Abolish Death Penalty India: US wanted Kasab's lawyer to build case for his freedom: WikiLeaks

Friday, October 14, 2011

US wanted Kasab's lawyer to build case for his freedom: WikiLeaks

Aman Sharma New Delhi, October 14, 2011 | UPDATED 10:15 IST

Lending a touch of irony, 26/ 11 terrorist Ajmal Kasab has approached the Supreme Court in appeal against his death sentence. But the plea he has made there, has been dismissed by his attorney S. G. Abbas Kazmi two years ago before the trial court pronounced its verdict.

Kasab has pleaded in the apex court that he was "brainwashed like a robot" into committing the dastardly act "in the name of god" and, "given my young age", had a chance to reform.

But a secret American diplomatic cable exposed by WikiLeaks shows that Kazmi had discounted exploring this avenue when the US had mentioned these very arguments to him in the trial court: if he would contact Kasab's parents in Pakistan to build up the case for mitigating circumstances which may help the convict escape the noose.

An official of the US embassy had met Kazmi on September 3, 2009, asking him if India would contact Kasab's parents in Pakistan to know the circumstances under which he was indoctrinated by the Lashkar e-Tayyeba (LeT) and whether he had been brainwashed. But Kazmi had dismissed the possibility of such a move, saying there were no funds to bring Kasab's parents to India and they would not get a visa.

"The death penalty is authorised in India only in rarest of the rare cases, Kazmi said, where there has been extreme brutality or inhuman treatment. The Indian law allows consideration of mitigating factors, such as whether Kasab had been brainwashed, but Kazmi is not planning on calling witnesses to testify on behalf of Kasab to explain the circumstances that led him to be indoctrinated by the LeT," the cable stated.

Kazmi ruled out calling anyone from Pakistan to testify on his behalf in the mitigation phase of the trial. Kazmi said: "I am an Indian citizen. I am not going to contact anyone in Pakistan." Even if he wanted to, there were no funds to bring such a witness to Mumbai, nor was it likely (that) the person would get a visa, he surmised. Further, he noted that no one from Kasab's family had contacted him, the cable added. Kasab's parents, Amir Shahban Kasab and Noor Illah, live in Faridkot village of Okara district. His family has rarely spoken up except when his father confirmed to Pakistani TV channels after 26/ 11 that Kasab was his son.

The US cable stated that even Kasab's defence lawyer was certain that the trial court would award him the death sentence.

"Kazmi said that given the overwhelming evidence against Kasab, he expected Kasab to be convicted and sentenced to death. Kasab's and Kazmi's fatalistic acceptance of the ultimate outcome of the trial appears to be shared by the public at large," the cable added.

Kazmi also complained to the US official that his attempts to provide Kasab with a "robust defence and fair trial" had been hampered from the beginning, the cable stated. "Kazmi is not permitted to confer with his client in private to prepare the defence.

Source: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/wikileaks-ajmal-kasab-us-26-11-mumbai-terrorist-attacks/1/154812.html

Accessed 14th October 2011

No comments:

The Death Penalty Scenario in India

India is one of the 193 countries that retains death penalty. There has always been a few imminent judges who have pronounced compelling verdicts upholding the rights of prisoners on death row. There has been increasing debate in various platforms advocating abolition of death penalty or at least to rethink sentencing policies in India. The Indian government has however always been committed to the retention of the death penalty, irrespective of their political ideology. India has voted against a United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) draft resolution on the use of death penalty, saying it goes against the statutory law of the country where an execution is carried out in the "rarest of rare" cases. India retains the death penalty as punishment for a number of crimes including murder, kidnapping, terrorism, desertion, inducement to suicide of a minor or a mentally-retarded person and has more recently in 2013 come to include the offence of rape in certain circumstances. Most recently, there is an outrage over child rape and murder.

After observing an unofficial moratorium of 8 years in India, the Indian Government in November 2012 carried out the execution of Ajmal Kasab, convicted in the Mumbai attacks case, without public knowledge. This was followed by the secret execution of Afzal Guru, convicted in the Parliament attack case of 2001, in February 2013, under similar circumstances, without intimating his immediate family or affording a chance of judicial review. In both cases, the executions were carried out under covert operations conducted by the Government immediately upon rejection of their mercy petitions. Before these executions, the last execution to be carried out in India was that of Dhananjoy Chatterjee in 2004 who was convicted of rape and murder and which sentence was carried out after he had spent 13 years in solitary confinement. Following this, several mercy petitions of death row convicts have come to be rejected. The fear of execution of such convicts is imminent. Bolstered by the Government's unapologetic conduct and public outcry, especially in recent cases of rape and murder reported in the country, the courts are continuing to hand down death sentences at an alarming rate.

