HUMAN RIGHTS
Pakistan lawyer to write book on Sarabjit’s trial
Sarabjit: A case of mistaken identity will also raise voice against capital punishment practised in various countries
Sarabjit: A case of mistaken identity will also raise voice against capital punishment practised in various countries
Jaipur: With ‘mercy’ as its theme, the lawyer of Sarabjit Singh, an Indian who is on death row in Pakistan, will pen a book on the prisoner’s life and the case.
Awais Sheikh, who has been handling Sarabjit’s case since June last year, in his book ‘Sarabjit: A case of mistaken identity’ will also raise voice against death sentence existing in various countries.
"The theme of my book is mercy. I’m searching for a suitable publisher in India due to certain reasons and initial hurdles in Pakistan," Sheikh said.
Sheikh, a Pakistani national, said he had seen the case and Sarabjit’s life very closely and had visited his native place in Punjab.
"In Sarabjit’s case, we have enough evidence to prove that it is a case of mistaken identity. The previous lawyer had submitted an application in the Supreme Court of Pakistan for re-considering the case, but the court rejected it," he said.
Sheikh said he would try to release the book at the earliest as it was expected to contribute in building pressure on both the governments of Pakistan and India regarding Sarabjit’s release.
"A decision in the case is reserved with the Pakistan President who is empowered to grant pardon or to commute the death sentence into life imprisonment and we have already submitted mercy petition for Sarabjit," he said. If the death sentence is converted to life imprisonment, Sarabjit will be released in two or three days as he had already spent over 19 years in jail.
Sheikh, who has written books on Muslim- Sikh riots and works for peace and harmony between both the countries in the capacity of a peace ambassador, was appointed Sarabjit’s lawyer last year by his sister after previous advocate Rana Hameed did not appear before the court in connection with the case.
Awais Sheikh, who has been handling Sarabjit’s case since June last year, in his book ‘Sarabjit: A case of mistaken identity’ will also raise voice against death sentence existing in various countries.
"The theme of my book is mercy. I’m searching for a suitable publisher in India due to certain reasons and initial hurdles in Pakistan," Sheikh said.
Sheikh, a Pakistani national, said he had seen the case and Sarabjit’s life very closely and had visited his native place in Punjab.
"In Sarabjit’s case, we have enough evidence to prove that it is a case of mistaken identity. The previous lawyer had submitted an application in the Supreme Court of Pakistan for re-considering the case, but the court rejected it," he said.
Sheikh said he would try to release the book at the earliest as it was expected to contribute in building pressure on both the governments of Pakistan and India regarding Sarabjit’s release.
"A decision in the case is reserved with the Pakistan President who is empowered to grant pardon or to commute the death sentence into life imprisonment and we have already submitted mercy petition for Sarabjit," he said. If the death sentence is converted to life imprisonment, Sarabjit will be released in two or three days as he had already spent over 19 years in jail.
Sheikh, who has written books on Muslim- Sikh riots and works for peace and harmony between both the countries in the capacity of a peace ambassador, was appointed Sarabjit’s lawyer last year by his sister after previous advocate Rana Hameed did not appear before the court in connection with the case.
Notify Freedom from Unwarranted Arrest
Prabhakar Sinha
Prabhakar Sinha
The provision in the Cr.P.C. under which any police officer is empowered to arrest a person without a warrant even on a mere suspicion of his involvement in the commission of a cognizable offence (under section 41 of the Cr.P.C) has been a source of maximum police atrocity. A legacy of the pre- independence colonial law enacted to keep the subjects of the empire in fear and subjugation was not amended even after we became a republic and the constitution guaranteed the right to life and personal liberty. Even the most obvious question as to why a person accused of minor cognizable offences should be arrested and detained at all was not raised by the political class; neither was any effort to regulate the exercise of the enormous and arbitrary power made. In fact, this provision has been misused with impunity at such a massive scale as to make the right to personal liberty meaningless for the poor. Almost all the victims of killings in the police custody, fake encounters and torture are those who had been arrested under this law because in the absence of a warrant there is no prior record to prove that they were arrested. The police manipulates the record of arrest in the event of death, injury or illegal detention in its custody for more than 24 hours to justify or deny its role in the crime. Hundreds who just disappeared (i.e. who were killed and whose bodies were secretly disposed of) were people arrested without a warrant, that is without any record of their arrest.
