Roadmap for Answer Writing
1. Introduction
- Purpose: Introduce the role of the President in granting pardons and commuting sentences under Article 72 of the Indian Constitution.
- Thesis Statement: State that the lack of a specified time limit for deciding mercy petitions has led to delays, raising questions about justice and whether a time limit should be established.
2. Body
A. Context of Mercy Petitions
- Definition and Purpose
- Explain what mercy petitions are and the President’s constitutional authority in this context.
- Mention the significance of these petitions in capital punishment cases.
B. Arguments for Establishing a Time Limit
- Right to Speedy Justice
- Fact: The right to speedy justice is considered a fundamental aspect of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
- Source: Supreme Court rulings on the right to a fair trial.
- Explanation: Discuss how delays can infringe upon this right.
- Humanitarian Concerns
- Fact: Prolonged delays can lead to severe psychological effects on convicts, often termed the “death row phenomenon.”
- Source: Studies on the psychological impact of prolonged incarceration.
- Explanation: Analyze the ethical implications of such suffering.
C. Arguments Against Establishing a Time Limit
- Complexity of Cases
- Fact: Cases involving death sentences are often complex and require thorough consideration.
- Source: Legal analyses of death penalty cases.
- Explanation: Discuss the need for adequate time to review all aspects.
- Political Implications
- Fact: Decisions on mercy petitions can have significant political ramifications and public reactions.
- Source: Historical instances of politically sensitive mercy petitions.
- Explanation: Highlight how a time limit might pressure the President to make rushed decisions.
D. Case Example
- Devender Pal Singh Bhullar Case
- Fact: Bhullar’s mercy petition was pending for over eight years before rejection.
- Source: Supreme Court of India, 2014 ruling on delays in mercy petitions.
- Explanation: Use this case to illustrate the consequences of delays in the decision-making process.
3. Conclusion
- Summary: Recap the main arguments discussed regarding the potential need for a time limit on mercy petitions.
- Final Thought: Emphasize the importance of balancing the need for timely justice with the necessity of thorough case consideration, suggesting that guidelines could help achieve this balance.
The delay in commuting death sentences by the President of India has often sparked public debate, with critics arguing that such delays amount to a denial of justice. The President’s role in reviewing death penalty petitions is crucial, but the lack of a specified time limit for such decisions raises several issues.
Arguments for Specifying a Time Limit:
Arguments Against Specifying a Time Limit:
Conclusion:
While specifying a time limit could enhance efficiency and address public concerns about delays, it is essential to balance this with the need for thorough and careful consideration of each case. A possible compromise could be the establishment of a reasonable, flexible time frame, ensuring timely yet considered decisions in death penalty cases.
Model Answer
Introduction
The President of India holds the constitutional authority to grant pardons and commute sentences under Article 72 of the Indian Constitution. However, the absence of a specified time limit for deciding mercy petitions has led to significant delays, often resulting in public outcry and debates about justice, particularly in cases involving death sentences.
Arguments for a Time Limit
Right to Speedy Justice
One of the primary arguments for establishing a time limit is the right to speedy justice, which is enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution. Delays in deciding mercy petitions can infringe upon this right, leaving convicts in a state of uncertainty and distress.
Humanitarian Concerns
Long delays can exacerbate the mental anguish experienced by convicts awaiting a decision on their fate, a phenomenon often referred to as the “death row phenomenon.” This psychological toll raises ethical concerns about the prolonged suffering of individuals facing execution.
Arguments Against a Time Limit
Complexity of Cases
Opponents of a time limit argue that cases involving capital punishment are inherently complex and require thorough consideration. The decision to grant a pardon or commute a death sentence carries irreversible consequences, necessitating adequate time for review.
Political Implications
Additionally, the political ramifications of mercy petitions can be significant. Imposing a time limit may rush the decision-making process, potentially leading to hasty conclusions that do not fully consider the nuances of each case.
Case Example
The case of Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose mercy petition was pending for over eight years before rejection, exemplifies the issue of delay. The Supreme Court of India ruled in 2014 that inordinate delays in deciding mercy petitions could be grounds for commutation of a death sentence, highlighting the need for timely justice.
Conclusion
While the need for speedy justice and alleviating the suffering of convicts is paramount, it is equally important to allow sufficient time for comprehensive case reviews. A balanced approach, possibly through the establishment of guidelines for reasonable timeframes, could help address these competing concerns without imposing rigid requirements.