To Hang Or Not To Hang

By Amir Zia
The News
October 30, 2012

Terrorists, murderers, kidnappers, robbers, narcotics’ smugglers and rapists are among the main beneficiaries of the government’s “pro-human rights stance,” which ironically added another contradiction and dichotomy in the country’s dysfunctional prosecution and legal system.

On October 10, key national dailies carried advertisements sponsored by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), urging the government to abolish the death penalty. The advertisements were meant to mark the international day against the irreversible capital sentence, which has been scrapped by around 140 countries across the world.
The same day, news of the assassination bid on 14-year-old Malala Yousafzai, in which she and two of her friends were wounded, dominated the national and international media. The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) – responsible for killing thousands of civilians and security personnel in recent years – was quick to take responsibility for the attack that shook the entire nation. The child was deemed fit for murder under the TTP’s controversial interpretation of Islam because she was seen as a collaborator of the United States by the so-called holy warriors.
With other reports of murders and routine crime that day, this newspaper also carried a small news item of vigilante justice on its Karachi pages – a report on a mob killing a suspected robber with sticks and iron rods. In recent years, there have been several such incidents in the country in which angry mobs spontaneously dispensed punishment to the alleged criminals. Reports of people killing under-trial suspects inside court premises to avenge alleged murders or the kidnappings of women also remain a common phenomenon.
The key reason for such outrage underlines the bitter reality that many people do not see justice taking its due course. Street wisdom says that even heinous crimes go unpunished in most cases as poor investigation and lack of evidence weaken the prosecution, which remains unable to prove the guilt beyond the shadow of a doubt. Justice is not just delayed, but denied. Yes, the proverbial long arms of the law often prove too weak when money, power and threats swing into action.
Therefore, many people prefer to settle scores on their own. Our society’s deep-rooted feudal and tribal system and its code of honour glorify private vendetta. This trend is restricted not just to rural areas, but has its buyers in urban centres as well. The situation has been further complicated thanks to the ill-conceived moratorium on executions by the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP)-led government since early 2008 in a country where more than 16,000 people have been killed in sectarian, religious, political and ethnic-related violence and terrorism during this period.
Terrorists, murderers, kidnappers, robbers, narcotics’ smugglers and rapists are among the main beneficiaries of the government’s “pro-human rights stance,” which ironically added another contradiction and dichotomy in the country’s dysfunctional prosecution and legal system.
No wonder Pakistani prisons now boast the world’s highest population of death-row convicts, numbering more than 8,000. The government stopped prison authorities from executing the court orders, but did nothing to remove the self-created contradiction in the law and its practice.
A close aide of President Asif Ali Zardari – who under the constitution wields power “to grant pardon, reprieve, respite, remit, suspend or commute any sentence passed by any court, tribunal or other authority,” – admits that the moratorium provide the two parties, the victim and the perpetuator of a crime, time for rapprochement. In a nut-shell, the state’s inaction gives a chance to the convict to pressurise the victims or their families to make deals through threat or lure of money.
The Islamic laws of Qisas and Diyat – originally conceived by former military ruler Gen Ziaul Haq – are often misused to help convicts buy freedom. The government, instead of fixing the flaws of the investigation, and the prosecution and legal systems to ensure speedy justice, has adopted a controversial way to appease the small section of rights activists and the European Union, which are at the forefront of the anti-death penalty campaign.
The government, however, is unable to fulfill the demand of abolishing the death penalty, which can be granted on 27 crimes under Pakistani law. The main reason: resistance from Islamic parties that see any such move as being in violation to Islam, and a bitter opposition by three provincial governments – barring the Sindh government. As a result, the country now has a hotchpotch system under which the death penalty exists only on paper – at least as long as this government stays in power.
The inconsistency in the law and its practice is fuelling lawlessness, crime and terrorism as the state remains unable to prosecute cases against known killers and terrorists and unwilling to move against convicts already given death sentences. Many legal and security experts believe that the capital punishment serves as a key deterrent to crime, though rights activists say that the state has no right to inflict irreversible punishment, which they argue is mostly given to the poor after prolonged legal process – often lasting for a decade or more. They argue that corruption and a flawed investigation system deprive a citizen of fundamental right to life without conclusively establishing the guilt.
But should criminals get blanket cover due to flaws in a system? Why not make it just and efficient so that any person – regardless of class or social background – gets equal treatment under the law. The local anti-death penalty campaigners and their foreign allies fail to take into account Pakistan’s objective conditions, which make it a very different case from those countries that banned this practice.
These differences are not just at the level of development, education and historical evolution, but also due to the erosion of the state writ in recent years and the rise of private militias and the armed groups, which are now directly confronting and undermining the state.
In a country where the life, property and honour of law-abiding citizens remain unsafe, it may look absurd to many to hear voices demanding a European Union-like compassionate approach in dealing with perpetuators of atrocious crimes and terrorism. Certainly, the countries that have abolished the death penalty do not witness 16,000 killings in political, ethnic, religious and terrorist violence in just four years. In their part of the world, militants do not shoot girls for demanding education or brainwash children to become suicide bombers.
What Pakistan requires is the implementation of laws. Any attempts to further blunt an already inefficient justice system will result in more chaos and lawlessness. Sometimes in history, even bad laws are considered better than lawlessness. Today’s Pakistan has slipped into this very abyss of disorder and turmoil and needs effective implementation of laws on a war footing.
One should not doubt the sincerity of human rights activists, but unfortunately the time for their “Great Idea” has not come yet in this land of the pure where any opinion poll will show that the majority want perpetuators of heinous crime taken to task. The sooner the government realises this and takes a stand for the supremacy of the law, the better for the people and the country.