Death Penalty, Justice and Ethics

Is death penalty just?

It is a difficult question. The answer would be unambiguous if we are clear and unanimous in our notion of justice.  Alas, that is not to be so! Justice can be subjective.

You and I, as lay individuals, will have our own notions of justice that need not always match with each other. In fact, the need for a just and fair outcome arises because there are differences to begin with. It is this that forces the two warring cats to seek the help from the 'unbiased' monkey.  

One should note that formal systems of adjudication through legal channels are not based on individual notions. They are based on existing laws of the land. In such a situation, the justness of a death penalty or for that matter any other matter would depend on two things. The relevant laws and their interpretations are unambiguous, and unbiased.

The legal laws and their judicial interpretations, unfortunately, are not about the physical world. They are about people and their social and economic context. Like life, they are not straightforward.  Thus, for the time being, the question of whether death penalty is just or not remains unanswered. Instead, we dwell into one powerful argument in support and another against.

Blood-for-blood

A powerful justification for the death penalty is the blood-for-blood argument. This is best explained by many a individual's instinctive reaction to a mosquito. Swash and clasp! Many a mosquitoes are killed by human beings in response to an internalized fear against mosquito-inflicted diseases.

Many a communities or individuals follow a more nuanced blood-for-blood system of adjudication while dealing with human beings. At an individual level this has led to feud between families that goes on for generations. Such conflicts are also witnessed between communities. In subtle forms, it is also observed between countries; for instance, the cold war (between the United States and its allies and the erstwhile Soviet bloc), the West Asia (Middle East) imbroglio, or the India-Pakistan 'bonhomie'.

A way out of this blood-for-blood, at least in situations when the killing of an individual was unintentional, is to reconcile the revengeful provision with a compensatory money-for-blood situation. Once introduced, this compensatory system can be extended to intentional but momentary actions that one later regrets and is remorseful of. As regret and remorse is difficult to evaluate, this could get extended to all situations and it is easy to see that people with money can get away with murder.

Just because some people are getting away with murder does not mean that the system should allow everybody to get away with murder. Instead, it should improve the rules and procedures that reduces the possibility of people getting away with murder.

Opponent of death penalty are not against punishing the guilty. They take an ethical position against the death penalty.

The ethical imperative

The ethical imperative is that human beings do not have the right to take another individual's life. Thus, they argue against death penalty in general. Besides, it is also argued that death penalty is not a deterrent against crime, and it is possible that there could have been errors in judgement. It is for this that more and more countries are taking away death penalty from their statute books. According to Amnesty International, there are 140 countries that have banned death penalty. Some countries have restricted it to few crimes, and in India it is reserved for 'rarest of rare' cases.

"An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind," said Mahatma Gandhi. Instead of blood-for-blood, his suggestion for reconciliation to perpetrators of crime during communal riots was to atone for their sins by adopting an orphaned child from the other community and bringing up the child in the culture and tradition of the other community. This not only ensures atonement of regret/remorse for an entire life, but also does away with a situation where money can buy justice.

The preaching's of the Buddha and the Jain Tirthankara's among many others restrain us from killing a mosquito. Live, and let live! A tall order!

[Update: 31 July 2015]
A recent case
Yesterday, one of the convicts in the 1993 Mumbai serial bomb blasts where more than 250 people died and thousands were injured, was sent to the gallows in India after a protracted legal battle. Proponents are of the view that this falls under the 'rarest of rare' cases while opponents against death penalty are of the view that some benefit of doubt could have been shown in the case because the major perpetrator of the crime are some others.

I applaud the opponents in trying all possible available legal channels to this specific case. Nevertheless, the argument is weak from the larger perspective because it agrees that the major perpetrators of the crime should be sent to the gallows and it is only a matter of interpretation of who is one of the major perpetrators.

The legal system in India also needs to be applauded for the fact that many perpetrators of the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts including some who were involved in planting the bombs have not been given the death sentence because they were not identified as the major perpetrators. It has shown restraint in ordering the death sentence.

As indicated earlier, interpretation of law can differ from situation to situation and from individual positions. This, however, does not mean that opponents of death penalty are taking a position in support of a perpetrator of crime. They are arguing from an ethical prism in support of life when opposing death penalty.

Final points
Laws and their interpretations can have some grey area. Agreement is not possible between the proponents and opponents of death penalty. But, in the comity of nations, from a rights perspective, the balance of arguments are in favour of the ethical imperative.

Aadhaar, Radiagate and Cablegate

Issues of privacy are cropping up in three events of immense importance to people in India and across the globe and it is necessary to put the discussion in perspective. The events are:

Aadhaar, the 12 digit number by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to be provided to every citizen.

Radiagate, a scam involving transcripts of telephone that points out the collusion between government, business houses and media in India.

Cablegate, is the leak detailing cable correspondence between the United States Department of State and its diplomatic missions.

In Aadhaar the basic demographic and biometric information - photograph, ten fingerprints, iris of eye will be stored, and hence, takes us close to do away with multiple identities. As this can be verified online in a cost-effective manner, it is said that this can be effectively used to target various public welfare schemes. Equally important is its intrusion into people's privacy and this cannot be overlooked.

Nira Radia, a powerful and influential public relations person, was lobbying for Andimuthu Raja to get the telecom ministry who in turn obliged with largess to the corporate houses and in this the media has been somewhat silent. A glimmer of hope has been the social media that has kept up the ante. To top it all, one of the corporate biggie, Ratan Tata, has gone to the Supreme Court stating that the revealing of the transcripts is an intrusion into individual privacy.

Wikileaks, which publishes leaked documents pointing out government and corporate misconduct has from 28 November 2010 started the Cablegate leaks. This will be done in a phased manner, but from the 251,287 documents that are likely to be put up,  130,000 are unclassifieds, 100,000 are confidential and 15,000 are secret and none are 'top secret'. Opinion about the leak is already divided. One view is that this  puts the conduct of diplomatic activity under jeopardy and that the stealing and dissemination of classified information surmounts to criminal activity. Others have hailed this activity as a freedom of speech and are aghast that a democratic government that should be open and transparent had hidden information from public scrutiny.

When it comes to have nots then information should be available for all (Aadhaar) for effective reach of public welfare schemes. When it comes to haves then information of national importance become matters of privacy (Ratan Tata's response to Radiagate). When it comes to nations then matters of global importance become matters of treason (a possible US response to Cablegate).

In reality, Aadhaar intrudes into people's privacy that is hidden under the guise of reaching out.  Radiagate exposes the nexus of money and power against people, that is hidden under the guise of public relations (nay, a private and personal chat). And, Cablegate exposes the intrusion into national sovereignty that is hidden under the guise of diplomatic exercise.

Day 35 of farmers march coincides with Obama's visit to India

Farmers marching across India to save agriculture are now in Andhra Pradesh. This peoples movement of liberating agriculture and ushering in hope does not reverberate with Obama's call for liberalizing and opening up agriculture.

Logo of Kisan Swaraj Yatra. © Kisan Swarj Yatra

Kisan Swaraj Yatra (KSY) taking inspiration from Mahatma Gandhi started the freedom tour on his 141st birthday has today on its 35th day reached Andhra Pradesh, Mr Obama also started his India tour by visiting his hero Gandhiji's museum 'Mani Bhavan', Mumbai. KSY's journey is a peoples movement that calls for hope to do away with the ills plaguing Indian agriculture, Mr Obama's ascendancy to office two years ago in the United States was also reverberating with hope for people across the globe. The similarities, one hopes, should not stop there; but, unfortunately, it does.

Flag off of Kisan Swaraj Yatra from Sabarmati Gujarat 2 October 2010. © Kisan Swaraj Yatra

The visit has a lot on platter for business ties. An opening up of the economy so that they buy goods and services from America so that there are more jobs back home. There are significant interests in liberalizing agriculture so that Indian farmer relies heavily on the market for inputs such as seeds, fertilizers and pesticides. These benefit business interests in America and also India. These will also have adverse affect on Indian livelihoods as tidbits of news from the Yatra indicates.

