So, The Law has been taking its Own Course, without any help from the political bankruptcy of the Kangress party. The Law took its Own Course and hanged Ajmal Kasab before a Parliament session and co-incidentally Afzal Guru before another Parliament session. The Law’s Own Course is stranger than the river Kosi which changes direction at will (actually, even the Kosi river changes directions because of corruption in the unnecessary embankments the Bihar government builds).
Criticism that the United Progressive Alliance government helped the Law take its Own Course has been taken too personally by the otherwise thick-skinned government. So personally that they even have a response! There’s been unfounded criticism that Afzal Guru was unfairly targeted to deprive the BJP of a stick they’d been beating the Kangress with, to play to the gallery, to appear strong, pro-active and to prove that we indeed have a government in place. But you can’t please everybody. For instance, Omar Abdullah, otherwise a good boy, had the gumption to ask the Gandhi Party to ‘prove’ that Afzal’s was not a selective execution.
The Collective Conscience of Society, by which we mean the evil side of Rashtrapati Pranab Poltu Mukherjee, Misses Sonia Gandhi, Dr Manmohan Singh and Shri Sushilkumar Shinde, has thus been awakened. Replying the critics is easy. We can just hang a few more people. There are so many to hang, where do we start? Let’s dispense with some non-Muslims for a change? After all, Rarest of the Rare happens Every Third Day. Let’s find someone who’s not a political hot potato. No Khalistanis or Tamil nationalists please, we can only hurt Kashmiri sentiments because Misses Gandhi is 50% Kashmiri and Rahul baba 100% only. Rajiv Gandhi’s killers have already been forgiven by Priyanka didi.
And so they found four guys who killed 22 people in a landmine blast. Five of themwere policemen. Waging war against the state, killing policemen. When policemen kill people we say “Law and Order” or “Encounter”. That’s exactly also what we can say when we hang killers of policemen! These four guys were with that bandit Veerappan, the Collective Conscience only wishes he was alive so we could feel rejoice with the thought of him choking to death. But since we killed him in an encounter long ago, we could kill these four. Killing people who kill people is the best form of reforming killers. If Sharia states do it why can’t we? We are the land of Due Process and self-multiplying Gandhis.
Killing those four in return will definitely establish that India is a country where the Rule of Law Prevails. That will leave only 472 more Rarest of the Rares to be despatched. God knows how many political crises the United Progressive Alliance government will face until elections come. How many more chopper purchase scams, how many more exposes by whatshisname Kejriwal, how many more people taking exception to rape and demanding stupid committee reports to be implemented as if these people own the country! Not even Digvijaya ji’s personal Swami and astrologer can tell the embarrassment that’s in store when there will be assembly elections in five states later this year. Some irritants will ask for food security bill and some will say budget is not good and inflation is too much and cash is not transferring through Nandan Nilekani’s nose. Every time the ungrateful aam aadmi whines like a cry baby, show them the Collective Conscience. Hang some bastard and the camel will come under the hill!
There may be some teething troubles like lack of rope but rest assured the Planning Commission will do something and we’ll pull off the Great Indian Rope Trick just as well as we pulled off the Commonwealth Games.
So what if a little bit of lying is needed? Lying for a good cause is as good as speaking the truth, as Advani ji, Narendra Modi ji and George Orwell ji always say. Why can’t the Kangress take the best of Hinduism from the Hindutvawaadis? To give you the example of lying for the good of the Collective Conscience, Chiddu had said Afzal was not being hanged because executions are by Serial Order. Much older mercy petitions have not been disposed off, he had argued, so why are you harping on Afzal? If anyone now asks what happened to Chiddu’s Serial Order theory, we can just say he was a bit over-influenced by Nandan’s UID numbers. He now looks after the fiscal deficit, Shinde is da man.
Similarly, don’t let these four Veerappan guys meet their lawyers once Poltu da rejects their mercy petition. If they can’t meet lawyers how will they sign on affidavits asking for judicial review? See how smart we are! Don’t reveal the date on which we want to hang them, we’ll decide depending on when Arnab Goswami is particularly angry with us. If somebody goes to the Chief Justice asking him to stay the execution, he can always say what proof they are going to execute the next day?! Pray tell, when there is no baans how will anyone play the bansuri.
