May 05, 2010
Why Mohammad Ajmal Amir should be sentenced to 'saza-e-maut'
Mohd. Ajmal Amir (aka Kasab) was found guilty of waging war against India and his sentence will be delivered tomorrow.
The prosecution has argued for the death penalty while the defence has claimed that he was a pawn in the larger scheme of things.
I have no specific views for or against the death penalty, but in this specific instance, India is much better off if he is sentenced to death (section 302 of the IPC) and the sentence carried out in a timely manner.
Imagine if he got life imprisonment and he escaped to Pakistan. Even worse, if there was another terror attack / hostage crisis and the demand was that 'Kasab' should be released in exchange for the hostages.
I don't have too much evidence in terms of previous hostage crises in India, but the 2 instances that come to mind, Rubaiya Sayeed and IC 814, don't inspire any sort of confidence.
In passing, if only the Mumbai suburban railway strike had happened on 26 November 2008!
Labels: death penalty, mumbai terrorism 200811, terrorism
Posted @ 4:28 PM
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
| | ]
Add/View 5 comment(s)

April 01, 2009
A defence lawyer for Mohd. Ajmal Amir Iman
The trial of Mohammad Ajmal Amir Iman (aka Kasab) could be jeapordized by the Shiv Sena's stupid, unwarranted and illegal protest against Anjali Waghmare, who was appointed by the special court as the defence lawyer.
I quote from section 304 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
304. Legal aid to accused at State expense in certain cases.
304. Legal aid to accused at State expense in certain cases.
(1) Where, in a trial before the Court of Session, the accused is not represented by a pleader, and where it appears to the Court that the accused has not sufficient means to engage a pleader, the Court shall assign a pleader for his defence at the expense of the State.
(2) The High Court may, with the previous approval of the State Government, make rules providing for
(a) the mode of selecting pleaders for defence under subsection (1);
(b) the facilities to be allowed to such pleaders by the Courts;
(c) the fees payable to such pleaders by the Government, and generally, for carrying out the purposes of sub-section (1).
(3) The State Government may, by notification, direct that, as from such date as may be specified in the notification, the provisions of sub-sections (1) and (2) shall apply in relation to any class of trials before other Courts in the State as they apply in relation to trials before Courts of Session.
It is fairly obvious here that what the special court did, and what Anjali Waghmare is tasked with doing, are completely compliant with the law. Yet, should we be surprised that the Shiv Sena, which has
always broken the law, is at it again?
By opposing the appointment of a defence lawyer, the trial will take even more time, increasing the danger to Mohd. Ajmal Amir Iman's life. I really hope that Anjali Waghmare, or whoever else the court appoints in case she withdraws, doesn't get cowed down by these goondas. If the accused doesn't get a lawyer, it would give Pakistan a lot of scope to rubbish the trial, wonder about whether a Pakistani citizen will get justice and question India's judicial system. While that'd be very rich coming from a country which has
signed away its political & judicial rights over Swat, it would be a fair comment. Now
that is the last thing I'd like to see - Pakistan passing judgement over India's judicial system!
At this point in time, Mohd. Ajmal Amir Khan has been charged with various crimes. That doesn't automatically make him guilty. He most certainly has a right to a fair trial, and be represented by a lawyer.
Where was the Shiv Sena when Ram Jethmalani, who had represented Haji Mastan, Indira Gandhi's assassins & Harshad Mehta, was made Law Minister in the NDA government of which they were a part?
Jethmalani later represented Manu Sharma, Ketan Parikh, Sanjay Dutt, Jayalalitha, Lalu Prasad Yadav, SAR Geelani, etc. Was he wrong in doing so? Of course not. As a professional, he did the right thing. Did he endanger the country by defending these people? I don't think so. He perhaps enhanced the judicial system's reputation. If his arguments were so convincing and if the prosecution's case was so weak that the accused got away, then why fault him for it?
If the Shiv Sena has a problem with section 304 and does not want it to be applied for trials involving acts of terrorism/war against the state or wants that it should only apply for Indian citizens, it should begin a campaign to change the law or promise that if the NDA came to power, the party would force a change in the law.
That is one of the main problems we have. A lot of people, especially those in power or those wielding power without authority, don't realize that you have to function within the ambit of the law that exists at that point in time. If you disagree with what the law says, work to change it! Don't impose your preferences on others. Drive the change
that you want to see!
Labels: legal, mumbai terrorism 200811
Posted @ 1:34 AM
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
| | ]
Add/View 1 comment(s)

