatives of the executed victim insisted for the last few days that Akmal Shaikh had clear and demonstrable mental problems and had been duped into carrying heroin into China by men promising to help him launch a singing career though Akmal didn't ever have even the elementary skill in singing. Cousins of Akmal said: "We are not mourning simply for our cousin; a lot of other people, including Muslims in China, have experienced and will continue to experience the same fate, without any real justification".
We don't know how many dozens or hundreds or thousands are now on death row in different parts of the world and of them how many would meet the same fate Akmal met in China! But, I am sure many among the executed would have lived today if they were tried in courts located in different countries or if the judges would have looked at the defendants from a different angle.
"Nobody is above law", like many other powers the Chinese authority may place this argument to justify their decision on declining the appeal for clemency. But, a question arises: What is the law? What is a good law? Nazi Germany also had a lot of laws that were designed to support Hitler's totalitarianism.
We are also strong supporters of capital punishment. Those who in cold blood and in good mental health commit crimes such as gruesome murder, violent rape, etc., and have been proven guilty beyond any shadow of doubt should be executed.
A death penalty is a particular form of punishment that can only be justified when the crime is a direct form of "murder", meaning the killer did it "hands-on" in a premeditated fashion. But, death penalty for carrying heroin, unless one forces the drug into one's mouth, to my humble opinion, is preposterous. Death sentences for smuggling or subversion are morally unethical and completely reprehensible, no matter what the "law" of the country is.
Of course, China might have their reasons to justify death penalty for a crime like 'carrying heroin' or 'voicing dissent against the ruling authority'. Moreover, with a huge burden of 3.5 billion people China perhaps cannot afford to house, feed and clothe criminals. Killing criminals is like clearing spaces for new entrants.
We also should not be carried away by concocted reports and stories and pity a veteran criminal who may put 101 excuses of mental illness to slip away from the dragnet of justice. You and I would claim mental illness if we were in a situation when there was no other defense. I would also wear a chicken's outfit and bark like a sheep if it helped.
Whether a person receives the death penalty depends heavily on where the crime is committed and who the judges are. Regional variation in death sentences or a little variation in the angles of judges' lookout suggests arbitrariness in application of laws that prescribe capital punishment. A just legal system that should be universally accepted should be universally applied. A law that sentences a man to death in one country and allows the same man clemency in another country is a law, I am afraid, that is empowering judges to play God.
Perhaps that is why many human rights groups including Amnesty International are now crying for clemency abolishing the 'death sentence' once and for all.
Clemency is an act of mercy given to a man sentenced to death, an inmate consigned to a condemned cell in a jail, facing an unconceivable countdown to the date of his death at the hands of a human.
Clemency means allowing an accused the maximum imaginable benefit of doubt. A judge, who shivers with trepidation -- lest he/she by a chance punishes an innocent due to lack of untold evidence -- usually prefers to award a person, even proven guilty beyond any shadow of doubt, a sentence of life-term in prison other than a sentence that sends the guilty to the gallows.
In many developed and developing countries, hundreds of clemencies are being granted in capital cases for humanitarian reasons, including doubts about the defendants' guilt or inconclusive considerations of the governments whether 'death penalty' should be abolished or not.
There are and will always be debates on whether death is a required punishment. Many observers believe that death penalty is essential if the defendant's conduct was heinous, vile or depraved and many other observers also deem death penalty indispensable if the defendant would be dangerous in the future.
However, framing laws, presenting arguments, gleaning evidence and validating the starkest truth of a crime---that calls for a death penalty---in any language on this earth which can be fairly understood and applied by the sentencing authority are tasks which, many like me are afraid, are beyond present human ability.
The death penalty should be abolished everywhere; it is an extreme punishment from which there is no way to ever review whether the punishment was justified. When hundreds of people are being executed everyday all over the world one can be certain that some of them were wrongly condemned and that must be particularly true of China where a trial starts with the presumption of guilt. There are many examples of people wrongly executed.
Death penalty is essential to set examples that deter future murderers. On the flip side, forgiving a convict is also a magnanimous example set by many, even by those who were the close relatives of the victims.
There are examples where a victim or his/her closest relation, just at the most opportune moment of taking revenge upon the perpetrator, stopped short of pressing the trigger.
Not only in fictions and movies, in the practical life too there are examples where a woman, who was eagerly waiting to see the murderer of her husband hanged to death, suddenly changed her mind and begged pardon from the king of a monarchy. Reason: "To enjoy the heavenly feeling of forgiveness".
(Maswood Alam Khan is a writer at large.
http://visitmaswood.com)
AKMAL Shaikh, a 53-year old restless man reportedly suffering from bipolar disorder, who had often retreated into a world of fantasy that 'one day he would become a famous pop star' was killed in Urumqi, Xingjian, China on December 29 morning. Sentenced to death by a Chinese court of law for carrying four kilograms of heroin, Akmal, a Muslim born in Pakistan and domiciled in Britain, was executed by lethal injection in spite of passionate pleas for clemency from many including the citizens of Britain. But Chinese authority dismissed the pleas on the ground that the victim failed to present any concrete evidence of his mental incapacity.
