New Delhi: Mohammad Afzal Guru, key conspirator in the December 13 Parliament attack case, has been sentenced to death. But now there is a movement that’s building up in Delhi and Kashmir that aims to save him. There are people who feel that Afzal must be given another chance to get justice for himself. Afzal’s family too has filed a mercy petition to the President.
But does Afzal really have a case for himself?
That was the question Bhupendra Chaubey posed on CNN-IBN’s programme The Sunday Special.
Those who participated in the discussion were Professor S A R Geelani, who was awarded the death sentence in the Parliament attack case but was acquitted, and former police commissioner T R Kakkar.
Joining them were lawyer and Rajya Sabha MP Ram Jethmalani, who has fought the case on behalf of Geelani, from Mumbai and Afzal’s wife Tabassum from Srinagar.
When asked why voices protesting Afzal’s death sentence (granted last year) were heard only this year, Geelani said, “We filed a review petition which was dismissed by the Supreme Court. Our campaign is for justice. You cannot establish someone’s guilt or innocence unless you give him a fair trial.”
However, none of those supporting Afzal have said it clearly that he is not guilty. Instead, they insisted Afzal hasn’t been given a fair chance during the trial.
But Kakkar disagreed with that. He said Afzal was given a fair chance by the trial court, High Court as well as Supreme Court and he was certain that the case is fit enough for the guilty to be hung.
“This is democratic country. The judiciary is totally independent. The prosecution only places the case before the court with all the evidence it has collected. What more fair trial do people need?” said Kakkar.
PAGE_BREAK
Jethmalani said most people had wrong impressions about the clemency plea.
“A petition to the President is not a mercy petition. It is a petition for justice, both legal and factual. In one of the cases, the SC held that even the finding of guilt by the SC does not bind the President and it is his right as well as his duty to look into evidence afresh and come to a conclusion. The President can declare that the man is not guilty and proceed to act accordingly,” Jethmalani said.
But considering how politicians are treating the case, will not the President be accused of acting under political duress no matter what decision he takes?
Jethmalani replied to that question by saying that he is bothered about media’s role in the matter. “Media should realise that justice in our country means justice according to law. It is a shame that the accused asks for the services of council and all the services were denied to the man because the lawyers didn’t have the moral courage to appear in an unpopular case,” he said.
But would he be willing to represent Afzal?
“I am afraid of public criticism. And people should know that the greatest triumph of justice is when a man is found guilty after the trial has been extremely fair and everything his lawyers could do has been done. First of all, he did not get the services of the lawyer he asked for,” Jethmalani said.
PAGE_BREAK
“Afzal’s brother has alleged that those campaigning for clemency are actually serving their own political ambitions. Do you doubt them?” Bhupendra Chaubey asked
“ No, it’s not that,” Tabassum.
“In a book written by Geelani and lawyer Nandita Haksar, they seem to suggest that they are fighting the case not on fact but on ideology,” said Bhupendra Chaubey.
Geelani rejected this. “One of the 9/11 accused was recently given a verdict about his case in America. He wasn’t given a death penalty. The jury had taken into account his violent family background,” he said. “We are basing our case on facts.”
“But why talk of a difficult past. The question here is he is involved in the case. He was tried by the courts. We shouldn’t compare it with America. We have our own law and courts. We are all independent judiciary,” Kakkar said.
Has the clemency appeal been politicised
“The question is whether this man has been found guilty after a trial, which conforms to the standards of fairness required by the civilised Indian judicial system. My answer is no,” Jethmalani said.
Geelani rejected that by saying: “I don’t know what Jethmalani means by fair trial. Media, NGOs politicians have done it for their own benefit. They have spoilt his case.”
“Let me tell you that the HC and the SC can only re-appreciate the evidence. It is the trial court where you can examine and re-examine the evidence. And the whole case is constructed in the lower court. If Afzal has nobody to represent him, how could he build his defence?” Geelani said.
The President will make the final call, but the debate on Afzal’s punishment will be played in the streets of Delhi and in political circles.
Comments
0 comment