February 08, 2009
Pakistan's great game
Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, the owner & administrator of Pakistan's largest & most famous EOU is set free by the Islamabad High Court. Dr. Khan, the poor metallurgist unfairly blamed for transfer of some atoms to Iran, North Korea & Libya, and thus Pakistan's nuclear proliferation record has been mentioned several times here.
I still think I gave a good suggestion around 2.5 years ago when I mentioned that India should provide medical treatment to Dr. Khan, who was (is?) suffering from prostrate cancer. Of course now, with the state of diplomacy, that's just impossible.
On a side note, and without any intention to offend those who do suffer from that form of cancer, shouldn't everyone who repeatedly does namaskarams at various places of worship (and in front of Jayalalitha) also get affected by prostrate cancer?
Reports suggest that
Pakistan will file cases against Pakistanis involved in the attacks in Mumbai. If this is true, will India allow Mohammad Ajmal Amir Iman (aka Qasab/Kasab/whatever) to be trialled (& jailed) in Pakistan?
Wouldn't that be a great opportunity for him to be bumped off? Ok, even if he doesn't actually get killed, they could just say "He escaped", just like Masood Azhar?
I see something developing here - Pakistan, a country that wants the UN to help investigate
Benazir Bhutto's assassination and which has absolutely no control over Balochistan, Swat & FATA (accounting for 47% of the country's land area), reckons that it actually has a judicial & legal system in place to try a terror attack in
another country. Someone help me understand this!
A moronic member of the USA Congress gives another great option - the
International Court of Justice.
I have always had
hatred for Narendra Modi, but I don't see why him
questioning whether it was possible for the attacks to be conducted at that scale & precision without local support implies he is weakening India's stand. It is
very highly likely there was local involvement. The arrests of those responsible for the blasts in Bangalore last July indicate that there are enough folks potentially unconnected with Pakistan who're involved in terror attacks in India. Yet, does that allow Pakistan to get away with murder? Of course not, because the attacks were planned by Pakistan, the attackers were Pakistani and the attackers were backed by Pakistan.
Now that India is sure to rebuff attempts by Pakistan to get "Qasab" over there, Pakistan will just shrug and say: "Hey, we're more than helping out. India isn't responding!". That increases pressure on India to agree to either Pakistani or neutral jurisdiction.
This will coincide with election time in India and the focus will be lost. Regardless of whether a new dispensation takes charge, things'll basically have to start afresh. By then, the USA would be more than happy to
buy Pakistan's line that resolving Kashmir would result in a
Yaadon ki baarat like re-union for the estranged siblings - India & Pakistan.
As for Dr. Khan, I'm sure he'll have a great future making after-dinner speeches on entrepreneurship.
Labels: aq khan, india, mumbai terrorism 200811, pakistan, proliferation, terrorism
Posted @ 11:36 PM
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
| | ]
Add/View 0 comment(s)

January 29, 2009
Ed Royce - "Let the ICJ try Mumbai terrorists"
Ed Royce, a member of the USA Congress, has given a radical suggestion - that of trying the terrorists responsible for the terror attacks in Mumbai in November 2008 at the International Court of Justice.
He wants the terrorists to face trial in a court that his own country has little faith in. The USA has so far twice withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the ICJ - the compulsory jurisdiction in 1985 and the optional protocol in 2005.
Pakistan has now apparently come to the conclusion that the attacks were planned outside Pakistan. This implies two things: Pakistan isn't going to handover anyone anywhere, and hence there is no question of any chargesheet/trial.
The attacks in Mumbai were on Indian soil. Now that Pakistan isn't going to do anything about it, David Miliband's suggestion that Pakistan courts get into the act is obviously no longer applicable.
The time for subtle pressure on Pakistan is over. A trial by the ICJ is going to take forever, if at all Pakistan is a signatory/member state. If it isn't, we've been taken for a nice ride by Ed Royce. If it is, there're multiple ways to circumvent the ICJ's jurisdiction, one of them being a withdrawal. i.e. take the bat & ball and go home after scoring a duck!
Labels: mumbai terrorism 200811, pakistan, terrorism, usa
Posted @ 12:12 PM
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
| | ]
Add/View 0 comment(s)

January 06, 2009
You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours - Part 2
Richard Boucher, the Assistant Secretary of State in the government of the USA, was conferred the Hilal-e-Quaid-e-Azam award for his contribution to USA-Pakistan ties. This at a time when there's huge diplomatic pressure on Pakistan to act decisively & firmly to dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism in the country.
I fully expect we will be treated to verbose diplomatic speak which effectively translates to "Sorry India, we can't do anything about this Pakistani government except pray and hope you guys can forget about it and live together as part of one big happy family. These guys are acting on the terrorists! Promise! See, they even banned the organizations!".
Part 1 was when Pakistan conferred a 'Hilal-e-Pakistan' award to a retiring World Bank chief when the bank had just appointed someone to review Pakistan's complaint over the Baglihar dam dispute with India.
Labels: india, mumbai terrorism 200811, pakistan, terrorism, usa
Posted @ 12:39 AM
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
| | ]
Add/View 2 comment(s)

December 11, 2008
UN bans Jamaat-ud-Dawa, but will that be enough?
Earlier today, the UN Security Council announced that Jamaat-ud-Dawa was added to its list of banned entities as part of the requirements of resolution 1822 of the UNSC. The ban on the Jamaat-ud-Dawa, the organization formerly called the Lashkar-e-Toiba, also extends to Hafiz Saeed, the big boss of the LeT. It is interesting that China didn't opt to play spoilsport by using its veto.
Resolution 1373 requires all member states to "prevent and suppress the financing of terrorism, as well as criminalize the wilful provision or collection of funds for such acts". Clearly, the fact that the LeT & JuD have been having a nice fun time in Pakistan implies that Pakistan violated that resolution. In addition, Pakistan did nothing to prohibit its citizens or entities within its territory from making funds & other resources/service available to terrorists or terrorist organizations. Pakistan also provided a safe haven for the LeT & the JuD.
However, merely banning the organization means nothing. The LeT has been banned for a few years now and yet was operating & striking at will. SIMI and LTTE have also been banned for so many years now. That hasn't stopped them from spreading terror far and wide. Pakistan has been a victim as well. They claimed they'd banned the Tehreek-e-Taliban, which then blew up the Marriott in Islamabad!
The need of the hour is to ensure that the top leadership of the proscribed organizations is taken out of the equation, by arresting them or eliminating them. The second aspect is to ensure that the morale of the organization plumbs so low that there's no motivation amongst those left over to continue the 'jihad'. More importantly, terrorists must be held up as an example for what would happen when you go astray. There needs to be a mechanism which tells folks about why they shouldn't even sign up for terrorism in the first place, regardless of the 'root causes'.
Is the extra pressure from the US & other governments a result of foreign nationals, specifically citizens of the USA & UK, being targetted during the attacks? There've been several terrorist attacks in India over the past few years. Exactly what have we been waiting for? Was targetting foreigners the last straw? Have the terrorists & their (state) sponsors just made a very stupid mistake?
As an aside, in a couple of days, it will be the 7th anniversary of the attack on the Indian Parliament. Any plans?
Labels: india, mumbai terrorism 200811, pakistan, terrorism, united nations
Posted @ 9:09 PM
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
| | ]
Add/View 2 comment(s)

December 10, 2008
After "classical language status", its now time for demanding an NSG unit
Around this time last month, folks in Kerala were angry because Kannada and Telugu had been granted 'classical language' status. A month later, the outcome of the terror in Mumbai is that every single state in India would now demand an NSG unit. That's "National Security Guards", not the Nuclear Suppliers Group!
So far, I've already seen demands from Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Assam and Maharashtra. I wouldn't be surprised if others also pitched in. Having an NSG unit would then become a status symbol, much like having an IIT, IIM or IISc campus; a Microsoft, Wipro, TCS, Infosys or Reliance office; a dozen flyovers that do little to solve traffic problems; a metro rail system designed for today & not for 20 years hence; a Nehru stadium or a Mahatma (or even Uttamar) Gandhi road.
Labels: india, mumbai, mumbai terrorism 200811, nsg, symbolism, terrorism
Posted @ 10:59 PM
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
| | ]
Add/View 0 comment(s)

