Monday, February 18, 2013

Of Indecency and Afzal's execution

In Afzal Guru's case, the newspapers, especially The Hindu, are replete with "debates". A common man like me ends up baffled in the tumult and the haze surrounding the particular case of Afzal Guru and in general, the issues around death penalty.

Almost in every case around death penalty, it is the convict who becomes the victim. Everyone seems to lose sight of the real victim who has to face untimely death, in many cases, excruciating.

To value human life and uphold its sanctity has come to be the hallmark of modern societies, especially democracies. The same applies to the freedom of expression and speech. However, I am exasperated at the blatant exhibition of bigotry of the media houses which have entrusted upon themselves the duty to protect the human rights of convicts pushing aside the rights of the victims.

What about the human rights of the victims and their families? Why does not anybody including Ms Arundhati Roy, speak of the value of the victims' lives with the same fervor that they exhibited in Afzal's case?

Lawyers, media persons and intellectuals are bemoaning the indecency of the manner in which the government informed Afzal's family of his execution. What about the indecency and luridness in which Afzal executed innocents? Who is to speak of that?

The victims' families had to watch their loved ones die on national television. Can there be anything more agonizing and untoward than that?

The Hindu asks (  "Has the Indian state diminished itself by failing to live up to the minimum standard of expectation, in not allowing a dying man to bid farewell to his wife and son?"

Were the victims allowed to bid farewell to their families? 

Everyone so loves to preach tolerance; but tolerance towards whom, towards what? An act becomes a crime only when it stands punished. What is the punishment befitting a well thought and planned murder of our policemen and the others? Let alone the effect on the morale of our policemen and soldiers who risk their lives to guard us. Who is to voice for them?

It is frustrating that none of our politicians came up with a spirited speech defending the rights of the victims and their families, the morale of the policemen who saw their colleagues die in the battlefield. 

To question the competence of the judiciary is every citizen's right as well as their duty. But before the media houses attack the government of indecency, they must search their souls. Speak of the anguish of the victim's family before you pay your respects to the convict and raise hell over the pain of the convict's family.


No comments: