NEW DELHI: President Pratibha Patil, who turned down the mercy petitions of three Rajiv Gandhi assassination convicts, has been advised by the Centre to reject a similar plea filed by Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru.
Patil recently turned down the mercy pleas of Rajiv case accused Murugan, Santhan and Arivu, setting the stage for their execution. Her decision could very well turn out to be the pointer to the call she takes in the case of Guru whose fate has become a politically divisive issue.
Although Patil can ask the government to reconsider the recommendation, that will be out of line with the practice Rashtrapati Bhavan usually follows. Her decision with regard to the three Rajiv case accused is a case in point. Guru was convicted in 2004 and the sentence was to be executed in October 2006, when his wife filed the mercy plea.
Mercy pleas are submitted to the President, who then refers them to the Centre for an opinion. The home ministry, in turn, seeks the view of the relevant state government where the crime took place, which in Guru's case is Delhi. The home ministry has endorsed the views of the Delhi government.
Guru, along with some others, was accused of plotting the audacious attack on Parliament on December 13, 2001 in which a group of jihadis came very close to wiping out India's political brass. The aggression almost provoked an Indo-Pak war, with India mobilizing troops along the border to force Pakistan to cut its support to terror groups.
Since the filing of the mercy plea, the Guru case has been highly politicized - with BJP accusing the government of dragging its feet and the Centre arguing that it was only proceeding on a case-by-case basis.
BJP has linked the delay in forwarding an opinion to the President to the UPA's "soft -on -terror" policy, and for considerations of vote bank politics. Congress will be rid of political millstone as and when the sentence is carried out.
On Wednesday, Congress sought to play down the decision of the Centre, with its spokesperson Rashid Alvi saying : "It is also part of a system. The matter is with the President. Just like it is not proper to say anything on sub-judice cases, the same holds true with issues submitted to the President."
While Congress has always countered BJP's charge by reminding the saffron party of the infamous Kandahar swap of three terrorists, it has been uncomfortable about the Guru mercy plea that has been pending for nearly five years.
In the Rajiv Gandhi case, three convicts - Murugan, Santhan and Arivu - from Tamil Nadu had filed mercy petitions. They were convicted for the death of Rajiv Gandhi at Sriperumbudur on May 21, 1991, as part of a plot hatched by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), who were worried at the possibility of Gandhi returning to power as the PM.
The home ministry opinion weighing against their mercy petitions was sent by the home ministry to the President in March, 2011. The trio was awarded a death sentence by the trial court in 1998, upheld by the Supreme Court in May, 1999.
In the Guru case, the ministry is believed to have cited the Delhi government recommendation, which rejected the plea. The government confirmed that the opinion had been conveyed to the President on Wednesday, when minister of state for home Mullappally Ramachandran told the Rajya Sabha that home ministry has submitted Guru's case to the President's secretariat for a decision.
"The mercy petition case of death row convict Mohd. Afzal Guru has since been submitted to the President's Secretariat on July 27, 2011, for a decision," Ramachandran said. He was responding to a question by BJP leader Prakash Javdekar on why the government is not taking steps with regard to expediting the pending mercy petition of death row convict Guru.
Asked whether there is any provision under the Constitution for deciding upon any "clemency petition" against capital punishment as per sequence of its submission, the minister said, "There is no Constitutional provision. It was an administrative decision to ensure fair and urgent treatment of all cases".
What next on Afzal Guru?
* The President will examine the matter and has 2 options
* She can uphold the recommendation made by the MHA and give the decision to hang Guru
* She can disagree with the decision and send it back to the MHA for reconsideration. In this case, the President will have to accept the advice of the government the second time round.
* There is no time limit to her taking the decision on a mercy petition.
Patil recently turned down the mercy pleas of Rajiv case accused Murugan, Santhan and Arivu, setting the stage for their execution. Her decision could very well turn out to be the pointer to the call she takes in the case of Guru whose fate has become a politically divisive issue.
Although Patil can ask the government to reconsider the recommendation, that will be out of line with the practice Rashtrapati Bhavan usually follows. Her decision with regard to the three Rajiv case accused is a case in point. Guru was convicted in 2004 and the sentence was to be executed in October 2006, when his wife filed the mercy plea.
Mercy pleas are submitted to the President, who then refers them to the Centre for an opinion. The home ministry, in turn, seeks the view of the relevant state government where the crime took place, which in Guru's case is Delhi. The home ministry has endorsed the views of the Delhi government.
Guru, along with some others, was accused of plotting the audacious attack on Parliament on December 13, 2001 in which a group of jihadis came very close to wiping out India's political brass. The aggression almost provoked an Indo-Pak war, with India mobilizing troops along the border to force Pakistan to cut its support to terror groups.
Since the filing of the mercy plea, the Guru case has been highly politicized - with BJP accusing the government of dragging its feet and the Centre arguing that it was only proceeding on a case-by-case basis.
BJP has linked the delay in forwarding an opinion to the President to the UPA's "soft -on -terror" policy, and for considerations of vote bank politics. Congress will be rid of political millstone as and when the sentence is carried out.
On Wednesday, Congress sought to play down the decision of the Centre, with its spokesperson Rashid Alvi saying : "It is also part of a system. The matter is with the President. Just like it is not proper to say anything on sub-judice cases, the same holds true with issues submitted to the President."
While Congress has always countered BJP's charge by reminding the saffron party of the infamous Kandahar swap of three terrorists, it has been uncomfortable about the Guru mercy plea that has been pending for nearly five years.
In the Rajiv Gandhi case, three convicts - Murugan, Santhan and Arivu - from Tamil Nadu had filed mercy petitions. They were convicted for the death of Rajiv Gandhi at Sriperumbudur on May 21, 1991, as part of a plot hatched by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), who were worried at the possibility of Gandhi returning to power as the PM.
The home ministry opinion weighing against their mercy petitions was sent by the home ministry to the President in March, 2011. The trio was awarded a death sentence by the trial court in 1998, upheld by the Supreme Court in May, 1999.
In the Guru case, the ministry is believed to have cited the Delhi government recommendation, which rejected the plea. The government confirmed that the opinion had been conveyed to the President on Wednesday, when minister of state for home Mullappally Ramachandran told the Rajya Sabha that home ministry has submitted Guru's case to the President's secretariat for a decision.
"The mercy petition case of death row convict Mohd. Afzal Guru has since been submitted to the President's Secretariat on July 27, 2011, for a decision," Ramachandran said. He was responding to a question by BJP leader Prakash Javdekar on why the government is not taking steps with regard to expediting the pending mercy petition of death row convict Guru.
Asked whether there is any provision under the Constitution for deciding upon any "clemency petition" against capital punishment as per sequence of its submission, the minister said, "There is no Constitutional provision. It was an administrative decision to ensure fair and urgent treatment of all cases".
What next on Afzal Guru?
* The President will examine the matter and has 2 options
* She can uphold the recommendation made by the MHA and give the decision to hang Guru
* She can disagree with the decision and send it back to the MHA for reconsideration. In this case, the President will have to accept the advice of the government the second time round.
* There is no time limit to her taking the decision on a mercy petition.
No comments:
Post a Comment