But listen, we can’t hide from the public that we’ve rejected their mercy petitions. Such special honour is only reserved from Pakistanis like Ajmal Kasab and Kashmiris like Afzal Guru. That’s because Kashmiris are an integralpart of India,and Pakistanis our estranged brothers (Sardar Patel ji and Nehru ji helped create Pakistan.) Letting the public know that we’re going to hang the four Veerappan guys, they may go to the court and delay their execution by arguing that we delayed it! Just like that Saibanna character.
To help the Law take its Own Course, we must always hang people in secrecy, not give the losers time to cry before their families or write long last letters or god forbid, meet their lawyers to file review petitions! Already that Saibanna escaped our rat trap and went crying to the court, arguing that he should not be hanged just because we took so long to decide to hang him. What hypocrites these human rights types? Don’t those they killed have human rights? First these people complain like cry babies that the Law takes too long to take its Own Course, and when the Law takes its Own Course they still complain and say want the Law to take even more time to take its Own Course! Do they believe in the Constitution of India? Are they Maoists or what?
We ourselves had to stop that Rajoana‘s execution because the Sikhs don’t want it. Arey, is Collective Conscience of Society not applicable to the Sikhs? Are the Sikhs not an integral part of India like the Kashmiris? Why is the BJP not demanding Rajoana’s execution? This is why we hate hypocrites and always ask people to vote for Kangress. This is why the Kangress is a Secular party.
These human rights types, who think only humans have human rights, don’t realise we are in the new India – India After Rahul Gandhi. They give silly arguments from Old India. They cite some Kehar Singh vs Union of India (1989) and B P Singhal vs Union of India (2010) to say the orders of the President under Article 72 of the Constitution are subject to judicial review. Arre, what is the point of giving Rashtrapati ji the power of mercy if it is still to be subjected to judicial review once the Law has taken its Own Course.
Didn’t the Law take its own Course when three thousand trees were cut to make up for the big tree fell in 1984? Didn’t the Law take its own Course when Gujarat played Holi with Muslims? In Bhagalpur, Kokrajhar, Khairlanji and so on, didn’t the Law take its Own Course? So why are these hypocrites defending Ajmal Kasab and Afzal Guru and those Veerappan’s buddies?
Just as promises are meant to be broken, mercy is meant to not be given. India is not a weak state. This is not about Politics but Justice. Justice must not only be strong but also seen to be strong.Those who confuse Justice with Politics and claim that Law has taken some course other than its very Own, forget that as Misses Gandhi once said, Yeh janta hai sab jaanti hai.
All these people need to understand that we are not like any other banana republic. We are our own indigenous Hindu banana republic with secular values, democracy, freedom of speech, rule of law, independent Kangress-friendly media, Kashmir, ten per cent growth rate. (Ok, Montek ji will double check the latest growth rate and let us know.) Other banana republics don’t have these things.
We the Mango People of Banana Republic, let us hang the guilty, Parliament session by Parliament session. Let us bang our heads on the wall and say Jai Hind! Jai Sonia! Jai Hind!
23 thoughts on “Why India Needs the Death Penalty”
Did you actually write this Shivam? I’ve your earlier articles and notwithstanding the satire, I am quite surprised at the style of writing!
this is the 1 time i have read any of your writing sir
and i must say i am really very impressed :)
well done one of the best which i have read in recent time
good piece shivam,
and a very good illustration – who did it?
i’m trying to figure out. was circulating on FB
Hmmm..the real ‘Mahatma’ said “An eye for an eye will make all of us blind”. But the previous president Mrs Patil had let off several rapist-killers ! Was she a better ‘Mahatma’ ? Or are we all ‘Mahatma’ material ? Debate is needed. The cartoon is clever but its casteism is also naked.
extremely well written!
I have not read the text. The picture appeared first in Vikatan a popular publishing group in Tamil which publishes magazines and the picture had been taken from that source. The original picture did not have the sacred thread. I understand that someone added and circulated in the net. You have put it here without giving the source. What point are you stating by putting this picture. Are you trying to argue that brahmins are for death penalty and welcome such rejections of mercy petitions, as a community. Are you not aware of the fact that ex-Judge of Supreme Court V.R.Krishna Iyer is in the forefront of campaign against death penalty and has been seeking its abolition. So why dont you put his picture also side by side with sacred thread in his body. Are you not ashamed to put such a picture that can create a negative image against a section of the people.
