Mumbai attack: Will Ajmal Kasab ever be hanged?

Rajiv Gandhi’s assassins have defied the noose for 18 years, so has Afzal Guru, the prime accused in the 2001 Parliament attack case. Given this backdrop, will Ajmal Kasab ever be hanged?


By M. Gautham Machaiah

“Whatever I have done, I have done on earth, and I should be punished here. I do not want to be punished by God. Please punish me by hanging,” Ajmal Kasab, the prime accused in the terror attacks on Mumbai has told the trial court. But given the Indian legal system, it might take at least a decade to hang him. That is, if the court awards him capital punishment.

For Kasab, it is a long way to the noose. Once the trial court pronounces its order, Kasab’s advocate will approach the High Court and subsequently the Supreme Court. Assuming that the trial court condemns him to death and Supreme Court confirms it, he still has one more lifeline—filing a mercy petition before the President of India.

If history is any indication, Kasab may succeed in defying the gallows even for the next 20 years. Take for instance the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case. The former Prime Minister was killed by a suicide bomber in 1991 and his assassins who were condemned to death are yet to be hanged even 18 years later.

The assassination trial took six long years and in 1998, all the 26 accused were sentenced to death. As the accused were booked under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), where the court of appeal was the Supreme Court, a long pending appeal before the High Court could be avoided. In 1999, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction of four of the 26 accused.

The four who were convicted to death filed a mercy petition before the President, who is yet to take a decision. Meanwhile, the death penalty of one of the accused, Nalini who had become a mother while in prison, was commuted to life imprisonment after Congress president Sonia Gandhi pleaded for clemency.

The remaining three continue to remain on the death row. If the assassins of a former Prime Minister can escape the noose for nearly two decades, it is difficult to believe that Kasab will see his end in the near future.

A parallel may be drawn between Kasab and Mohammed Afzal Guru, convicted for his role in the terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament in 2001. Guru’s trial was relatively speedy when compared to that of Rajiv Gandhi. He was awarded the death sentence by a trial court in 2002, which was upheld by the Delhi High Court in 2003 and confirmed by the Supreme Court in 2005.

In 2006, Guru’s wife filed a mercy petition before the President, which continues to hang fire even to this day.

Only in the case of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s assassination was the entire process of appeal exhausted in about five years. Indira Gandhi was shot dead in 1984, while her assassins were executed in 1986.

The opposition BJP has been demanding that Afzal Guru’s mercy petition be rejected and that he be hanged immediately. But the Government does not seem to be in any hurry.

Union Law Minister M. Veerappa Moily has said that Afzal Guru is twenty second in the list of 28 mercy petitions pending before the Government. “You cannot pick and choose and hang people in a country which believes in the rule of law,” is his argument.

Thus, Afzal Guru will have to wait his turn. Meanwhile, Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram has announced that he will attend to one mercy petition every month. This means it will take at least another two years before the Home Minister even has a look at Guru’s file. It is anybody’s guess when he will be hanged, if at all.

There has been a demand from citizens and a section of politicians that cases involving terrorism should be fast tracked, instead of following the queue system. But in India, political expediency takes precedence over national security.

And who knows, one day Kasab may walk a free man!

(Picture sourced from: bajan.wordpress.com)

COMMENTS

Nice blog on Kasab! But I think they should just let him go. Who are we to punish him? We have no right to take somone's life! Yes, He killed all those people. But if we turn around and kill him - then what is the difference between him and us?
-Sindhu M.C., New Jersey

I agree with you. This is what I have written in my blog, sangeethvinayakan.blogspot.com. But unlike me, you have done it well. Jai Bharath!
-Sangeeth Vinayakan

Your employee is not an asset!

M. Gautham Machaiah

Corporations today have derived different euphemisms to describe their employees. Some treat them as assets; others refer to them as human capital, while most stick to the time-tested description of human resource.

But how many companies look at their employees as simple human beings? Do you view your employee as a machine which needs to be overhauled and oiled periodically in the form of increments, or as a living being with emotions, mood swings, joys, sorrows, pleasure and pain?

