Friday, December 4, 2015

[Editorial # 4] Ending politics of remission

Ending politics of remission

The verdict of a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on legal questions relating to grant of remission to life convicts exposes the haste with which the Tamil Nadu government acted in February 2014 in seeking to release the seven persons serving life terms for plotting to assassinate Rajiv Gandhi in 1991. The court’s finding that the Central government has primacy in according remission to life convicts in a case of this nature is a political setback to Chief Minister Jayalalithaa. It was apparent that she wanted to be seen as a champion of Tamil rights rather than the stern opponent of terrorism that she was believed to be. In token compliance with a statutory requirement, she wrote to the Centre, giving just three days’ time for its opinion on their release. Alarmed by the thought of Rajiv Gandhi’s killers being freed, the then United Progressive Alliance government rushed to the Supreme Court to stall the process. Thus, the humanitarian question whether convicts who had only been accessories in the LTTE’s assassination plot should languish in prison even after 23 years was converted into a political issue. It became embroiled in technical questions that were referred to a Constitution Bench. The validity of the Tamil Nadu government’s decision will be decided separately by a regular bench.

However, the larger significance here is that the court has barred State governments from invoking their statutory remission power for the premature release of those sentenced by a High Court or the Supreme Court to a specified term above 14 years without remission. It has rejected the theory that every convict, even those facing life-long incarceration, will have to be offered a ‘ray of hope’, placing the interests of the victims of murder above those of the perpetrators. It indicates that those whose death sentences are altered to life terms will have to spend the rest of their life in prison. At the same time, it has kept a small door open for life convicts by declaring that one who had got the benefit of commutation of death sentence to life is not barred from getting remission from the executive. In any case, it has said the constitutional powers of the President and the Governor for grant of clemency remain untouched. The State government will now have to get the concurrence of the Centre in cases investigated by Central agencies before it can use its power of remission to release convicts. Also, the sentences they are undergoing must be for crimes relating to subjects falling under the Union government’s executive powers. The court rejected the idea that a State government can remit prison terms on its own without following the prescribed procedure. A lesson to be drawn from this episode is that the release of prisoners ought to be dealt with on merits on a case-by-case basis by following statutory procedures and not through whimsical or partisan acts of political misadventure.


Questions:

1. What is understood by the term Remission?
2. Is a convict facing a death penalty eligible to get his sentence Remitted?
3. What is LTTE?
4. How was Rajiv Gandhi killed?
5. Why were the killers of Rajiv Gandhi being released?  What were the grounds put forth by the proponents of their release?
6. Bring out the tussle between the Union and the State Government on this particular matter?
7. Are there any other instances of such Centre-State differences? If yes then what all?
8. Can Supreme Court arbitrate between Centre and State disputes? Where from does it draw its power to do so?

9 comments:

  1. 1. In the context of the article, the power to grant pardon, as envisaged in article 72 and 161 of the Indian constitution can only be achieved when they art attained with the sense of responsibility. the power of judicial review provides a check over this type of extraordinary power in the hands of the executive pillar of the Indian Democracy. the vital purpose for he creation of article 72 and 161 is to render a humanitarian tough to the extreme and ultimate rulings of the high court or supreme court. if these mercy power are not used in the humanitarian side , then the very purpose of such provisions will be defeated.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. the restoration power of state's for remission under section 432 and 433 of Criminal Procedure Code to release life convicts may be used for considering relief for those life convicts who have undergone prison term for 14 or more years. in this case, convicts have spent 16 years term in prison and peacefully (without committing any indiscipline or conflictual behavior) - said by their lawyers. according to available facts and figures, they are eligible for remission but the extreme power of "remission" comes along with the "sense of responsibility" in the hands of the executive organ of the constitution.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. 3. Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), commonly known as the Tamil Tigers is a militant organisation that has been waging violent secessionist campaign against the Sri Lankan government since the 1970's in order to create a separate Tamil state in north and east of Sri Lanka. Founded in 1975, the LTTE attracted many supporters amongst disenchanted Tamil youth, who were dissatisfied with policies followed by successive Sri Lankan governments towards solving various concerns of the country’s Tamil community.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 6. When any person has been sentenced to punishment for an offence, the appropriate Government may, at any time, without conditions or upon any conditions which the person sentenced accepts, suspend the execution of his sentence or remit the whole or any part of the punishment to which he has been sentenced.
    Whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the appropriate Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court before or by which the conviction was had or confirmed, to state his opinion as to whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion and also to forward with the statement of such opinion a certified copy of the record of the trial or of such record thereof as exists.
    As per the article 435 - state government to act after the consultation of the Center government. which involved the misappropriation or destruction of, or damage to, any property belonging to the Central Government.
    In the Indian Constitution, there are various provision and acts which are well defined to arrest any one government's dominating power over the other. above given are some of the mos important fields of contention between both the State and Union government.

    ReplyDelete
  7. 7. “Though the country and the people may be divided into different states for convenience of administration, the country is one integral whole, its people a single people living under a single imperium derived from a single source.” - Dr. B.R.Ambedkar, Chairman, Drafting Committee of the Constitution of India
    Democracy as well as federalism are a matter of degree, but the general tendency all over has been towards a stronger centre. This is possible if the states are provided with a federation that readily meets the approval of the constituents.
    there are various instances of disputes between state and center government since the inauguration of our constitution in 1950, such as -
    sandalwood smuggler encounter in andhra pradesh.
    babli project
    belgaum border dispute
    jalaput dam
    narmada river dispute for sardar patel dam
    godawari water dispute tribunal
    krishna river water dispute tribunal etc.

    Since centre is the custodian of all financial reserves, there are mostly financial disputes, especially when there are governors from the different party which is not in the state. disputes regarding the article 350 - 360. territorial disputes are very common in India. disputes regarding the "special status" category of any state is the other major concerns of the center government.
    SC plays a vital role to resolve most of their issues by keeping the constitution as cushion.



    ReplyDelete
  8. 7. “Though the country and the people may be divided into different states for convenience of administration, the country is one integral whole, its people a single people living under a single imperium derived from a single source.” - Dr. B.R.Ambedkar, Chairman, Drafting Committee of the Constitution of India
    Democracy as well as federalism are a matter of degree, but the general tendency all over has been towards a stronger centre. This is possible if the states are provided with a federation that readily meets the approval of the constituents.
    there are various instances of disputes between state and center government since the inauguration of our constitution in 1950, such as -
    sandalwood smuggler encounter in andhra pradesh.
    babli project
    belgaum border dispute
    jalaput dam
    narmada river dispute for sardar patel dam
    godawari water dispute tribunal
    krishna river water dispute tribunal etc.

    Since centre is the custodian of all financial reserves, there are mostly financial disputes, especially when there are governors from the different party which is not in the state. disputes regarding the article 350 - 360. territorial disputes are very common in India. disputes regarding the "special status" category of any state is the other major concerns of the center government.
    SC plays a vital role to resolve most of their issues by keeping the constitution as cushion.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Most of the disputes you have mentioned are disputes between two or more states and NOT specifically between the Centre and the States. There are three broader areas where there are differences in the Centre-State relationship -- administrative, legislative and financial. Whenever you come across such news you should be noting it down as an example of such differences.

      Delete