The massive misuse of this draconian law and the misery it caused to the poor has been common knowledge to the people’s representatives and the political parties in power at the centre and the states, but it failed to move them. In fact, they continued to turn a blind eye to the judgments of the Supreme Court which drew attention to the grave injustice done to the people and issued directions to mitigate the suffering of the helpless victims (Joginder Singh vs State of U P, 1994 and D.K. Basu vs the State of West Bengal, 1997). In 1999, the Law Commission approached the National Human Rights Commission ‘for a study leading to amendments in the law relating to the power of the police to arrest’. Thus, the issue of restricting the power of the police to arrest without justification and protect the right to personal liberty was taken up by Parliament following repeated prompting of these judicial bodies rather than respect for it inspired in the people’s representatives. The amendment bill passed by both houses of parliament has already received the President’s assent and been published in the gazette of the government of India. But ironically, it has not come into effect because the Act itself stipulates that it would come into force with effect from the date of its notification in the Gazette.
The amendment Act restricts the power of the police to arrest anyone at will which it has been enjoying and abusing and continues to possess even after the enactment of the amendment. According to the new provision, the police cannot arrest a person without a warrant if he is accused of an offence carrying a sentence up to seven years. Instead of arresting him, the police is empowered to give him notice of appearance before it to facilitate investigation, but he may be arrested if he refuses to respond. This provision excludes minor offences for which the police has been arresting the poor and misusing this power for extortion. However, the amendment Act empowers the police to arrest without warrant in cases where it may be necessary to prevent escape, intimidation of witnesses, destruction of evidence of prevention of further offence etc., but in such cases the reason for the arrest has to be recorded, which would naturally be subject to scrutiny. It also incorporates the recommendations made by the Supreme Court in D.K. Basu’s case, which safeguards the interest of the arrested persons. If and when the Act comes into effect, it is likely to drastically reduce death in police custody, fake encounters, disappearance of the arrested persons, torture in the police custody, indiscriminate arrest of the poor and inhuman conditions in jails due to overcrowding.
The draconian law and its rampant misuse are a blot on the face of our republic, which should be wiped out immediately by bringing the amendment Act into force.
(Author is PUCL President )
The massive misuse of this draconian law and the misery it caused to the poor has been common knowledge to the people’s representatives and the political parties in power at the centre and the states, but it failed to move them. In fact, they continued to turn a blind eye to the judgments of the Supreme Court which drew attention to the grave injustice done to the people and issued directions to mitigate the suffering of the helpless victims (Joginder Singh vs State of U P, 1994 and D.K. Basu vs the State of West Bengal, 1997). In 1999, the Law Commission approached the National Human Rights Commission ‘for a study leading to amendments in the law relating to the power of the police to arrest’. Thus, the issue of restricting the power of the police to arrest without justification and protect the right to personal liberty was taken up by Parliament following repeated prompting of these judicial bodies rather than respect for it inspired in the people’s representatives. The amendment bill passed by both houses of parliament has already received the President’s assent and been published in the gazette of the government of India. But ironically, it has not come into effect because the Act itself stipulates that it would come into force with effect from the date of its notification in the Gazette.
The amendment Act restricts the power of the police to arrest anyone at will which it has been enjoying and abusing and continues to possess even after the enactment of the amendment. According to the new provision, the police cannot arrest a person without a warrant if he is accused of an offence carrying a sentence up to seven years. Instead of arresting him, the police is empowered to give him notice of appearance before it to facilitate investigation, but he may be arrested if he refuses to respond. This provision excludes minor offences for which the police has been arresting the poor and misusing this power for extortion. However, the amendment Act empowers the police to arrest without warrant in cases where it may be necessary to prevent escape, intimidation of witnesses, destruction of evidence of prevention of further offence etc., but in such cases the reason for the arrest has to be recorded, which would naturally be subject to scrutiny. It also incorporates the recommendations made by the Supreme Court in D.K. Basu’s case, which safeguards the interest of the arrested persons. If and when the Act comes into effect, it is likely to drastically reduce death in police custody, fake encounters, disappearance of the arrested persons, torture in the police custody, indiscriminate arrest of the poor and inhuman conditions in jails due to overcrowding.
The draconian law and its rampant misuse are a blot on the face of our republic, which should be wiped out immediately by bringing the amendment Act into force.
(Author is PUCL President )
Comments