The other day I came across this article in BBC. I couldn't help but share my views...
Until, I read this topic, I was always curious of what could be the argument of those who favor to forgive Mohmmad Afzal execution.
It shouldn't be a surprise that I favored in his execution. I believe more from a symbolic point of view, than from 'a revenge' point of view. I think our Parliament is the highest symbol of our nationality.
It shouldn't be a surprise that I favored in his execution. I believe more from a symbolic point of view, than from 'a revenge' point of view. I think our Parliament is the highest symbol of our nationality.
It is a symbol of our democracy, it is a symbol of our independent existence. And it wasn't a mere coincidence that it was attacked. It was a calculated cold blooded attempt at damaging the symbol. So when we finally got our act together (by spending 5+ years in arriving at the decision) and identified the commander for this operation, I thought that there could not be any other means of conveying the message to the terrorists group and more so to the world at large how earnestly we respect our this symbol. (Whether it is inhuman to execute somebody or not is a totally different discussion. But given the frame of context where we have accepted that as a means of highest punishment I think we shouldn't be mincing our actions a bit)
But when I got over my first blood-boiling reaction on our own people demanding that we refrain from sending this signal, I did want to understand what could be the argument. Here was one chance given to me by BBC. If I read it right the theme behind this appears two folded, one is that this person is been victimized by the system and he is really not the culprit, he is been given the short handle of the stick and secondly (or because of that) this might instill violence in Kashmir Valley.
The first objection if it has any truth in it, is a matter of shame for our system. If on such an important issue we can't get the best breed of our intelligence get to the bottom of the issue even after taking 5 long years, it is ridiculous. But we have seen such shameless display of inefficiency in the past from our intelligence. But we have also seen the humanitarian activists always making hoopla on such issues unnecessarily to coax the Muslim or other minorities in our country.
So my vote is divided on this, although I do feel if our judicial system stands for 'save one innocent if you have to let go 100 suspects', thorough investigation is needed, if it means dragging this beyond this point (which I do feel is ridiculously late. I am fully aware Zarquavi was sentenced after 5 years too, but I don't buy 'if America takes this much time we can(should) take the same' argument). But if we know, more so, BELIEVE, we have done our bit in the investigation, we should not delay it even by a day.
So my vote is divided on this, although I do feel if our judicial system stands for 'save one innocent if you have to let go 100 suspects', thorough investigation is needed, if it means dragging this beyond this point (which I do feel is ridiculously late. I am fully aware Zarquavi was sentenced after 5 years too, but I don't buy 'if America takes this much time we can(should) take the same' argument). But if we know, more so, BELIEVE, we have done our bit in the investigation, we should not delay it even by a day.
On the second objection, I think Kashmir is a burning issue and any firm action we take to resolve the issue will always have the danger of instigating more violence. That should not deter us from taking firm actions, on the contrary could be the reason to take firm actions sooner to get the situation under control. We are living under the ghosts of our forefathers' lack of taking firm actions. Sooner we correct our behavior the better are the chances of solving the issue.
May be my prejudiced blood-boiling mind is still tainting my thinking, but this is my best shot at thinking about it rationally.
No comments:
Post a Comment