New Delhi: Leading human rights organization has reiterated its demand for the abolition of death penalty in India following the findings of a Law Commission report on the unfairness of the death penalty in the country.
In a statement issued on Tuesday, Amnesty International’s India unit, said that the Indian government must heed to the findings of a Law Commission report and immediately abolish it for all crimes.
“India’s gamble with this lethal lottery needs to stop now. The Law Commission points out that in nearly a quarter of the cases in which the Supreme Court has recently given the death penalty, it has done so in error,” said Aakar Patel, Executive Director of Amnesty International India.
On August 31, the Law Commission of India submitted a report to the Ministry of Law and Justice, in which it said that the administration of the death penalty in India is fallible, vulnerable to misapplication, and disproportionately used against socially and economically marginalized people.
“The death penalty therefore remains an irreversible punishment in an imperfect, fragile and fallible system,” it said. The Commission stated that it hoped “the movement towards absolute abolition will be swift and irreversible.”
Terming the Law Commission’s report as a vital step in the debate on death penalty in India; Amnesty appealed to the Parliament to seize this opportunity in abolishing the death penalty, twocircles.net reported.
Patel described the Law Commission’s report as “a vital step” forward in the debate around the death penalty in India as it debunks many myths surrounding the death penalty.
“Although the report stops short of recommending complete abolition, Parliament must seize this opportunity to show political leadership and abolish capital punishment,” said Patel. “As the report says, the government has the power to lead public opinion, and indeed an obligation to do so on issues of human dignity and equality,” he added.
The Law Commission report has recommended that the death penalty be abolished for all crimes other than ‘terrorism-related offences and waging war.’ However it pointed out that “there is no evidence of a link between fighting insurgency, terror or violent crime, and the need for the death penalty.”
Citing examples including Nepal and Sri Lanka, it says, “Several countries have abolished the death penalty, or maintained moratoriums on executions, despite facing civil wars, threats of insurgency or terrorist attacks.”
The commission also notes that “a country’s decision to abolish or retain the death penalty is not necessarily linked to its socioeconomic or development profile” and that “the road to abolition is not always a function of public opinion.”
In accenting the arbitrariness and inconsistency in how the death penalty is imposed in India, the commission quotes Supreme Court judgments which say that death sentences have been “arbitrarily and freakishly imposed,” and notes that there is large variation between states in the rate of imposition of death sentences for murder. It concludes that, “there exists no principled method to remove such arbitrariness from capital sentencing.”
The commission further observes that the disposal of mercy petitions is vitiated by “gross procedural violations and non-application of mind”, making the death penalty “indefensible”.
The commission states that the death penalty does not achieve any constitutionally valid penological goals, including deterrence or retribution.
“Reliance on the death penalty diverts attention from other problems ailing the criminal justice system such as poor investigation, crime prevention and rights of victims of crime”, the report says.
It recommends various measures to improve the criminal justice system, including police reforms, improved witness protection and compensation to victims.