Friday, September 26, 2008

Batting for terror accused

Chindu has slammed the BJP for speaking against the legal aid offered by Jamia Islamia to those accused of a role in the recent Delhi blasts. For a good part of the editorial, it appeared as if the BJP demanded that nobody provide any legal help to the accused. The BJP has only said that the university - that is centrally funded- has no business defending a terror accused. Chindu puts up a passionate argument in support of Mushirul Hasan, Vice Chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia.

Embedded in the idea of providing accused with the means of defending themselves competently is a jurisprudential principle that forms the bedrock of modern law — the presumption of innocence unless the person is proved guilty


Does Chindu follow this principle with respect to Modi? Modi has not been found guilty by any court of law so far, but article after article slams him for his "alleged" role in the riots. Whenever the VHPs and the Bajrang Dals go on the offensive, does Chindu invoke this principle?What is all this talk of presumed innocence until proved guilty when it is only selectively invoked?

If these two students are convicted, will Chindu conclude that these guys are indeed terrorists and not innocent? Absolutely not. Afzal Guru is a case in point.With an inept government at the centre, even a conviction is not enough to prove a terrorist's role in a carnage. Afzal Guru, convicted for his role in the Parliament attack case, is still "presumed to be innocent". Even after the Supreme Court upheld his conviction, the UPA government and the entire battery of pseudo secular media is against proceeding with his execution. If indeed these two Jamia students are found guilty, the entire investigation will be questioned and the intellectuals will wonder whether they were given a fair trial.

Against this backdrop, when will terrorists get the treatment they deserve? If the killing of hundreds of innocent civilians does not necessitate an iron handed response from the state I wonder what will awake the government from its deep slumber. Looks like the PM will lose sleep only over Mohammed Haneef and not on terror victims.And the Human rights activists are bothered only about the rights of brutal terrorists and not of their innocent victims.In the time we explain these "intellectuals" that terrorists are terrorists and not humans and hence do not deserve the sympathy reserved for humans, the nation would have lost a few more lives.

The argument put forth by Chindu is plain stupid, to put it mildly. If I work for Microsoft and I am nabbed for a murder, is it logical for me to expect MS to defend me or pay for my legal expenses? Why should Jamia do this to two of its students? The question is not about denying the accused access to legal help. It's a question of whether the university should do this and send out a wrong signal. The move also raises serious doubts about the intention of the VC. By batting for the accused he is sending out the message that the Muslim suspects cannot get adequate legal help without the intervention of the university.The decision of the university is shocking , condemnable and sets a dangerous precedent. It has the potential to stoke communal unrest.

5 comments:

Dirt Digger said...

Andromeda,
I would like to point out Orwell's statement in the 'Animal Farm' -->
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
Which describes this situation in a nutshell.

Anonymous said...

Very good post Andromeda.

Let us remind everyone what did our hypocrite chief call Modi, in this editorial , back in 2005...

Cheif called him "a man who violated every single norm enshrined in the Indian Constitution"

Mr N. Ram, where was your "presumption-of-innocence-unless-the-person-is-proved-guilty" then?!

B Shantanu said...

Great post Andromeda....

Anonymous said...

Interesting stand taken by the secular brigade. Are Universities duty bound to "defend" students accused of say, pickpocketing, rape, burglary etc.? By the same token various govt. departments and agencies should "defend" employees accused of various crimes.

A civil-war like situation seems to be developing, and these supid and imbecile secularists are supporting the dubious stand of terrorists and terrorist-sympathisers.

Anonymous said...

Chindu editorial lacking moral courage to profer its view on the matter seeks to shield behind the idealogies of the BJP to support the view on the vice Chancellor, who had gone on record to state that the " Jamia Millia Islamia University would provide legal aid to two suspended students who have been arrested by Delhi Police for being allegedly involved in the Serial blasts in the capital". In the process it has completely missed the wood for the trees and unabashedly supports a Vice Chancellor who commits an institution to the misdeeds(alleged or real) of the students. It would appear that Chindu deliberately is distorting BJP views as nobody is denying them legal aid, but only pointing out to the perfidy of committing the institution for that purpose. The Vice chancellor is perfectly at liberty to provide legal aid and can also augment resources towards that purpose but then an educational institution can not and must not be seen to protect a person or persons who are arrested for comitting heinous crimes.

The chief will need to get his mind examined and the sooner the better for the reading public.