A HANGING IN SHADOWS: THE AFZAL GURU CONTROVERSY
Priyal Mehta , 4 th year, Amity Law School, affiliated to Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University,Dwarka New Delhi, IndiaAbstract
The execution of Afzal Guru, convicted for his involvement in the 2001 Indian Parliament attack, remains one of the most controversial and debated events in contemporary Indian history. This study delves into the multifaceted dimensions of Guru's trial, conviction, and eventual hanging, examining the legal, political, and societal implications surrounding the case. Through a critical analysis of court documents, media narratives, and public opinion, the study explores the questions of judicial fairness, political motivations, and the impact on India's democratic and legal institutions. By uncovering the complexities and contradictions of the case, this paper aims to provide a nuanced understanding of how justice, politics, and public perception intersected in the Afzal Guru controversy, raising broader questions about the rule of law and human rights in India.
Keywords
Indian Parliament attack, execution, judicial fairness
References
Death Penalty to Execute One Terrorist is to Reward Terrorism.(Session 8.1, Criminal Law, LAWASIA 2005 Conference, 22 March 2005) available at.http://www.nswccl.org.au/docs/pdf/speech%20glynn%202005.pdf
Afzal Guru: A chronology of events, available at http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/afzal-guru-achronology-of-events/article4396402.ece
Bakshi P.M., The Constitution Of India, 9th ed. 2009, Universal Law Publishing Co. Ltd., New Delhi.
Banerjee Sumanta, Of Criminals, Martyrs and Innocents available at http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4419020?uid=3738256&uid=2&uid=4&sid=211025703 03917
Bhargava Rajeev and Acharya Ashok, (eds.), Political Theory: An Introduction, 1st ed. 2008, Pearson Education, New Delhi.
Dr. Muralidhar S., Hang Them Now, Hang Them Not: India's Travails With The Death Penalty, 40 Journal of theIndian Law Institute (1998), p. 143
Dr. Puniyani Ram’, Hanging of Conscience: Case of Afzal Guru’. Available at http://www.countercurrents.org/puniyani260213.htm
Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238, 453 (1972) (Powell, J., dissenting) (quoting Lord Justice Denning, Minutes of Evidence, Royal Commission on Capital Punishment, 207 (1949-1953).
Garner Bryan A., Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th ed. 2009, Thomson Reuters, U.S.A.
Gonsalves Colin, “In Defence of Afzal”, Combat Law, Vol 5 Issue 5, Nov-Dec 2006.
Heywood Andrew, Key Concepts In Politics, 1st ed. 2000, Macmillan Press Ltd., Delhi.
Lawrence M Frederick, Punishing Hate: Bias Crimes under American Law, Harvard University Press, 2007, p. 163.
Marqusee Mike, “The State and the Right to Life”, The Hindu, 11.02.2007, New Delhi.
McDonnell Michael Thomas, The United States, International Law , and the Struggle Against Terrorism, Routledge Research in Terrorism and the Law.2010. USA and Canada.
Mitra Ashok, “The Hangman’s Call”, The Telegraph, February 22, 2013, The Telegraph, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.
Morris Lauren & Naidoo Vinay “Public Opinion And The Death Penalty:The Route To Abolition When The Road Is Blocked”
Pak terrorist-turned-author gets life imprisonment for Modinagar bus blast case of 1996, India Today, April 15, 2013.
Ramanathan Usha, The Disturbing Truth about an Execution, The Hindu, 13 March 2013.
Roy Arundhati, ‘Perfect Day for Democracy’ The Hindu , February 11, 2013.
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Universal Law Publishers, New Delhi.
Article Statistics
Downloads
Copyright License
Copyright (c) 2024 Priyal Mehta
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain the copyright of their manuscripts, and all Open Access articles are disseminated under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC-BY), which licenses unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is appropriately cited. The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, and so forth in this publication, even if not specifically identified, does not imply that these names are not protected by the relevant laws and regulations.