The Amnesty International, the world's human rights watch body, has slammed the Centre's decision to allow execution of two prisoners - Devinder Pal Singh Bhullar and Mahendra Nath Das.
Referring to reports on President Pratibha Patil's decision to reject the mercy petitions of the two condemned prisoners, accepting the recommendations of the Union Home Ministry, Amnesty International's Asia-Pacific Director Sam Zarifi said in a statement on Friday: "reports that India will execute two men after an encouraging seven-year hiatus are hugely disappointing, and would be a step backwards for human rights in the country."
"For India to revive capital punishment now would also be bucking the global trend towards abolition of the death penalty, with numbers of executions continuing to decline".
India's decision to approve the country's first executions since 2004 would be a blow to human rights, he added.
Bhullar was sentenced to death in 2001 for plotting terror attacks that killed nine people in Delhi in 1993. Das has been on death row since 1997 for committing a murder in Guwahati, Assam in 1996.
Although India voted against the resolution for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 2007, 2008 and 2010, President Patil had commuted the death sentences of 20 prisoners since November 2009, an Amnesty report claimed.
The last execution in India was carried out in Kolkata jail in August 2004 when one Dhananjoy Chatterjee was hanged for raping and killing a school girl.
Keywords: Death sentence, mercy petitions, Amnesty International
An eye for an eye may not be a solution, but for people who won't stop even after getting your other eye too, it's better for them to be terminated. Proposition for punishment may not stop crime, but a lack of it will definitely increase crime. India uses Capital punishment only in the rarest of rare cases, and almost all of them get reviewed by the High Court, Supreme Court and the President. That they weren't pardoned at any level shows the degree of seriousness of their crimes. This Mahendra Nath Das killed a guy, when he was out on bail in another murder case. Had he been hanged earlier, that guy could have been living by now. So people at Amnesty and the people supporting them, keep doing your job while the Hangman does his. Had these people shared the level compassion you're showering them with, they wouldn't have committed the crime at the first place.
I agree with all the comments made here against capital punishment.
But then how many criminals should we hold in jail and as a tax payer should I keep paying for their well being? Recently there was news about Rs 45 crore having been spent already on the "safe keeping" of Kasab. If this man is not given the death penalty and goes on to live for another 50 odd years....
The amnesty International must come up with some innovative ideas to take care of these criminals.
An eye for an eye is a concept abhorrent to civilized society. Legalised killing of killers is based on this concept even though it is claimed that it is only meant to be a deterrent to future crimes. Countries which have done away with capital punishment have not seen increase in murders and this excuse is invalid. It is time that we in India lived up our claim of being a civilized nation by banning capital punishment.
The verdict from highest office shows that Indian people get the representatives they deserve, who are completely out of touch with sensible human thinking that is sweeping across the globe.
I hope Indian authorities do not execute these prisoners. The death penalty does not deter crime, but brutalizes and degrades our society. Evidence of this is in the USA, where capital punishment is common and yet the nation has the highest crime rate and the highest incarceration rate than any other country in the world. Vengeance has never delivered peace.
Please Email the Editor