Many observers and relatives of the executed victim insisted for the last few days that Akmal Shaikh had clear and demonstrable mental problems and had been duped into carrying heroin into China by men promising to help him launch a singing career though Akmal didn't ever have even the elementary skill in singing. Cousins of Akmal said: "We are not mourning simply for our cousin; a lot of other people, including Muslims in China, have experienced and will continue to experience the same fate, without any real justification".
We don't know how many dozens or hundreds or thousands are now on death row in different parts of the world and of them how many would meet the same fate Akmal met in China! But, I am sure many among the executed would have lived today if they were tried in courts located in different countries or if the judges would have looked at the defendants from a different angle.
"Nobody is above law", like many other powers the Chinese authority may place this argument to justify their decision on declining the appeal for clemency. But, a question arises: What is the law? What is a good law? Nazi Germany also had a lot of laws that were designed to support Hitler's totalitarianism.
We are also strong supporters of capital punishment. Those who in cold blood and in good mental health commit crimes such as gruesome murder, violent rape, etc., and have been proven guilty beyond any shadow of doubt should be executed.
A death penalty is a particular form of punishment that can only be justified when the crime is a direct form of "murder", meaning the killer did it "hands-on" in a premeditated fashion. But, death penalty for carrying heroin, unless one forces the drug into one's mouth, to my humble opinion, is preposterous. Death sentences for smuggling or subversion are morally unethical and completely reprehensible, no matter what the "law" of the country is.
Of course, China might have their reasons to justify death penalty for a crime like 'carrying heroin' or 'voicing dissent against the ruling authority'. Moreover, with a huge burden of 3.5 billion people China perhaps cannot afford to house, feed and clothe criminals. Killing criminals is like clearing spaces for new entrants.
We also should not be carried away by concocted reports and stories and pity a veteran criminal who may put 101 excuses of mental illness to slip away from the dragnet of justice. You and I would claim mental illness if we were in a situation when there was no other defense. I would also wear a chicken's outfit and bark like a sheep if it helped.
Whether a person receives the death penalty depends heavily on where the crime is committed and who the judges are. Regional variation in death sentences or a little variation in the angles of judges' lookout suggests arbitrariness in application of laws that prescribe capital punishment. A just legal system that should be universally accepted should be universally applied. A law that sentences a man to death in one country and allows the same man clemency in another country is a law, I am afraid, that is empowering judges to play God.
Perhaps that is why many human rights groups including Amnesty International are now crying for clemency abolishing the 'death sentence' once and for all.
Clemency is an act of mercy given to a man sentenced to death, an inmate consigned to a condemned cell in a jail, facing an unconceivable countdown to the date of his death at the hands of a human.
Clemency means allowing an accused the maximum imaginable benefit of doubt. A judge, who shivers with trepidation -- lest he/she by a chance punishes an innocent due to lack of untold evidence -- usually prefers to award a person, even proven guilty beyond any shadow of doubt, a sentence of life-term in prison other than a sentence that sends the guilty to the gallows.
In many developed and developing countries, hundreds of clemencies are being granted in capital cases for humanitarian reasons, including doubts about the defendants' guilt or inconclusive considerations of the governments whether 'death penalty' should be abolished or not.
There are and will always be debates on whether death is a required punishment. Many observers believe that death penalty is essential if the defendant's conduct was heinous, vile or depraved and many other observers also deem death penalty indispensable if the defendant would be dangerous in the future.
However, framing laws, presenting arguments, gleaning evidence and validating the starkest truth of a crime---that calls for a death penalty---in any language on this earth which can be fairly understood and applied by the sentencing authority are tasks which, many like me are afraid, are beyond present human ability.
The death penalty should be abolished everywhere; it is an extreme punishment from which there is no way to ever review whether the punishment was justified. When hundreds of people are being executed everyday all over the world one can be certain that some of them were wrongly condemned and that must be particularly true of China where a trial starts with the presumption of guilt. There are many examples of people wrongly executed.
Death penalty is essential to set examples that deter future murderers. On the flip side, forgiving a convict is also a magnanimous example set by many, even by those who were the close relatives of the victims.
There are examples where a victim or his/her closest relation, just at the most opportune moment of taking revenge upon the perpetrator, stopped short of pressing the trigger.
Not only in fictions and movies, in the practical life too there are examples where a woman, who was eagerly waiting to see the murderer of her husband hanged to death, suddenly changed her mind and begged pardon from the king of a monarchy. Reason: "To enjoy the heavenly feeling of forgiveness".
(Maswood Alam Khan is a writer at large.
http://visitmaswood.com)