The Congress today referred to the Supreme Court’s decision to commute the death sentence of Nalini Sriharan and the other six Rajiv Gandhi murderers as ‘unacceptable and absolutely erroneous’ and stated that it ‘disagreed’ with former president Sonia Gandhi. Priyanka Gandhi Vadra has also encountered Nalini while incarcerated.
Abhishek Manu Singhvi, a top lawyer and Congress politician, asserted that Sonia Gandhi was allowed to express her personal opinions and that the party will pursue ‘all possible remedies, whether it review or any other kind of legal remedy’ on the subject. Whatever legal options we have, we’ll use them. The verdict has ‘shocked the nation’s conscience,’ Singhvi said, adding that ‘we owe it to the nation’s citizens as well as to the Supreme Court and the heritage it has established’.
‘We are consistent, he remarked in reference to Sonia and Priyanka Gandhi’s highly visible position on the subject. Institutional concerns apply here. Politics is not the topic here. Despite the party’s disagreement, Sonia Gandhi is free to hold the opinions she wants’. According to Singhvi, we appreciate that viewpoint. The Supreme Court’s decision to release the last remaining Rajiv Gandhi assassins was deemed ‘absolutely inappropriate and entirely erroneous’ by senior Congress leader Jairam Ramesh. The Congress Party vehemently disagrees with it and believes it to be completely unworkable. ‘The Supreme Court’s failure to act in accordance with the spirit of India on this matter is really regrettable’, he remarked.
Randeep Surjewala, a Rajya Sabha member for the Congress, questioned the role played by the Narendra Modi administration in the decision and asserted that there could be no compromising when it came to terrorism and terrorists. ‘The state cannot neglect its responsibility to punish terrorists. The Narendra Modi administration cannot escape responsibility for its questionable contribution to the choice. Is the decision supported by the Narendra Modi administration? Even as Congress ally DMK applauded the ruling’, he questioned why the BJP government never vigorously defended the matter in the Supreme Court.
Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin referred to the ruling as a ‘win of powerful legal fights and humanity’ and a ‘victory of democratic theory,’ saying it is evidence that the choices of the elected government shouldn’t be ignored by governors in appointed posts. The Tamil Nadu Cabinet, presided over by the then-chief minister M. Karunanidhi, proposed that Nalini’s death sentence be commuted to life in prison in April 2000.
Regarding the DMK’s attitude, Singhvi asked, ‘Do you believe we (the Congress party) will agree with our ally if we disagree with Sonia Gandhi on this issue? Tamil Nadu and the Congress have historically had opposing positions on the matter. On this issue, our position has always been crystal clear and unwavering. Singhvi gave a list of reasons why the judgement was ‘very problematic,’ including the message it sends to the rest of the world about India’s treatment of these killers and its disregard for the seriousness of their crimes’. They deliberately and coldly killed a previous prime minister.
‘Why has the court, despite being aware of the nature of the crime, the evidence that supported their conviction, and the previous objection of the Governor, sought to grant preferential treatment to individuals convicted of such abhorrent, horrifying, and heinous crime? How will it deal with similar claims by numerous other similarly situated or ever even seriously placed accused? Regardless of how horrific a crime has been committed, how can the Supreme Court now reject other such claims?’, he questioned.
Post Your Comments