It is a fact that the suicide bombing in which Rajiv and 14 others were killed was carried out by a member of the Sri Lankan Tamil separatist organization Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) along with a few other terror organizations. Those convicted had a proven role in the bombing which was a direct attack on the national security of the country, successfully executed on the behest of foreign handlers. It was for the proven role of these convicts that the courts awarded them lifetime imprisonment, but the way their life sentences have been commuted raises several questions which have got difficult answers.
The meaning of life imprisonment is that those convicted have to die in a prison cell because of the crimes they have committed; a lifer is the least they can get. Here, we could argue: isn’t conspiring to kill the former Prime Minister of the country a grave crime and apart from being a grave crime, isn’t that a direct attack on the sovereignty and integrity of the country? Things become more serious when the element of the foreign conspiracy becomes clear, and that’s not just a speculation, but has been corroborated with evidence. Further, the behaviour of convicts is brought into consideration in cases where the crimes are not heinous and the quantum of punishment is less. But in Rajiv’s case, the opposite has been done.
The release of the convicts has been criticised by one side while the other has preferred silence—on the face of it. But the question remains and those questions would be asked again and again. Here, we could say that the move is going to have an impact on all the cases where life imprisonment has been awarded and there is not going to be any difference made in the cases of terror and otherwise. The questions will be raised on the validity of life imprisonment as well, leading to increased chances of judges going for the death penalty instead of life imprisonment: if the crimes turn out to be heinous. Lastly—and it is something that should worry us all—the pardon and letting the convicts walk free might have a different impact on the terror circles and the people who feed on the radicalization; they might interpret it differently, and persuade more youngsters to join them. By using special powers, one might ask, is the judiciary diluting deterrence? We hope the opposite is true.
