Opinion - News Analysis   

The case for Sarabjit Singh’s release

The late Dorab Patel, a former Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, used to say that if he had to be a judge again he would never award the death penalty. His reasons: human fallibility and faulty legal systems that discriminate against the poor. As he emphasised, a human life can never be brought back once it is taken.

Justice Patel, who resigned from office in 1981 in protest against General Zia ul Haq’s military rule, was a founding member of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. The HRCP, like other credible international organisations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, took a stand that reinforces the principled position against the death penalty. At its first convention in 1986 the HRCP passed three resolutions making three demands: hold elections, abolish the separate electorate system, and abolish the death penalty.

Unfortunately, Pakistan remains among the 62 countries that continue to retain and use the death penalty, compared to the 135 that have abolished this form of punishment in law or practice. The HRCP, in its report Slow march to gallows (2007), records a staggering number of prisoners awaiting execution in Pakistan: over 7,400 men and 36 women. Most of them are poor. Some were under-age at the time of the alleged crime. Pakistan was among the six countries (along with China, Iran, Iraq, Sudan and the United States) that accounted for 91 per cent of the 1,591 executions reported in 25 states in 2006, according to Amnesty International.

The death penalty does not deter crime more than other punishments do, notes Amnesty. The homicide rate has fallen by 40 per cent since 1975 in Canada, where the death penalty for murder was abolished in 1976. On December 18, 2007, the U.N. General Assembly passed a resolution — by a wide margin — seeking a worldwide moratorium on executions. The resolution has since been opposed and the debate will continue in the session in September 2008.

Since 1973, thanks to advances in DNA-based evidence gathering, 126 death row prisoners in America have been released after being found innocent. In countries such as Pakistan and India, with their flawed investigative and legal systems, the odds against each other’s prisoners are even greater — especially when they are accused of acts of terrorism.

The HRCP noted in a recent press release: “The relations between India and Pakistan have long affected the entire population of South Asia. One of the factors contributing to tensions between the two neighbours is the horrible treatment they mete out to one another’s prisoners.”

Sarabjit Singh was convicted of espionage and terrorism: bomb blasts in Lahore, Kasur and Faisalabad that killed 14 people in 1990. Fifteen years later, in 2006, the Supreme Court upheld the death sentence awarded in 1991. A life sentence is for 14 years. Sarabjit Singh has already served 18 years in prison, mostly on death row.

The high-profile release on March 3 of another Indian, Kashmir Singh, convicted of espionage, had raised hopes for other such prisoners. Pakistan’s unconditional and unilateral release of Kashmir Singh was a magnanimous gesture that raised expectations of India’s reciprocation. Caretaker Minister for Human Rights Ansar Burney said as much, talking to journalists at the Wagah border post after bidding Kashmir Singh an emotional farewell.

Although no one conveyed these expectations through “proper” channels, New Delhi could have moved beyond the existing system under which prisoners are occasionally released and exchanged, such as fishermen who stray across the maritime border. After all, Kashmir Singh’s release was not part of that inadequate mechanism either.

Unfortunately, soon after arriving in India Kashmir Singh admitted having spied for his country. He was apparently upset at finding his family living in poverty, uncared for by the ‘sarkar’ for which he had sacrificed so much, even getting circumcised in order to escape detection in Pakistan. He soon retracted his admission but the damage was done. Still, even if he was guilty, his 35-year captivity should be considered punishment enough.

To make matters worse, a week after Kashmir Singh walked free across the Wagah border, garlanded and feted, New Delhi sent across a coffin containing the body of undertrial Pakistani prisoner Khalid Mehmood who had died on February 12, 2008. India denied torture, and listed the hospitals where the prisoner was treated but without mentioning the nature of his ailment (it was cirrhosis of the liver, according to an Indian High Commission official in Islamabad who stated this in response to a query later).

Indian authorities say they informed Pakistan of Mehmood’s death the same day but received the family’s request for the body to be transported to Pakistan for burial only three weeks later. However, India’s denials of torture are met sceptically by human rights activists, given the country’s track record — which is no better than Pakistan’s. In any case, the timing could not have been worse for Sarabjit Singh.

Shortly afterwards, he received a ‘black warrant’ for his execution date. This was issued “in routine” and not in retaliation for Mehmood’s death, maintains Sarabjit Singh’s lawyer, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, Rana Abdul Hameed. However, he adds that now it is a “matter between two governments that they need to sort out as a humanitarian issue.”

The governments are clearly aware of this aspect. On March 19, Pakistan granting a month’s reprieve to Sarabjit Singh coincided with India’s release of a Pakistani prisoner, Jamal Qurashi of Sukkur, acquitted just two days earlier of a counterfeit currency case in Uttar Pradesh in 2005. Institutional mechanisms to facilitate prisoners are already under way, like a much needed Agreement on Consular Access (both governments are currently slow to grant consular access to prisoners). A newly formed Joint Judicial Committee on Prisoners met recently in New Delhi and will meet again in Pakistan in April.

Executing Sarabjit Singh will derail this process and kill all hope for other prisoners, whether they are guilty or innocent. Pakistan spontaneously released Kashmir Singh outside the existing formal mechanisms. Any reciprocal gestures by India will go a long way towards improving relations and clearing the bad blood created by Khalid Mehmood’s death. Meanwhile, Sarabjit Singh’s sister and two young daughters have appealed to President Musharraf and the new government in Pakistan to allow them to meet him. Even better, spare his life.

On March 20, another Indian prisoner died in Pakistan. Laxman Kanji, a young fisherman from Gujarat, who was among a dozen arrested in 2006 for trespassing into Pakistani waters. Prison authorities at the Malir Jail on the outskirts of Karachi said he had been complaining of stomach pain for 10 days and was shifted to the prison hospital when his condition deteriorated. According to one newspaper report, some 430 Indian prisoners currently languish in Pakistani prisons. Many do not have consular access or proper legal aid.

(The writer is a freelance journalist and documentary filmmaker currently based in Karachi. Email: beena.sarwar@gmail.com )

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Politics of polarisation
A worthwhile mission
Tibet issue and the Indian reaction
Deconstructing tourism image of Goa
The case for Sarabjit Singh’s release
Creating thought-tools for the times
Taslima’s exit
Reprieve for Sarabjit
On Bhagat Singh
Reducing stress

Copyright © 2008, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu