9 ms·

According to AlJazeera, Afzal Guru is just a "Kashmiri separatist". I guess they missed the part where he was convicted for attacking the Indian parliament[1].

According to AlJazeera, Afzal Guru is just a "Kashmiri separatist". I guess they missed the part where he was convicted for attacking the Indian parliament[1]. Interesting that Amnesty International questioned the way he was tried and punished[2]. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Indian_Parliament_attack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Indian_Parliament_attack 2. https://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/india-new-execution-points-worrying-and-regressive-trend-2013-02-09 https://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/india-ne...

xrisk 6y ago
Also interesting that they did not find a shred of evidence in that case. In fact the order mentioned that he was convicted to placate the “conscience of the nation”.
- ninjahatori1 6y ago
  when was he hanged?
- sbmthakur 6y ago
  Supreme court had concluded that he arranged logistics and explosives for the attackers. I am not sure how they arrived at that conclusion without a "shred of evidence". https://scroll.in/article/805427/the-quick-guide-to-sar-gilani-afzal-guru-and-the-2001-parliament-attack-case https://scroll.in/article/805427/the-quick-guide-to-sar-gila...
  - xrisk 6y ago
    I meant that all the evidence was circumstantial, which was admitted by even the court.
    - djsumdog 6y ago
      Isn't this the entire reason we need groups like Amnesty International present, or do you think they're bias/compromised as well?
    - arjun1296 6y ago
      What do you mean by circumstantial? He was a trained militant that dropped out of medical college who went to Pakistan for militancy training to wage ware against the sovereign state of India. He had knowledge of the criminal conspiracy and arranged logistical support to terrorists. I don't think he was innocent. But I don't think he deserved capital punishment. The likes of Amnesty International was involved in proselytizing him as revolutionary hero and that was totally uncalled for. No wonder they are being investigated.
      - srean 6y ago
        He was pretty much made a scapegoat. Yes he was a terrorist but a repatriated one. India had a policy of bringing youth who have gone the terrorism way, served their sentence et be brought back into the folds of civil political society. Afzal Guru was such a case. Also as mentioned by police high ups who oversaw his case he was a pushover (actual words used "bhondu"). This all turned very convenient for the administration that was under pressure to show progress on the investigation. The circumstantial evidence found on him related to the parliament attack are of such nature that could easily have been planted by the police (specific example, a scarp of paper with the terrorist handlers phone number found on his person). Planting of evidence is quite common and rote in India. Judges with a spine discount those. In this case the justice bench didn't -- because the theatre was too important compared to a pushover reformed erstwhile terrorist.
      - detaro 6y ago
        > The likes of Amnesty International was involved in proselytizing him as revolutionary hero and that was totally uncalled for. Source? The Amnesty International link upthread about his execution does nothing like that, but is criticism of a) the law under which he was sentenced and b) that and how the execution was done (which AI is strongly opposed to and criticizing everywhere) FWIW, this sounds quite similar to criticism of orgs like them in the west when people also can't understand why they'd defend bad people
- xrisk 6y ago
  “The incident, which resulted in heavy casualties, had shaken the entire nation and the collective conscience of the society will only be satisfied if the capital punishment is awarded to the offender.”: [1] [1] https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/parliament-attack-2001-what-sc-said-when-it-upheld-death-for-afzal-guru/ https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/parliament-attac...
murukesh_s 6y ago
But Afzal was hanged when India was ruled by Congress. And all parties including Far left supported it. So that case cannot be used to measure judiciary sleeping with present government.
- sbmthakur 6y ago
  My comment did not talk about the judiciary. It was more about just calling Afzal Guru a separatist. I don't think the judiciary is sleeping with the government. In recent times, they have given verdicts like the decriminalization of homosexual relationships and abolishing of Triple Talaq. I do agree that they should be more proactive. One reason for them being a bit soft on the government is that the current government has stuff like NJAC in their arsenal, which threatens to dilute the power of the judiciary. While NJAC was declared unconstitutional by the SC some years back, the current leadership can still bring it back by mobilizing support for it.

xrisk 6y ago

Also interesting that they did not find a shred of evidence in that case. In fact the order mentioned that he was convicted to placate the “conscience of the nation”.

ninjahatori1 6y ago
when was he hanged?
sbmthakur 6y ago
Supreme court had concluded that he arranged logistics and explosives for the attackers. I am not sure how they arrived at that conclusion without a "shred of evidence". https://scroll.in/article/805427/the-quick-guide-to-sar-gilani-afzal-guru-and-the-2001-parliament-attack-case https://scroll.in/article/805427/the-quick-guide-to-sar-gila...
- xrisk 6y ago
  I meant that all the evidence was circumstantial, which was admitted by even the court.
  - djsumdog 6y ago
    Isn't this the entire reason we need groups like Amnesty International present, or do you think they're bias/compromised as well?
  - arjun1296 6y ago
    What do you mean by circumstantial? He was a trained militant that dropped out of medical college who went to Pakistan for militancy training to wage ware against the sovereign state of India. He had knowledge of the criminal conspiracy and arranged logistical support to terrorists. I don't think he was innocent. But I don't think he deserved capital punishment. The likes of Amnesty International was involved in proselytizing him as revolutionary hero and that was totally uncalled for. No wonder they are being investigated.
    - srean 6y ago
      He was pretty much made a scapegoat. Yes he was a terrorist but a repatriated one. India had a policy of bringing youth who have gone the terrorism way, served their sentence et be brought back into the folds of civil political society. Afzal Guru was such a case. Also as mentioned by police high ups who oversaw his case he was a pushover (actual words used "bhondu"). This all turned very convenient for the administration that was under pressure to show progress on the investigation. The circumstantial evidence found on him related to the parliament attack are of such nature that could easily have been planted by the police (specific example, a scarp of paper with the terrorist handlers phone number found on his person). Planting of evidence is quite common and rote in India. Judges with a spine discount those. In this case the justice bench didn't -- because the theatre was too important compared to a pushover reformed erstwhile terrorist.
    - detaro 6y ago
      > The likes of Amnesty International was involved in proselytizing him as revolutionary hero and that was totally uncalled for. Source? The Amnesty International link upthread about his execution does nothing like that, but is criticism of a) the law under which he was sentenced and b) that and how the execution was done (which AI is strongly opposed to and criticizing everywhere) FWIW, this sounds quite similar to criticism of orgs like them in the west when people also can't understand why they'd defend bad people
xrisk 6y ago
“The incident, which resulted in heavy casualties, had shaken the entire nation and the collective conscience of the society will only be satisfied if the capital punishment is awarded to the offender.”: [1] [1] https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/parliament-attack-2001-what-sc-said-when-it-upheld-death-for-afzal-guru/ https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/parliament-attac...

murukesh_s 6y ago

But Afzal was hanged when India was ruled by Congress. And all parties including Far left supported it. So that case cannot be used to measure judiciary sleeping with present government.

sbmthakur 6y ago
My comment did not talk about the judiciary. It was more about just calling Afzal Guru a separatist. I don't think the judiciary is sleeping with the government. In recent times, they have given verdicts like the decriminalization of homosexual relationships and abolishing of Triple Talaq. I do agree that they should be more proactive. One reason for them being a bit soft on the government is that the current government has stuff like NJAC in their arsenal, which threatens to dilute the power of the judiciary. While NJAC was declared unconstitutional by the SC some years back, the current leadership can still bring it back by mobilizing support for it.