November 29, 2008
The next steps
Will summoning the ISI's boss achieve anything other than him bleating about lack of evidence etc? What next, take along Pakistani army folks when we're trying to flush out terrorists, and make sure they're with the Indian army folks all through lest there be accusations of planting of passports, currency, dry fruits, hate literature, etc.?
The despicable part is that this one is called Mumbai's 9/11. The attacks of 11/9 [:)] resulted in ~ 3000 people dying that day. From around the mid-80s (Operation Bluestar) & the riots following Indira Gandhi's assassination to after the 1993 Bombay blasts, there were major terrorist incidents just about every year, whether it was a bomb on an aircraft (Kanishka) or a kidnapping of a minister's daughter (Rubaiya Saeed), assassination of politicians (Longowal, Beant Singh, Rajiv Gandhi).
After 1993, there was a lull for a few years with a few sporadic attacks. Then a massacre in Chattisinhpura, blasts in Coimbatore, an attack on J&K's assembly, Parliament, Godhra & the resultant riots, attack on Akshardham, 5 bombings in Mumbai in a period of 5 months, Diwali blasts in Delhi, attacks in Varanasi, July 11 bombings in Mumbai ... I'm running out of breath. We've had far too many "9/11s".
There is a need to inculcate an understanding of being watchful without being hyper-sensitive. CNN-IBN reported yesterday that a grocer around Nariman House told them that a bunch of folks he'd not seen in the area earlier had bought 50,000 worth provisions from him in the last few days. Things like that should make you perk up and go to the police. Do what you have to do. If the police doesn't respond, then you could choose to go to a higher authority or drop the ball altogether. But individuals must do their bit.
The political establishment needs to do something about intelligence agencies. If they're not doing a good enough job, disband it. Shivraj Patil said yesterday when asked about prior-intelligence reports "Maalomaat to hote hain, lekin aise nahin maaloom hota hai ki kahan aur kab attack hoga". Next thing he'll want an invitation sent to his home by courier 2 weeks before an attack!
We also need to have a rethink about a government's primary responsibility. To me, it is securing the borders and ensuring the protection of the country's citizens. The secondary responsibilities are bijli, sadak, pani, roti, kapda, makan, etc. Right now the political establishment has a vested interest in making the secondary responsibilities appear as the primary responsibility.
If security needs to be stepped up at airports, railway stations, bus terminuses etc. and one of the deterrents is a higher charge for visitors, then we must be ready to pay the cost associated with security, in terms of time spent being frisked or the price of platform tickets. Over-crowded stations and bus terminuses are great places for terrorists to merge in with the populace. How many times has an airport been blasted? In contrast, how many times has a bus terminus or a railway station been a target?
There also needs to be a recognition that the locally-bred terrorists are now reasonably self-sufficient in terms of human resources that Pakistan's involvement in the attacks is likely to be more of a benefactor role, including providing arms & other resources.
There're just far too many easy ways for a terrorist to attack any place in India. How many times have airline or airport authorities insisted on seeing your photo id when you're taking a flight? How many times has the railway travel ticket examiner asked you to show your photo id when you've booked an e-ticket?
People in authority get away without the normal security procedures, because they're the privileged ones. What's the penalty for violating the Indian Passport Act and taking along a woman and boy claiming them to be family? Being expelled from the Lok Sabha when the Indian Passports Act prescribes a fine of (a piddly amount of) Rs. 5,000 and 2 years in jail!
Stop having exceptions in security procedures. Everyone is the same. Enforce the security procedures properly. Have close-circuit cameras at public places. There will be a cost to the residents, builders, tenants, owners, etc. But the cost is miniscule compared with the loss of human capital caused due to terrorist attacks occuring every six weeks.
I see now that the TV channels are having a field day bringing in experts to discuss what should be done. However my fear is that we think November 26 2008 isn't going to be repeated. I fear that there's another one, just around the corner, maybe as little as a week away.
In addition, I wonder if the reaction from the public and the media would have been had the target been a place like Chennai or Kolkota, which isn't a financial capital, nor the political capital, nor an IT capital, nor a religious centre. I fear, and I suspect I maybe right, that the reaction would have been a lot more muted, mainly because this would have been the first time Chennai or Kolkota (barring the 2002 attack on the US Consulate) was impacted by this nature of terrorism.
Mostly cross-posted from my reply to Mekin's post.
Labels: india, mumbai, mumbai terrorism 200811, security, terrorism
Posted @ 7:12 PM
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
| | ]
Add/View 1 comment(s)

November 27, 2008
Time to show your resilience and spirit again, Mumbai
After the blasts on 11 July 2006 in Mumbai, I wrote
Mumbai, please stop getting on with life. Cry! Become angry! Riot! Do something to let those in power know that they can't go off to sleep and let another terrorist attack happen, knowing well that the Mumbaikar's resilience and spirit will ensure that they don't get blamed in the end.
It isn't fair. The terrorists are cheats. It's only been
4 weeks since the last attack, not the
6 weeks that normally transpires. How can they
attack again so soon?How will the government react? This is how their cabinet meeting this morning will go.
- Two minutes silence for the dead
- Shivraj, please answer the following questions
- Any ministers injured or dead? No
- Any MPs injured or dead? No
- Any state CMs or ministers injured or dead? No
- Any MLAs injured or dead? No
- Any former PMs or CMs injured or dead? No
- Any 'important' politicians not belonging to the above list injured or dead? No
- Any film stars or cricketers injured or dead? No
- Any other important media, cultural or sports personalities injured or dead? No
- Right, we move on to the next item on the agenda.
I'd expect no better from the government, since like I mentioned after the attacks in New Delhi on 13 Sep:
In my opinion, the terrorists will keep getting away with these attacks as long as they target civilians. The moment a politician is affected, that's when the representatives will wake up and take action. We saw that with the Khalistan movement, especially after Indira Gandhi was assassinated. We also saw the stance taken by various parties against the LTTE after it assassinated Rajiv Gandhi.
Labels: india, mumbai, mumbai terrorism 200811, terrorism
Posted @ 7:56 AM
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
| | ]
Add/View 5 comment(s)
