I'm puzzled by the goings on over the past few days in our country. I was under the impression that we're a matured people who understand the various aspects of life thanks to our legacy of a rich and tolerant heritage and culture. Let me spell out my misgivings:-
(a) Hanging of Afzal Guru.
The person who'd conspired to carry out a terror strike on our Parliament deserved to die. And the government went about it in a systematic manner to deliver justice. But what I was unprepared for was the politicisation of the entire thing. The media went overboard to hold panel discussions to ferret out the pros and the cons, which would have been appropriate at a later stage. And some of the guys who'd participated in those discussions just went overboard in their expression, forgetting the decorum.
We need to be sensitive about the fact that his family is grieving and respect their sentiments too.
(b) The utterances of a judge.
Justice R Basant(Retd) of the Kerala High Court, who's currently practising as a lawyer in the Supreme Court, has got into trouble by his own utterances. He was one of the two judges of the then division bench that had acquitted 34 of the 35 accused in the infamous 'Suryanelli' case. He was at an interview with a journalist and was asking her to read his judgement on the case and went on to add that the Suryanelli girl was a willing participant thanks to her 'deviant' behaviour.
What he seems to have forgotten was that a person of his stature has to be very careful with his utterances. He cannot afford to be insensitive and crass or else, what differentiates him from a common man, who freely opines about others without having to care for the consequences?
(c) The plight of PJ Kurien.
The extent to which Prof PJ Kurien has gone about to reiterate his innocence in the Suryanelli case has divided the people into two camps - those supporting him and the others who're clamouring for his retrial. With so much having been said, both in the visual and the print media, shouldn't he opt for being completely absolved off the nightmare through a fast track trial?
Or is politics being played to tarnish reputations and muddle the waters further, so that there's no end in sight for the vexed case?
Tailpiece.
1. The hanging of the terrorist should send a clear message to other potential ones that we're reasonable while meting out justice and our resolve to stand as one for the nation cannot be diluted by any external force.
2. While the Judge should have been careful in his utterances, what about the ethics practised by the journalist who was told that the conversation was entirely off the record and was not to be quoted? The use of the hidden camera was in bad taste.
3. The representatives of the people would always be subjected to harsh public scrutiny and it's against this backdrop that their behaviour must be above reproach, always and every time.
(a) Hanging of Afzal Guru.
The person who'd conspired to carry out a terror strike on our Parliament deserved to die. And the government went about it in a systematic manner to deliver justice. But what I was unprepared for was the politicisation of the entire thing. The media went overboard to hold panel discussions to ferret out the pros and the cons, which would have been appropriate at a later stage. And some of the guys who'd participated in those discussions just went overboard in their expression, forgetting the decorum.
We need to be sensitive about the fact that his family is grieving and respect their sentiments too.
(b) The utterances of a judge.
Justice R Basant(Retd) of the Kerala High Court, who's currently practising as a lawyer in the Supreme Court, has got into trouble by his own utterances. He was one of the two judges of the then division bench that had acquitted 34 of the 35 accused in the infamous 'Suryanelli' case. He was at an interview with a journalist and was asking her to read his judgement on the case and went on to add that the Suryanelli girl was a willing participant thanks to her 'deviant' behaviour.
What he seems to have forgotten was that a person of his stature has to be very careful with his utterances. He cannot afford to be insensitive and crass or else, what differentiates him from a common man, who freely opines about others without having to care for the consequences?
(c) The plight of PJ Kurien.
The extent to which Prof PJ Kurien has gone about to reiterate his innocence in the Suryanelli case has divided the people into two camps - those supporting him and the others who're clamouring for his retrial. With so much having been said, both in the visual and the print media, shouldn't he opt for being completely absolved off the nightmare through a fast track trial?
Or is politics being played to tarnish reputations and muddle the waters further, so that there's no end in sight for the vexed case?
Tailpiece.
1. The hanging of the terrorist should send a clear message to other potential ones that we're reasonable while meting out justice and our resolve to stand as one for the nation cannot be diluted by any external force.
2. While the Judge should have been careful in his utterances, what about the ethics practised by the journalist who was told that the conversation was entirely off the record and was not to be quoted? The use of the hidden camera was in bad taste.
3. The representatives of the people would always be subjected to harsh public scrutiny and it's against this backdrop that their behaviour must be above reproach, always and every time.
No comments:
Post a Comment