Governance · Public Policy

State Funded Murder – Secrecy and Viability

The secret hanging of Afzal Guru shook the corridors of parliament once again, after the devastating attack on parliament happened in 2001. This time, the gallows have been used to heal the democratic pillars by thwarting the democracy to a greater extent. Guru, who was arrested from Srinagar, had been accused of supporting the attackers by providing them logistics, to carry a successful attack. It is far-flung from our human capabilities that we could understand the approach of authorities, be it government, judiciary and executive, in carrying away the due process of law which was promised to Afzal Guru. Ergo, it’s not advisable to talk about, what had actually happened with the guru, after he was arrested from Srinagar and taken back to Delhi till his moribund situation. It’s nothing but a filthy politics that works more horrendously than it seems like. Let us not entangle ourselves in concocting alleging, that must have been taken place, lest we have been. The question is not about why Afzal guru was hanged, rather it is about the way he was hanged. Is the national security that paramount that he even, did not allow to meet his wife and his child, who was waiting for his father’s last advise. The pertinent questions like, How far the state funded murder is viable in secrecy? Still being unanswered by the government. This question plays a major role in unearthing the fallacies that the government has done already, by not allowing guru to impose faith in the democracy. Why the hanging was kept clandestine cannot be evaluated unless, seen from a government’s perspective.

New Delhi came up with a reason of national security, before it could apprehend the silent sorrow cum protest in the cold waves of young Jammu and Kashmir. Yes, national security is one of the bulwark that the government could have produced, but should have been juxtaposed with the will of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. National security has always been a concern for New Delhi when such clandestine acts were being done. Regardless of the fact that in Kashmir this curfew is not new, as they have just ended their long battle with beefed up soldier’s boot. This concern would have been shown by a different method, had methods like intimidation to her wife and family been reached. By sending state officials to Afzal’s home and asking his wife and child to come to Delhi. This could be done by funding a funeral of him, for his family. Yes, if Afzal was a part of the 2001 attack on parliament than he avails comeuppance. New Delhi’s stance on this execution could lead to loss of some major fronts like, the pre-emptive measures could have been taken properly, there were other methods like to disclose, rejection of his mercy petition which was rejected two days prior to his execution. In this way, the government could have cleared its stance on mercy petition and its due process law. In a way, New Delhi could have produced prerogative on the Afzal of filing petition for the delay or asking the reasons for rejection. Nonetheless, Afzal mustered the faith of social conscience by imposing faith in democracy by saying “what happened to Ajmal Kasab would not happen to because, I am from Jammu and Kashmir and people across this country, I have faith in them”. The government reopened the wounds of JKLF Maqbool’s execution by giving Afzal the same treatment. It has again given an upper hand to Pakistan, to comment on matters related to Jammu and Kashmir and national integration. Also, Kashmiri’s are forced to believe that they do not live under the shades of democracy.

Kashmir and its cohesiveness with the rest of the India is becoming a distant dream. If this cohesiveness is to be given preference, than New Delhi should also take conscience of Kashmir into consideration, so that no laceration, messages to Kashmir. Execution in secrecy, of Afzal also depicted that how New Delhi is, to Kashmir, if seen from international stance. Government’s stance on national security is somehow seems logical and upright but this question of indifferent behavior would have never emerged, had distinct methods been adopted at least by informing his family. Then the question of national security comes into play, that it could motivate anti-social elements to thwart national integration and security. Political parties were heard saying “ Muslims have been targeted to please Hindus” nothing can be derogatory than this, to secular fabric. We also need to understand the fabric of our society that it is hard for government to take harsh measures, especially in dealing with matters of national integration and J&K. We do not know what happened in between with Afzal? Whether government did wrong, by hanging Afzal? But certainly, the way he was hanged is not viable. If government wants to protect the national integration in the first place. If such decisions are coming from elsewhere, should not be 2014 elections motivated. Therefore, How far is the state funded murder viable in secrecy?

About the Author

mayankMayank Sapre

Mayank is an ardent debater and a rationalist. He is pursuing integrated law program at Chanakya National Law University, Patna.

2 thoughts on “State Funded Murder – Secrecy and Viability

  1. I do agree with you as far as government (mis)handled the crisis in both Guru and Kasab case. You don’t have to feed terrorist, either work for rehabilitating them or kill them instantly. Nonetheless, they prove a burden to tax payer money.

    Weakest LINK

Leave a Reply