Your employee might be a resource, capital or an asset, but remember, he is first a human being.

A person spends a major part of his life at work, away from his family, which is why it is important that he looks forward to attending office and enjoys spending time with his colleagues. As a boss, this is in your hands.

You treat your employee like a machine and he will respond mechanically. He will perform because you incentivise him with increments and bonuses, not because he shares an emotional bond with the company. Such workers, who perform from the level of their body and mind, without giving their heart and soul to their work, can often prove to be a liability.

Only a good boss can fire the passion in an employee. And who is a good boss? Somebody who has business acumen, leadership qualities and marketing skills? All this, and more. You can never be a good boss unless you are first a good human being.

As you read this, sit back for a while and ponder: Do your employees respect you because you are a tough boss, or because you are a decent human being? And if your answer is the former, you have some soul searching to do.

All of us carry personal and professional baggage with us. Our personal lives reflect on our work and vice-versa. As a boss you have no control over your employee’s personal life, but you can at least ensure that he carries a happy baggage home. After all, he spends a better part of his life with you.

Many a time you would have pulled up an employee for under performance on a particular day, but have you ever given a thought to what could be running in his mind. It could be as simple as a domestic fight or something as serious as his father’s illness. But have you offered him solace?

How many times has your employee felt comfortable to sit across the table and discuss his personal life with you? Does he see you just as a boss or as a friend, philosopher and guide? Does he trust you enough to share his problems with you? And if he does, do you give him a patient hearing?

It is not just sorrows that your employee would like to unburden. As the boss, are you among the first to know about a joyous event at home, like a new arrival or the purchase of a car? Or, do you remain distanced from the personal life of your employee?

It is the small things of life that matter. How many times have you taken time off to have a one-on-one discussion with your employees on their personal lives—their parents, wife, children or even their problems. Is your relationship with your employee confined only to business or do you genuinely care for his well being too?

Little gestures can often go a long way in winning over your employee’s trust, confidence, respect, and above all love. All you have to do is show that you care.

When was the last time you visited an employee’s parent who was hospitalised? When was the last time you attended a puja in your team member’s house? When was the last time you bothered about how your employee reached home from office late in the night? Or, when was the last time you remembered and personally wished your employee on his birthday?

This does not mean you should forever mollycoddle your employees. Be firm when needed, but be reasonable. As a boss you too are human and may be given to bouts of temper. You may sometimes give him a shelling, but do not forget to make up.

One question you should never forget to ask yourself every evening is: “Has my employee gone back home today with a smile on his face?”

Employees do not despise tough bosses, what they hate is bosses without a heart.

Several studies have indicated that when a person quits his job, it is not because he is unhappy with the company, but because he is dissatisfied with his boss. Such people separate with a bad taste in the mouth and hold the company in utter contempt through out their lives—all because you were a bad boss.

Yet, there are instances where people quit their jobs with happy memories and remain in contact with their former bosses for years to come. A good boss does not merely develop a working rapport with the employee, but a relationship for life.

As Russel H Eving said: "A boss creates fear, a leader confidence. A boss fixes blame, a leader corrects mistakes. A boss knows all, a leader asks questions. A boss makes work drudgery, a leader makes it interesting."

So, what are you? A boss or a leader?

COMMENTS

(This article was also posted on MSN. Some of the responses received are reproduced below)

The fact of the matter is whether you call people as resources, assets or capital, none of them in business are treated like humans. A machine gets respected;, if it gets heated it is switched off, dusted and greased as per schedule. Plant maintenance has a scheduled check-up and downtime? But how many times has your boss/company insisted you go on leave once every six months? Only when they want to reduce costs not when they want to improve performance.

Essentially, I mean even machines are treated with respect and maintained to improve performance. Men are lectured by glib and swanky managers who do not recognise you when you are waiting for a bus, never have they asked if you could be dropped someplace, but that half-hour of pepping is expected to better your performance by leaps or bounds.

Today, people are not bothered about the company. As they are paid more and more, they seem to care less and less. Management as a subject is key to human development, as a practice it does not exist.
-Rajesh, Hyderabad

Dear Gautam, the managers of today are even afraid to appreciate good work. They are worried as to how then will they justify having denied a promotion or an increment later. In our country promotion is not based on performance; it is based in chamchagiri, caste, and religion. Professionalism is only in our words and not in actions.
-Bobby Sakariah, Jeddah

My case was different. I had horrible bosses in most of the companies I worked. I believed in hard work and sincerity, they believed in time pass and sadistic pleasures. I ended up being tortured. I still delivered and grew up the ladder.

The attitude of my bosses had an impact on my personal life and I lost my wife and kids to this turmoil. My bosses who were known for their regional bias, tampered with my career. I have found bosses to be scheming and political in their attitude. When I could not help it any longer, I moved on.
-Natarajan VG Iyer, Bangalore

Dear Natarajan, Do not be sore, it is not worth all the tension. No one in the IT industry is happy. How many bosses will you find with a smiling face? Do we have to become graduates, engineers and doctors to face such unhappiness at work. I have always felt that I am working among dead people. I even mentioned this to one of my bosses and he smiled!
-Rajesh, Hyderabad

Very interesting.
-UPOP, Mumbai

What a good article. It should be published in the newspapers.
-Lucky Charm, Kuwait

The concept of boss itself is a curse from the colonial British rule. The Indian way is partnership and mutual respect as a human being, which in my opinion yields better results. We should shun the boss system for our own progress.
-Karthik, Hyderabad

"You can never be a good boss unless you are first a good human being" Well said. Some deep thoughts for consideration. Thanks.
-Dr. Cajetan Coelho, Goa

This article is admirable. The boss should be balanced in his praise and criticism.
-Phani Krishna, Hyderabad

Fantastic content!
-Gnana, Chennai

A boss is a boss is a boss. He can never become your family member. It is unfortunate that you have to spend most of your time with him rather than with your family, because both you and your family are greedy for money.
-Bosskey, Chennai

I would like to speak from the perspective of a businessman. Initially, people join as salaried employees. They say any salary is fine with them. Slowly as time passes, they start a trade union. They start demanding a share in the company's profits.

As a businessman, I never recruited you saying you are my partner. I recruited you for a salary. So, if you have high expectations, that is not my problem. With regard to the boss, well, as a businessman, it is my duty to ensure that he/she as a boss is the right person for the right job. But unfortunately he/she is saddled with blunders that the juniors and subordinates have committed assuming that it will not been noticed.

You will be surprised that many employees who are not even managers, swindle the company’s money, indulge in sexual harassment etc. Business challenges are so huge that as salaried employees you do not understand it till you yourself become a businessman.
-S.S. Sharma, Bangalore

When I started my company ten years ago, I tried to be a friend to every employee. I extended them monetary help and was always around in their times of need. But what did I get in return? They indulged in theft and made me bankrupt. I was an emotional fool and gave them more than what they expected. But having learnt my lesson, I hardly speak to my workers and give them what they deserve. I do not extend any help to them. As a result my profit has begun soaring. Here I am, a boss with leadership qualities.
-S Salim Sarang, Mumbai

Hats off to Gautham. This article is really good.
-Shehensah, Bangalore

You are right, Gautham, not all bosses are the same and not all employees are the same. We have both types; some who discuss and want personal things be heard and some who do not care about anything except their work and the money they get. All they see and make sure is kill some time and go through the routine. You cannot help but be a moron sometimes.
-VB, Bangalore

It is interesting. I want to be a leader and not a boss. I have a small company where 25 employees are working with me
-Leela, Chennai

I was once a worker and now I am the boss of my own firm. It is 100 per cent true that what a leader can achieve, may not be achieved by a boss. If a boss is made up of leadership qualities then the whole team becomes a winning and productive organisation.
-Ragu, Johannesburg

Very good and useful.
-Prabhakhar Varma, Hyderabad

Enlightening!
-Anannd R.Kulkarnii, Thane

Good one Gautham. 'Resource' is a very commonly used word in the IT industry while referring to an employee. Eg : "I need a resource with good communication skills OR can you send that resource's profile across". I particularly get very irked when people do this and give it back to them irrespective of their designation at the work place.
-Kartik Krishnaswamy, Bangalore

That is exactly why Shruthi and I would want to work with you even today (given an opportunity). You are a great boss and a great human being. Thank you Gautham.
-Surabhi Shastry, Bangalore

Kingfisher: No longer the king of good times?