In a meeting at Jangaon in Warangal district of Andhra Pradesh on 3 November 2010 the slogans that rented the air are “Farmers’ welfare is nation’s welfare”, “Companies that loot farmers, gotta go; Ministers who are company agents, gotta go”, “Farmer who feeds us, don't commit suicide”. A host of groups came together and the mood may be summed up by the remark of a police official present “I have never seen all these organizations coming onto the same platform. How did you all manage this?” This was possible because of an engagement with people, what the Human Development Report has been stressing.

On 2 November 2010 in a meeting at HD Kote, Karnataka a discussion revealed that not non Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) seeds and organic seeds are not available in the market and Pandit Krishi Vivek Cariappa added that parental lines of hybrid seeds have been contaminated. Another speaker emphasized that "to save the country, we should save our villages; for saving our villages, we should save our farming; for saving farming, we should save our seed, our land and our ecological farming methods." The absence of regulation for private input providers, the yield stagnation, the increasing health risks were also discussed. The Yatris joined the paddy diversity festival at Rangayana, Mysore.

Meeting and paddy diversity festival Rangayana, Mysore, where Yatris had delicious lunch made out of many traditional rice-based recipes, 2 November 2010. © Kisan Swaraj Yatra

The tour had reached the state of Kerala on 30 October 2010. In a public meeting at Palakkad, Mr Mullakkara Ratnakaran, Minister for Agriculture, conveyed through phone that "all the issues being raised by the Yatra are issues of concern for the state government too." Mr Diwakaran, the local member of the legislative assembly, mentioned about "the disappearance of honeybees and the huge environmental imbalances that we are creating."

The state of Kerala, which has been in the centre of many environmental movements such as the save silent valley, has now also declared itself to be free of genetically modified crops. The state has a policy towards organic farming and plans to implement the same in a few years time said Sridhar Radhakrishnan of Thanal.

Sridhar says that KSY in Kerala is a celebration as the state has declared itself a GM-free organic state, Palakkad, Kerala, 30 October 2010. © Kisan Swaraj Yatra

Kavita Kurangathi of Alliance for Sustainable & Holistic Agriculture (ASHA) who said that the Yatra "aims to provide a message of hope to farmers in the country that there is indeed a way out of the crisis in farming today – that of adopting self-reliant, ecological farming." It comes in the backdrop of the government not addressing "the issue in fundamental ways, including assessing the role of unsustainable technologies in creating and exacerbating the crisis."

On their second day in Kerala the Yatris visited a school where the meeting was organized by the Mallapuram Organic Farmers’ Movement. Dr VS Vijayan (Former Chair, Kerala State Bio-Diversity Board) explained the local practices and gave the example of a farm family that "has been living off the organic farm by integrating innovative cattle and organic farming techniques." The historic relevance of the place Eddappal, Ponnani where there was an uprising in the struggle for independence was indicated by Dr Jacob Vadakkanchery.

Dr. Vijayan addresses the crowd at Eddappal, Mallapuram, Kerala, 31 October 2010. © Kisan Swaraj Yatra

Farmers from different parts of the country shared their story of the over-hyped green revolution in Punjab, the yield of nine tonnes of paddy per hectare during pre-independence days at Chengalpat, Tamil Nadu or how farmers in Budelkhand kept their seed stock for the next generation even during extended period of drought. A second meeting was organized at Nilambur by Haritha Senam, a farmers collective which has been working on the issue of debt and farmers suicides.

The third day in Kerala began at the memorial for Pazhassi Raja, the Adivasi King who fought the British for independence. The town reverberated with slogans in Hindi and Malyalam. The Yatris visited the farm of Mr Raman who has been growing 23 different traditional varieties of paddy. Mr Kalpetta Narayanan, a writer and poet, questioned the industrialization of agriculture. He gave examples from Gandhiji to explain the real meaning of 'swaraj' (freedom).

Yatris pay homage to Pazhassi Raja, the king who fought the British for Adivasi rights, Wayanad, 1 November 2010. © Kisan Swaraj Yatra

Mr Obama are you listening. Farmers' across the country do not agree that opening of agriculture will not affect their livelihoods.

(This write-up was first put up in Digital Journal, 6 November 2010, http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/299596.)

Other articles in this series are day 28 of the Yatra and their travels in eastern regions and northern regions of India.