Why Make Him A Hero?

My articleon the question of the execution of the death penalty awarded by the court toMohd. Afzal Guru, a jihadi terrorist involved in the attack on the IndianParliament in December, 2001, has evoked a large number of replies critical ofmy article. They have also raised many questions. I also participated in a briefdiscussion on this subject in a TV channel on October 3, 2006. In the light ofthis, I am giving my views on the various issues raised in this follow-uparticle.

To my knowledge (I will be happy to stand corrected), Buddhism and Jainism donot authorise the death penalty. I am not sure of the position regardingHinduism and Sikhism. Christianity, Judaism and Islam authorise the deathpenalty.

The Bible says:  'A man, who spills human blood, his own blood shall bespilled by man because God made man in his own image." Judaism and Islamalso say so. Islam not only sanctions the death penalty, but also specifies thevarious ways in which it shall be carried out.

Thus, there can be no opposition to the death penalty on religious/moralgrounds.

The death penalty  is also legal in countries where it figures on thestatute book.  It figured on the statute books of most countries before theSecond World War. After the war, in response to a public movement against thedeath penalty, many countries have re-considered the advisability of continuingto have it on their statute book. The members of the European Union haveabolished the death penalty. Russia has the death penalty on its statute book,but has not enforced it since 1996 despite the aggravation of jihadi terrorismin Chechnya and Dagestan, due to pressure from the Council of Europe  toabolish the death penalty. In 1996, Mr. Boris Yeltsin, the then RussianPresident, passed an order keeping in abeyance the enforcement of the deathpenalty. His order was upheld by the Constitutional Court. Since then, no jihaditerrorist has been executed in Russia. Of late, there has been a demand forrevising this decision in order to control jihadi terrorism.

China carries out the largest number of death penalties in the world. It hasbeen estimated that every year nine times more death penalties are carried outin China than in the rest of the world put together. In China, death penaltiesare awarded for offences such as terrorism, narcotics smuggling, mafiaactivities, human smuggling, corruption etc. Such offences continue to takeplace despite the large number of death penalties.

Israel has the death penalty on its statute book ever since it came intobeing, but it has enforced it only once against Adolf Eichmann, the Nazi warcriminal who killed millions of Jews. It has never enforced it against aPalestinian or other jihadi terrorist. Israel does not hesitate to killterrorists in encounters, exchange of fire, covert actions or targeted killingsin order to prevent them from killing more people. It has not so far sent todeath a prosecuted and convicted terrorist, who is in the custody of the Stateand hence is not in a position to indulge in more killings.

Death penalty for dangerous crime figures in the statute book of the US.Courts do not hesitate to award the death penalty and the States do not hesitateto have them carried out. A recent example is that of Mir Aimal Kansi, aPakistani, who shot dead two officers of the Central Intelligence Agency inJanuary,1993. He was tried, found guilty and executed. He was not a jihaditerrorist.

The US has not hesitated to execute terrorist loners such as Timothy McVeigh,who did not belong to any terrorist movement, but I am not aware of any instancewhere it has sent a jihadi terrorist to death—either in respect of theexplosions in the New York World Trade Centre in February,1993 or the explosionsoutside the US Embassies in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salaam in August 1998 or inrespect of 9/11. It seems to be going slow with the prosecution and trial ofKhalid Sheikh Mohammad, who orchestrated the 9/11 terrorist strikes and other AlQaeda terrorists, who have been captured. Again, I would be happy to standcorrected if I am wrong.

The question to be considered is not whether the death sentence is moral orlegal. It is. The question is whether it would be wise to have it carried out atthe present moment. Would it help us in our counter-terrorism operations orwould it make them more difficult? Would it create fresh pockets of alienation?Would it add to the existing anger in the Muslim community?

The decision as to whether we should carry out the death sentence or keep itin abeyance till a further examination of the various aspects or straightawaycommute it to life imprisonment has to be based on a careful examination ofthese questions. A reader has raised the question: If we commute it and keep himin jail, we might encourage a terrorist incident to free him. That is a danger,which we have to face, but that cannot be the only argument for taking a finaldecision to have the penalty carried out. Another reader asks: How about thefeelings of the relatives of the victims? They need justice. One has to ask:what would be better—to keep the contemptible terrorist languishing in jailfor the rest of his life or let him die a quick death at the hands of a hangmanand thereby give an opportunity to his relatives and associates to project himas a hero?

B. Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India,New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai.