Kasab's ticking clock

The Supreme Court has upheld Ajmal Kasab’s death sentence. Ever since November 26^th 2008, his death sentence has been a topic of discussion and the joke is that after 26/11 Kasab is the safest person in India. As I write this, my family is in the living room, watching a panel discussion on Times Now on the very topic I’m writing on (if you’re wondering why I’m not watching it, it’s because I avoid Times Now on principle. But yes, I can hear the shouts and accusations). In a span of a few hours, a great deal has been said about the recent development. If the judiciary was even half as quick as the news media, Kasab would have been history.

The Indian judiciary has been erratic on death penalty. Since 1995, only one execution has taken place, that of Dhananjoy Chatterjee. However, between 1975 and 1991, 40 executions took place (if Wikipedia is to be believed). It could reflect two things – greater concentration on human rights, or an increasingly lethargic judiciary. He does have a chance to save his skin, by filing a review petition (and a curative petition, if that is rejected). After all, self-preservation can be a powerful instinct. The President’s pardon, if granted, will be the last saving grace. Indian law is providing him escape routes, with goodwill no doubt, but is running out of reasons to spend over 5 crores of tax-payers’ money on his security. Though keeping him alive has not been futile as he has confessed to the terrorist attack and given a couple of names, four years is a long time.

However, what all of us need to remember is that his death sentence does not directly affect us. He has given  the information he wanted to, and it will be comforting to know that if he is executed it will save quite a bit of money. Yes, we must be aware and ponder on the issue as concerned citizens, but we will not feel the immediate effect of the verdict. The ones who will be affected are the survivors of the terror attack, a handful of politicians, the Supreme Court, the people who lost their loved ones in terror attack. It is possible that some families have lost hope, but I’m sure that there are a number of those who will receive closure. Discussing and analyzing the issue is not a bad thing, if one can keep in mind that the decision is not going to affect them directly. You may watch panel discussions, read blog posts and editorials, but those directly affected will look at it through different eyes. The eyes of the survivors, in particular will look at the situation in a way only they can. It is easy to support the saying “an eye for an eye makes the world blind”, until it is your eye at threat. The survival instinct does reveal hidden layers of a person's character, doesn't it?

For further inputs you could take a look at this article on NDTV:

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/supreme-court-upholds-ajmal-kasab-s-death-sentence-says-he-waged-war-against-india-260696?pfrom=home-lateststories