When the designated TADA court in Poonamallee delivered its judgement in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination trial, it effectively saluted the Indian investigative and legal system. The uncovering of the circumstances leading to the murder of the former prime minister, and of 17 others, on May 21, 1991, was a task of extraordinary magnitude.It was accomplished most successfully by the Central Bureau of Investigation's special investigation team (SIT). Credit is also due to Judge V. Navaneetham, who has delivered what is likely to be the most important verdict of his career. His work could not have been made easier courtesy the enormous media and political interest in the case.Nevertheless, the judgement has raised some disturbing questions. The SIT's chargesheet named 41 conspirators. Of these 12 are dead and three - including V. Prabhakaran, the LTTE chief - are absconding. Each of the 26 in custody has been sentenced to death. If a record has been set, it is certainly a dubious one. Capital punishment is the ultimate weapon in the state's armoury. It is not evoked in every case of murder and, indeed, recommended only for the rarest of rare cases - for crimes of unimaginable morbidity. There is no denying Rajiv's assassination was more than just culpable homicide. It sought to pre-empt and subvert governmental policy and amounted to a war against the state.Even so, to send 26 people to the gallows for one murderous crime does appear an overreaction. As the court itself admits, the 26 had varying roles to play and, therefore, varying degrees of guilt. In a sense, unequal crimes may have been treated as equally culpable. This is a crucial point for legal and civil society to ponder. What the Poonamallee judgement will do is reopen the old debate about capital punishment. Nuclear powers often argue that the very presence of the ultimate weapon is a better deterrent than its (over)use. There may be a legal analogy here.Published By: AtMigration Published On: Feb 9, 1998--- ENDS ---