What can Shivam do if Poltuda is indeed a thread-wearing brahmin ( from another threaded one). I think, for macabre aesthetics, it created an intermediate layer- the chorka thread is thin, the poita thread is thicker and finally the noose.
“Don’t reveal the date on which we want to hang them, we’ll decide depending on when Arnab Goswami is particularly angry with us.” heeheeheehee
As usual and as expected stupidity at the zenith mr shivam. But well attempt to make the article a bit funny.
Ugh, Shivam, you sound like Arundhati Roy with the precious initial capitals for Important Words. Please don’t go down that path.
Well done, sir! “Mushkilein etni padeen ke hum pe aasaan hogaieen” :) :( :)
BTW the illustration was in Outlook.
I say kill them all. The worldwill do better a bilion people less. Only fear works for indians. Why do you think temples get so rich. HANG everyone and then everyone will fear death.
Corruption can be killed only by kindness…yes that was a joke…
Do you t hink people do the right thing because they care? If th at was true then the universe revolves around the earth….howzzz that?
So like you say….no priority no reservation and no bribing….wee just kill them all…..until none is left…and the world is a better place already…….
Great piece Shivam. Enjoyed every bit.
@ Shivam – Absolutely brilliant post! Latest blockbuster – “Law and Order” with the dear Poltu da serving as the Execution Producer!
@Passer by – Please don’t take the illustration out of context and zoom it out of proportions. Let Arnab go-swami be the lone reason for increase in the sales of hearing aids.
Hilarious! Satire at its biting best.
Rabiindranath Tagore opposed killing of man by man or by state. Gandhi too never supported capital punishment. He said it was permissible by law as a barri
Prabhat Patnaik wrongly stated that Lenin and Bolsheviks were opposed to CP. Paresj Chattopadhyay in a small paper (text of which has been mailed to me) refuted him. It is expected to be published in a wellknown weekly.
Here is the extract from Rabindranath Tagore’s essay on Nationalism: “Man in his fulness is not powerful, but perfect. Therefore, to turn him into mere power, you have to curtail his soul as much as possible. When we are fully human, we cannot fly at one another’s throats; our instincts of social life, our traditions of moral ideals stand[Pg 37] in the way. If you want me to take to butchering human beings, you must break up that wholeness of my humanity through some discipline which makes my will dead, my thoughts numb, my movements automatic, and then from the dissolution of the complex personal man will come out that abstraction, that destructive force, which has no relation to human truth, and therefore can be easily brutal or mechanical. Take away man from his natural surroundings, from the fulness of his communal life, with all its living associations of beauty and love and social obligations, and you will be able to turn him into so many fragments of a machine for the production of wealth on a gigantic scale. Turn a tree into a log and it will burn for you, but it will never bear living flowers and fruit.” ( http://www.gutenberg.org/files/40766/40766-h/40766-h.htm p 37).
ster-in-temperament. He never told the Viceroy to hang Bhagat Singh. I wrote a small article on this.- http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/NM17/Half-truths-and-true-lies/Article1-154831.aspx
Hilarious, cutting, and relevant! Haven’t laughed as hard in days. Brilliant!
My comment on death penalty at the end of what has been uploaded is incomplete and hence confusing and inexplicable, fault being mine. It’s about Gandhiji’s views on death penalty. The corrected statement is as follows. ” Never compromising on non-violence, Gandhiji never supported death penalty. There is a notion that he endorsed the execution of Bhagat Singh and told this to the Viceroy. It’s based on Bhagat Singh’s notional statement sans evidence. Actually, Barrster-in-temperament, he said that the British rulers had the legal right to execute him but he never told the Viceroy to hang Bhagat Singh.My piece , written in 2006, was an endeavour to clarify the matter. .- http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/NM17/Half-truths-and-true-lies/Article1-154831.aspx
Haha couldn’t stop laughing even as my thread-wearing brahmin boss peered at my screen from behind me :D Hilarious! Poltu da has become a Kaali-bhakt, offering convicts’ blood to the goddess to pray against the fall of UPA!