M. Gautham Machaiah
Bangalore

After an international beer conference in London, all the world’s top brewery bosses decide to go out for a beer together.

The Chairman of Budweiser says, “I would like the most refreshing beer in the world, ‘The King of Beers’, give me a Budweiser.”

The Chairman of Guinness says, “I would like the only beer in the world worth really, truly waiting for, give me a Guinness.”

The Chairman of Carlsberg says, “I would like the world's best beer, drunk in more countries than any other, give me a Carlsberg.”

Vijay Mallya sits down, looks around and says, “Just give me a Coke.”

The other brewery bosses laugh loudly and say, “Hey Vijay, how come you are not drinking a Kingfisher?”

“Listen,” says Vijay Mallya, “If you guys are not drinking beer, neither will I.”

Well, any Kingfisher fan would agree with Mallya. In fact, until recently you would walk into a restaurant and just ask for a beer. And a beer in most parts of the country invariably meant Kingfisher. Beer and Kingfisher were synonymous with each other. Not any longer.

With the entry of several international brands like Carlsberg, Foster’s, Tuborg, Budweiser and Tiger, the consumer is spoilt for choice. But that is not the only reason why bad days have befallen the king of good times.

Over the past few years, Kingfisher could not match up to its rivals in terms of aggressive branding, advertising and marketing, thus failing to encash the equity that it enjoyed.. While other brands launched a blitzkrieg targeting the youth, Kingfisher remained content resting on its laurels. Thus, the younger generation today considers it more hip to be seen with a bottle of an international beer than good old Kingfisher.

There was a time when competitors struggled to get even a toehold of the market, but in a reversal of roles, Kingfisher has been shown the door in many up-market pubs. Some pubs even consider it infra dig to serve the popular home grown beer. Another common excuse of pubs is that Kingfisher is in short supply, something unheard of in the past. Unfortunately, this is the state of affairs in Kingfisher’s hometown Bangalore too

Whatever be the reason for this dismal performance, Kingfisher fans are a distraught lot. Beer like wine is an acquired taste and Kingfisher lovers swear by their favourite brand. However, with Kingfisher often being unavailable, patrons are forced to sample other brands. Though many affirm that “there is nothing to beat Kingfisher”, some others have slowly begun switching loyalties.

Has Mallya taken his customers for granted, is there a genuine shortage of Kingfisher beer or have his executives been lax? Whatever be the reason, after seeing many moons of good times, Kingfisher fans may have to brace themselves up for some bad times too. That is not something you can raise a toast to.

(Picture sourced from www.travelpod.com )

COMMENTS

Yes, there has been a lot of competition for Kingfisher, but do you have some statistics on the sales and market share? May be that would prove your point that Mallya is not heading for good times..I believe that market is growing bigger for beer and KF still holds large chunk of it.
- Lakki

I was pleasantly surprised to know of its popularity among New Zealanders when I was there recently. The brand is popular at the innumerable Indian eating places there. Was quite amusing to watch the Kiwis order for a strong version along with naan and butter chicken. It is considered an essential part of the Indian platter! I also remember a Kiwi who had been to Mumbai some years ago, lamenting about the mild headache he had when he downed them. “I believe they add Glycerin to your beer?” he asked me. Well, 'The king of good times' does need a revamp of its packaging and marketing.
-Deepti Ganapathy, Mysore

Well, there is no doubt that competition has increased, but the fact remains that Kingfisher is still the king of good times. In the alcoholic beverage industry in India, it is not just about establishing a brand, but it also about building a strong distribution network besides liaison with government officers.