In the recent past, there have been a few empirical studies (mainly four) conducted with prisoners on death row. This has highlighted the situation of prisoners on death row.

(1) Most recently the India Exclusion Report 2017-18 found that fair trial rights and guarantees are reduced to a nullity and seeks to breach the citadel of the collective silence. It further said that Convicts on death row in India belong to groups marginalised along the axes of caste, religion, economic vulnerability and educational deprivation, and their fair trial rights, though a part of the Right to Life guaranteed by the Constitution, are invariably non-existent, a survey of 371 out of the 385 persons living under the death sentence and their families has revealed.

(2) Another study was The Death Penalty Research Project (2015) which was conceived with an aim to document the socio-economic profile of prisoners sentenced to death in India and map their experience within the criminal justice system.

There were two other academic studies that were done conducted by Dr. Reena Mary George –

(3)“Voices of prisoners surviving the death row in India” (2014) done through the University of Vienna under the guidance of Prof. Dr. Christoph Reinprecht (Sociology) and Prof. Dr. Manfred Nowak (Law and Ex-United Nations Rapporteur on Torture). George’s research highlights three salient features, namely: poverty, social exclusion and marginalisation are antecedent to death penalty; death penalty is a constructed account by the state machinery; and prisoners on death row situate dignity higher in the juxtaposition of death and dignity.

(4) Another one “Death Penalty – A Human Rights Perspective” (2009) done through the University of Mumbai under the guidance of Retired Justice Hosbet Suresh. This was a study in Maharashtra with the objectives to firstly study the impact of death penalty on the social, mental, and physical being of the inmate and secondly, to study the perception of opinion leaders on death penalty with reference to human rights. All the above reports are public documents.

According to the National Crime Records Bureau, Prison Statistics 2015, there are 101 prisoners sentenced to death. The actual figure of sentences originally awarded is much higher considering the death sentences of 49 convicts came to be commuted to life imprisonment in the said period. As of today, almost in 2019, the figures are unknown through government statistics, however, research centres claim this figure to be around 371 convicts. During the 1980s the Supreme Court sought to restrict the use of the death penalty by characterizing it as a punishment reserved only for the “rarest of the rare” cases. The doctrine has not had the desired effect. According to a former chief justice of the Delhi High Court, Rajindar Sachar: “after the rarest of rare doctrine was introduced in 1980, the Supreme Court confirmed death penalty in 40 per cent of cases in the period 1980-90 while it was 37.7 per cent between 1970 and 1980. For the high courts it rose from 59 per cent in 1970-80 to 65 per cent during 1980-90”. Over the past two decades the death penalty has been extended to include more crimes and been handed down with increasing frequency.

Most recently while commuting a sentence in Supreme Court (2018), Justice Joseph did not seek the reconsideration of the Bachan Singh judgment, but only sought to re-examine the purpose and practice of the death penalty, and whether as a punishment, it serves any goal at all. In other words, the death penalty can continue to remain constitutionally valid because of the Bachan Singh judgment, but its application in substantive cases coming before the court must be restricted to only those cases which meet the criteria laid down in that case.

While updating the blog and conducting my own empirical studies, I observed the heinous nature of the crimes that were committed and thought about the families, about their loss, about the victims who for no fault of their own died. If I lost my relative or a dear friend, would I still oppose death penalty and would I still advocate to abolish the death sentence? Having worked in the criminal justice system and also having the seen the other side, where often it is the marginalized, vulnerable and oppressed who are on death row makes me want to advocate for abolition of this punishment. Victims should definitely get justice for their loss, for their pain. No one should escape the rule of law. As long as humanity exists; crime will exist. Should we not re-consider our sentencing policies?

Reena Mary George

Abolish Death Penalty India

Friday, October 14, 2011

US wanted Kasab's lawyer to build case for his freedom: WikiLeaks

No comments:

Post a Comment

Followers