Copyright infringement not intended
Context: Do not postpone decisions on mercy pleas filed by death row inmates, the Supreme Court advises states.
Details
Mercy petitions
- A mercy petition is a plea made by a convict who has been sentenced to death or life imprisonment to seek mercy from the President or the Governor of the state.
- It is the last alternative available to the convict after exhausting all legal remedies.
- The power to grant mercy is derived from Article 72 and Article 161 of the Constitution of India, which vest this prerogative in the President and the Governor respectively.
Objectives
- Mercy petitions are based on the principle of human dignity and compassion, and they aim to provide a chance for rehabilitation and forgiveness.
- The purpose of mercy petitions is to provide an opportunity for the executive to consider various factors that may not have been taken into account by the courts, such as the age, health, mental condition, family circumstances, or socio-economic background of the convict.
- It is also a means to correct any possible errors or miscarriages of justice that may have occurred during the judicial process.
- Mercy petitions are meant to be an act of grace and humanity, and not a matter of right.
Procedure for filing a mercy petition
- Step 1: The convict or his/her relative submits a mercy petition to the President or the Governor within 7 days of receiving the death warrant from the trial court.
- Step 2: The President or the Governor forwards the petition to the Home Ministry of the Union or the state for advice.
- Step 3: The Home Ministry examines the petition and seeks inputs from various authorities, such as the police, prison officials, judges, lawyers, etc.
- Step 4: The Home Ministry prepares a note with its recommendation and sends it back to the President or the Governor.
- Step 5: The President or the Governor acts on the advice of the Home Ministry and either grant or rejects the mercy petition.
- Step 6: The decision of the President or the Governor is communicated to the convict and the concerned authorities.
Supreme Court guidelines for dealing with mercy petitions
- The decision on mercy petitions should be taken within a reasonable time, preferably within 3 months from the date of receipt of the petition.
- The decision should be based on relevant grounds and material facts, and not on extraneous or arbitrary considerations.
- The decision should be fair, just, and transparent, and should not suffer from any bias or malafide.
- The decision should be open to judicial review on limited grounds, such as non-application of mind, violation of natural justice, perversity, or mala fides.
Limitations on the pardoning power of the President or the Governor
- Cannot grant pardons in cases involving contempt of court, impeachment, or violation of fundamental rights.
- Cannot grant a pardon in cases where an appeal is pending before a higher court or where a review petition has been filed in the Supreme Court.
- Cannot grant pardon in cases where there is a conflict of interest or where they have personal knowledge or involvement in the matter.
- Cannot grant pardon in cases where it would amount to interference with judicial independence or encroachment on judicial power.
Concerns
- There is no clear or uniform procedure for filing and deciding mercy petitions.
- Some mercy petitions are delayed for years or even decades, while others are rejected without any explanation or reasoning.
- Some mercy petitions are influenced by political or public pressure, while others are ignored or overlooked.
- Some mercy petitions are granted on arbitrary or discriminatory grounds, while others are denied based on rigid or outdated criteria.
These issues undermine the fairness and legitimacy of mercy petitions, and they also violate the human rights and dignity of the petitioners and their families. Therefore, there is a need to reform mercy petitions and make them more transparent, consistent, and humane.
|
Challenges
● How to balance punishment and rehabilitation, deterrence and reform, justice and mercy?
● How to ensure that mercy petitions are decided expeditiously and consistently, without undue delay or discrimination?
● How to prevent misuse or abuse of mercy petitions by convicts who may seek to evade or delay their execution?
● How to respect public opinion and sentiments while exercising mercy petitions, especially in cases involving heinous crimes or public outrage?
|
Measures need to be taken
Establish clear and uniform guidelines for filing and deciding mercy petitions
- These guidelines should specify the eligibility criteria, the time limit, the format, the content, and the authority of mercy petitions.
- They should also provide a mechanism for reviewing and appeal of the decisions.
Ensure that mercy petitions are decided in a timely and expeditious manner
- The delay in deciding mercy petitions can cause lengthy suffering and uncertainty for the petitioners and their families, and it can also erode public confidence in the justice system.
- Therefore, there should be a reasonable and fixed time limit for deciding mercy petitions, and any deviation from this limit should be justified and reported.
Provide adequate information and reasoning for the decisions on mercy petitions
- The decisions on mercy petitions should not be arbitrary or secretive, but rather based on relevant facts and circumstances.
- They should also be communicated in writing to the petitioners and their families, along with the reasons for granting or rejecting them.
- This would enhance the accountability and transparency of the process, and it would also allow for better scrutiny and evaluation of the decisions.
Consider a range of factors and perspectives in deciding mercy petitions
- The decisions on mercy petitions should not be based solely on legal or technical grounds, but also on moral, humanitarian, and social grounds.
- They should also take into account the views and interests of various stakeholders, such as the victims, their families, society, and the international community.
- This would ensure that the decisions are balanced and comprehensive and that they reflect the values and aspirations of society.
Promote a culture of mercy and compassion in the society
- The ultimate goal of mercy petitions is not to undermine or negate the rule of law, but rather to uphold and enhance it.
- Mercy petitions are not a sign of weakness or leniency, but rather a sign of strength and humanity.
- They are not a threat to justice or security, but rather a source of hope and reconciliation.
- Therefore, there should be more awareness and education about the importance and benefits of mercy petitions in society, and there should be more support and respect for those who seek or grant them.
Way Forward
- Mercy petitions are an important aspect of the criminal justice system in India, as they provide scope for compassion and mercy in cases where harsh punishments may not serve the ends of justice.
- The concerns need to be addressed while dealing with mercy petitions in India. Mercy petitions are not merely a legal issue, but also a moral and ethical one. They require careful deliberation and discretion by both the executive and the judiciary, keeping in mind the constitutional values and principles that guide our democracy.
Must Read Articles:
Capital Punishment: https://www.iasgyan.in/daily-current-affairs/capital-punishment-9
|
PRACTICE QUESTION
Q. What are the constitutional provisions, procedures and grounds for granting mercy petitions in India? How effective are they in ensuring justice and human rights? What are the challenges and limitations of the existing system and what reforms are needed to improve it?
|
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/supreme-court-directs-states-to-not-delay-mercy-petitions-of-death-row-convicts-warns-of-commutation-to-life-term-sets-new-precedent-101681532559880-amp.html