People have now got an opportunity to taste other MNC brands (Of course, even KF is an MNC brand now), but how far they will be loyal to new brand in long run is the question to be asked. In Andhra Pradesh, for instance, there was no supply of Kingfisher during the peak of summer, which actually is the season, due to the legal tussle between UB and Andhra Pradesh Brewery Corporation Limited. Thus, Kingfisher was off the shelves during the months of April, May, and first half of June. The new MNC brands did take the advantage by trying to flood the market with their products.

But the moment Kingfisher was back in the market, stockists found it difficult to sell other brands like Tiger, Budweiser and Carlsberg. Mallya's UB and USL (United Spirits Ltd) empire has grown with a good dealer and distributor network along with strong support from the government authorities. This lethal combination at any given time can make or break a brand overnight no matter how strong it is out side India!
-Anju A, Hyderabad

Nobody is denying Mallya’s network of dealers and contacts with the Government, the question is: Why is Kingfisher beer not available in many pubs of Bangalore? Is there really a scarcity or have other brands succeeded in convincing pubs not to serve Kingfisher?
-C.L. Mohan Kumar, Bangalore

Govt should ban political 'titles'

M. Gautham Machaiah

The Congress party has recently issued an advisory to its blue-blooded members to drop their feudal titles, but why are the neo royals, the political class, still allowed to use pompous honorifics?

Royal titles ceased to exist with the abolition of Privy Purse by Indira Gandhi in 1971, but many Congress leaders continued to use titles like Maharaja and Maharani, prompting this directive from the party high command. But the political masters who have replaced the royals, continue to use appendages like Excellency or Honourable.

For instance, any reference to the President of India and Governors of States is prefixed with His/Her Excellency in all official records and communication. There has been no instance in India where a President or Governor has voluntarily given up this ‘title’. In fact, the Rashtrapati Bhavan and Raj Bhavans expect the President or Governors to be addressed as His or Her Excellency.

Similarly, any reference to an elected representative, be it the Prime Minister, Chief Minister, Minister, MP or MLA is preceded by Honourable. It is always Honourable Prime Minister, Honourable Chief Minister or Honourable Minister.

The Mayor of a city, on the other hand, is addressed as Worshipful Mayor. One wonders how many Mayors in India are worthy of worship.

One of the arguments put forth by the Congress while issuing its advisory was, “Everybody is a common man in India.” That being the case, why are politicians being treated as a special class?

The situation is worse in the judiciary. Judges in the lower courts are referred to as Your Honour, while in the High Court and Supreme Court they are addressed as My Lord. It is not just the advocates; even judges refer to each other as My Lord. Will a mere Sir or Madam not suffice?

To be fair to the judiciary, the Supreme Court has on several occasions advised that such honorifics should be dropped, but the Bar Council of India has failed to rise to the occasion.

If the Congress really believes in the equality of all, the UPA Government should issue a directive banning political titles like His Excellency, Honourable and Worshipful, besides feudal references like Your Honour and My Lord.

Politicians are the servants of the people and as such they have no right to pamper themselves with lofty titles which do not have the sanction of the Constitution.

(Picture sourced from: www.timeotcchem.com)

COMMENTS

Good stuff. But Congress workers should be allowed to refer to their respective state chiefs as `Oh Great Fearless Leader'. May be then the odd State chief might even be emboldened to rebel against the High Command! Nevertheless, should be fun at the national plenary when a great number of `Great Fearless Leaders' would be seen sucking up!

-Vedam Jaishankar, Bangalore

Well, I agree with you, but sometimes people themselves want to address you by bestowing such titles and honorifics. It also makes room for creative expressions in rather boring speeches and write-ups. Just being a bit democratic about my own opinion!

