Rajiv Gandhi’s killers cannot roam the streets
The Union Government has rightly asserted that there is no scope for mercy to those who assassinated a former Prime Minister. The suicide bombing that killed Rajiv Gandhi in 1991 also claimed the lives of 18 others, and showing leniency to any of the convicts in this case will send out a wrong message. Already, there is a perception that terrorists can get away with bombing buses and trains, market places and court houses in India — attacks that have claimed hundreds of lives over the years.
The last thing India needs is to signal that even those who kill heads of Government can get away with serving a few years behind bars. Deterrence is the key, and even those who argue that incarcerating Rajiv Gandhi's killers for life does not dissuade others from committing acts of terror, will agree that it is in the interest of justice that the convicts serve their full sentence — which, in this case, initially included the death penalty. This principle is equally applicable to Yakub Memon who has been convicted in the 1993 Mumbai bomb blasts. There is simply no ground for forgiveness or compassion for those who engage in the indiscriminate, large-scale killing of innocents, and the Supreme Court has done well to reject Memon's mercy plea.
The current debate over Rajiv Gandhi's killers started last year when the Government of Tamil Nadu sought to use its executive powers to release the seven convicts, after the Supreme Court commuted their death penalties to life sentences. The State Government argued that the convicts had already spent 23 years in prison and should be released on humanitarian grounds.
This line of argument gained some leverage with Rajiv Gandhi's widow and daughter also saying that they had made peace with the killers. Touching as those gestures may have been, personal decisions to forgive perpetrators should not be allowed to determine decisions of the state — even when the individuals involved are powerful members of the polity. Moreover, the State Government's desire to free the killers is not entirely above board. It will be naïve to assume that the decision has been driven entirely by humanitarian concerns and that it is not an effort to pander to that small group of Tamil voters who sympathise with the convicts.
Generally speaking, if a convict serving a life sentence has completed 14 years in prison, then the State Government has the authority to free that convict. last year, when the Tamil Nadu Government sought to exercise this power, the Centre intervened and the Supreme Court stayed the former's decision. The apex court also framed seven questions relating to the powers of the State and Union Government in a situation where the investigation has been done by Central agencies, the possibility of remitting a life sentence that comes after remitting a death sentence, and other related matters. These issues are now being taken up by a five-member Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice of India Hl Dattu.