Among the ceremonial invitations piled on the desk of India's new president Pranab Mukherjee sits a small file that could provide the veteran politician with one of his biggest challenges.
The folder contains 11 mercy petitions from condemnedconvicts for whom Mukherjee now represents the last legal obstacle betweentheir death row cells and the hangman. As president, Mukherjee is required todecide on clemency petitions that are forwarded by the home ministry, in thefinal stage of India's death penalty appeals process. It is largely aninherited challenge.
India has more than 400 people on death row and the courtshand down fresh death sentences every year. But Mukherjee's three presidentialpredecessors, while signing off on a number of recommendations for clemency,often stonewalled when it came to appeals the ministry recommended should berejected. As a result, only one execution has taken place in 15 years -- that ofa former security guard hanged in 2004 for the rape and murder of a 14-year-oldgirl.
The lack of executions has led some to question why Indiaretains a death penalty it so rarely enforces. Colin Gonsalves, an advocate inthe Supreme Court and a founder of the Human Rights Law Network, points tosurveys showing public opinion strongly in favour of capital punishment."The idea of revenge is widely accepted here," Gonsalves said. Theruling Congress Party is seen as having abolitionist leanings, but Gonsalvessaid it was unlikely to push for the death penalty to be eliminated, given itspopular support. "If they try to abolish it, then the opposition willappropriate the issue and attack them," Gonsalves said.
Some legal experts believe the hiatus on executions partlyreflects reluctance to hang people affiliated with an ethnic, religious orpolitical group. Other observers say the main cause of the lack of executionshas been the actions -- or not -- of Mukherjee's three predecessors, K RNarayanan, A P J Abdul Kalam and Pratibha Patil. The president's powers indeciding clemency petitions are limited. The recommendation of the homeministry can be returned for reconsideration -- but only once, after which thepresident is constitutionally obliged to follow the ministry's lead. However,there is no set time limit for providing the presidential signature, leavingroom for endless delays. After taking office in 1997, Narayanan opted to sit oneight clemency petitions until his term expired. Kalam followed suit. As wellas the eight he inherited, he received 17 more, but acted on only two. One wasapproved and the other rejected -- leading to India's last execution in 2004.The growing list of 23 pending appeals was then passed on to Patil who receivedanother nine petitions during her tenure.
In an attempt to clear the backlog, Patil acted on the homeministry's recommendations to grant clemency in 19 cases and refuse it in two,including the case of Rajiv Gandhi's murderers. She left 11 for Mukherjee,among them several toxic cases including Mohammed Afzal Guru, a Kashmiri Muslimsentenced to death for his role in the 2001 attack on India's parliament.Granting Afzal Guru clemency would risk a backlash, especially from Hinduright-wingers, while rejecting his appeal risks igniting Muslim separatistsentiment in volatile Kashmir. Mukherjee may also come under pressure to rejectany petition from Mohammed Kasab, the sole surviving gunman from the 2008Mumbai attacks, who was sentenced to death two years ago.