Written in bad taste. Death Penalty is so serious an issue that it requires more study of facts, verifying reported facts in the SC Judgment, NOT including the pic you did and not taking recourse to the offensive style that passes for (low-brow, I am sorry to say this) satire. Leftists, whatever they do or don’t, used to write better.
Why blame Sitraram Yechury and Prakash Karat of CPI(M) or A B Bardhan and D Raja of CPI. Lenin and Trotsky were instrumental in introducing capital punishment, wrote Victor Serge, associated with the Executive Committee of Communist International from its first Congress and a member of RSDLP(B), in his memoirs in the early 1940s (English version published in 2012 – incidentally reviewed by me in HT). Now Paresh Chattiopadhyay unveils the hard truth. Communists and Capital Punishment
By Paresh Chattopadhyay 2 March 13 (http://www.epw.in/letters/communists-and-capital-punishment.html)
EPW (“Hanging Afzal Guru”, 23 February 2013) should be praised for its splendid editorial on the execution of Afzal Guru. However, while admiring this severe indictment of the powers that be I fail to understand why the editorial does not say a word about the position of the Left – particularly the seriously compromising position of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) which seems to have chosen to align itself with the arch Hindu communalists and what the party itself calls the “bourgeois-landlord” classes. To their credit the two other communist parties of India have (one with some initial faux pas) denounced this miscarriage of justice.
In 2004, the CPI(M) – then ruling West Bengal – made unabashed public propaganda for the execution of Dhananjay Chatterjee, on the correctness of which human rights activists had cast grave doubts.
This stand of the communists in defence of the death penalty should not surprise anyone with knowledge of their claimed Leninist heritage. The horrendous acts of executions under the Stalin regime are too well known to need any specific discussion here. However it is not very much known that years before Stalin had acceded to power as Lenin’s nominee, the death penalty was already well established in the Leninist regime. The claim by Prabhat Patnaik (The Telegraph, 12 December 2012) that the Bolsheviks had abolished capital punishment in Russia in 1917 is a blatant untruth.
Capital punishment in Russia was abolished not by the Bolsheviks but by the Provisional Government, almost immediately after the fall of the ancien régime (see Bunyan and Fisher, The Bolshevik Revolution 1917-1918: Documents and Materials, Stanford University Press 1934; see also Russian Provisional Government 1917: Documents, Volume 1, Stanford University Press, 1961). Of course, shortly afterwards Kerensky restored the death sentence partially, at the front to dis¬cipline soldiers. After the Bolshevik victory, at the last session of the second Congress of Soviets, Kamenev issued a decree in the name of the Congress to abolish totally the death penalty. However, on receiving this news Lenin was furious. On page 124 of their book, Bunyan and Fisher cite Trotsky’s book on Lenin:
When Lenin learned of this first legislative act his anger knew no bounds. ‘This is madness. How can you accomplish a revolution without shooting? …What repressive measures have you then? Imprisonment? Who pays any attention to them in a time of bourgeois war when every party hopes for victory?’ Kamenev tried to show that it was a question of repeal of the death penalty which Kerensky had introduced especially for deserting soldiers. But Lenin was not to be appeased… He repeated, ‘it is an inadmissible weakness. Pacifist illusion.’ He proposed changing the decree at once. We told him this would make an extraordinarily unfavourable impression. Finally someone said ‘the best thing is to
resort to shooting only when there is no other way’.
By the way, there was no civil war yet. However Trotsky himself was instrumental in reviving the death sentence the very next year. The occasion was the bitter relation that developed between Trotsky and the commander of the Baltic Fleet, Aleksei Shchastny, on the question of the movement of the Baltic Fleet for demolition, faced with the German threat. Trotsky charged him with neglect of duty. He submitted his resignation which was rejected by Trotsky who summoned Shchastny to Moscow where he singlehandedly organised the investigation, sham trial and death sentence on the spurious charge of attempting to overthrow the Petrograd Commune with the larger aim of fighting the Republic. The execution symbolised the restitution of judicial capital punishment. I have taken all this from the recent authoritative book The Bolsheviks in Power by the eminent historian Alexander Rabinowitch (Indiana University Press, 2007, pp 242-43, 283). The same book adds, “Trotsky was the sole witness allowed to testify at the commander’s trial, possibly the first Soviet show trial. In 1995 he was cleared of all charges and officially rehabilitated” (p 435). The rest is history.