-Rajesh Gundu Rao, Bangalore

Madras HC should act against Union Minister

M. Gautham Machaiah
Bangalore

Justice R. Regupathi of the Madras High Court has stirred a hornet’s nest by announcing in the open court that a Union Minister tried to influence him to grant anticipatory bail to a doctor and his son in a forged marks sheet case filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation.

Such interference by politicians which smacks of gross impropriety deserves to be condemned, but the judge too failed in his duty by not naming the Minister at the first instance.

The judge has threatened to incorporate the name of the Minister and details of the conversation in his order if the accused fail to tender an unconditional apology. Why is the judge insisting on an apology from the accused and not the Minister himself? Is it because the accused and the Minister are powerful people?

Would the same concession be granted to a common man had he tried to influence a judge? The judiciary’s history is replete with instances where people who have interfered in the course of justice by writing letters or making phone calls to judges have been punished. Why this preferential treatment for the Minister?

No doubt, Justice Reghupati needs to be congratulated on his bold stand, but the right course of action for him would have been to haul the Minister concerned for contempt of court. The law of the land should not differentiate between a politician and the common man.

India takes pride in its independent judiciary and any attempt by self-serving politicians to subvert this should be nipped in the bud. One hopes that the judiciary will stand solidly behind Justice Reghupati in his fight against the interference by the executive.

The judiciary need not look to the Prime Minister to bring the Minister to book. The court is well within its powers to initiate appropriate action and hand down exemplary punishment to the Minister so that it serves as an example to his entire ilk.

Unless the judiciary deals firmly with the truant Minister, the common man will get an impression that some are more equal than others in the eyes of law.

(Picture sourced from www.skyscrapercity.com)

COMMENTS

(This article was also posted on MSN. Some of the responses received are reproduced below)

I believe this is only the tip of the iceberg. I think this judge has the courage to at least speak. Most others will not even speak.
-B. Kumar, Allahabad

Justice Regupathi will be remembered for the strength of his mind if he passes a proper order on this issue. It would have been more appropriate and would have served as a deterrent, had he spelt out the name of the Union Minister in the open court.
-Amal Datta, Chennai

How does the judge or any one else know that it was not an imposter pretending to be a Minister just to ensure that the accused does not get bail? There are always more angles than one when looking for the truth.
-Ajit, Mumbai

The judiciary of India has become corrupt and the judge who has took a bold step against a Minister should be praised.
-Shri Paul Sharma, Ludhiana

Which Union Minister are we talking about? Does not somebody have the guts to come out upfront with his/her name? If we can make these allegations, then we should be bold enough to give out the name of the person concerned. This practice of hiding the name is pure cowardice. Media persons think they are doing the public a great favour by reporting sensational news. If the report comes with inconclusive news, then they may as well have not reported the issue.
-Johnny Walter, Lucknow

Life is miserable for the people who are truthful. They can end up in a mess. Such is the fibre of our country. Only now some people are becoming bolder. It is good that the judge came out with the statement. I pray to God to bless this country and the people with great transparency while performing their duties. No one can be proud unless and until people feel that it is worth living in this country. We have lived in fear, and continue to be in fear as right can be turned wrong and wrong can be turned right. The mighty wield the power. We all wish to live in state of happiness and that too fearlessly.
-M.S. Rao Chennai

The article is a trend setter to the judiciary and the politicians in the country.
Subhash Chand, New Delhi

I am a sufferer under the corrupt legal system widely prevalent in India. First of all, the law of the land is not easily available to the common man on the street as it should be. Lawyers and judges have a similar nexus as the politician and the bureaucrats. They are always in connivance with the rich and powerful.
I hail from Bihar where the law is non-existent. If someone has the misfortune of protecting their rights through a court of justice in such lawless states then only God can help him or her. There is a goonda raj and politicians are goondas. The greatest irony is some of these people who are roaming the streets under the protection of Z security should be put behind bars. But they think they are above the law.
Only a miracle can save Indian democracy. It is a sham democracy. Judicial process is slow and compels people to take the law onto their hands.There is a saying which totally fits the Indian judicial system, 'Justice delayed is justice denied'.
-Kumar P, New Delhi