Daily Times

Aftab Bahadur became the 150th victim of the hangman’s noose in Pakistan since the moratorium was lifted roughly 150 days ago. Aftab Bahadur Masih, was a Christian who was hanged after spending 23 years on death row (this is common in Pakistan, where inmates spend years in jails) in Central Jail of Kot Lakhpat, Lahore for a crime that took place on September 5, 1992. Aftab Bahadur Masih was 38 years old when executed but was sentenced to death at the age of 15. At the time, a 15-year-old could legally be sentenced to death, although the minimum age for capital punishment was raised to 18 under the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance of 2000. Human rights groups and activists across the world have condemned the hanging of Aftab Bahadur Masih and labelled the criminal justice system of Pakistan truly sordid, in which innocent people are sent to the gallows. Mr Masih wrote an essay a day before he was hanged, which was published in The Guardian. In it, he said: “I have not given up hope, though the night is very dark.”

Aftab Bahadur Masih was roped into a crime that happened in 1992. He worked as the apprentice of Ghulam Mustafa, a plumber. Aftab was arrested in the early hours of September 6, 1992, on account of the murders of Sabiha Bari and her two sons, which he allegedly committed with Ghulam Mustafa. Before his hanging, Aftab disclosed that the police had asked for a Rs 50,000 bribe to set him free. Yet, as a plumber’s apprentice he could not pay a single penny to the police. After studying Aftab’s case thoroughly, I have reached a solid conclusion that he was innocent, as there were several lacunae in his case file. Following are two noteworthy points that need to be explained.

Aftab Bahadur was tortured by the police into confessing to the murders. Let me clarify that there are generally two kinds of confessions: a confession to the police during investigation and a confession in a court of law, before a judge and during trial. Confessions before the police are inadmissible evidence in Pakistan and cannot be used against the accused to prove his or her guilt. However, a confession before a judge in a court of law is sufficient for the judge to conclude the trial and sentence the accused. Furthermore, if the confession before the judge is due to torture or threat from the police, it is simply an inadmissible piece of evidence. This is what happened to Aftab: he was tortured by the police to confess to a crime that he never committed. The other suspect and the only “eyewitness” to the crime, Ghulam Mustafa, recanted his statement and said that he lied when he accused Aftab. Plainly, Mustafa said that he had not even been at the scene of the crime, so he did not witness anything. He also said that the police had asked him to name Aftab and implicate him. The aforementioned points actually make the case against Aftab very weak, and show that he was wrongly implicated for a crime he never committed. His implication was a cunning move by the complainant, in connivance with the police and the other accused party.

There are many other inmates who are languishing in the notoriously violent jails of Pakistan for many years. Some have been wrongly implicated in false or frivolous criminal cases. I am sure that many inmates have been executed for crimes that they did not commit, and that Aftab Bahadur Masih was not the only one. My intellectual and rational thinking have always compelled me to condemn such a barbaric and medieval punishment. I oppose the government’s decision to reinstate capital punishment in Pakistan after a five-year ban, in the wake of the Peshawar incident that took the lives of more than 140 children last year. My contention is that the death penalty is no longer an effective deterrent for crime across the globe. The leading nations of Europe for instance, abolished this medieval form of punishment years ago. Belarus is the only country that retains the death penalty in the European Union. Capital punishment is in decline even in the US because public opinion is rapidly changing there. I further contend that since the reinstatement of capital punishment in Pakistan, the crime rate has not declined; the same number of capital crimes are being committed as before.

Countries that retain the death penalty argue that it is a matter of national sovereignty and not a human rights issue. “The countries that continue to oppose the attempt by abolitionist nations to bring about a universal end to capital punishment have stigmatised their efforts as a form of cultural imperialism, as an attack on national sovereignty and an attempt to turn a domestic justice system into a human rights issue.” This idea has been propagated by Professor Hood, who believes that the aforementioned argument is ambiguous and lacks substance in reality. There are a number of international treaties that disallow torture or slavery. This same level of brutality can be inflicted on convicted citizens in prisons. I believe that capital punishment violates the right to life, which cannot be taken away by anyone.

In conclusion, I submit that such a barbaric punishment should be abolished in Pakistan, where the justice system is easily manipulated by people with deep pockets. I oppose capital punishment in Pakistan because the investigation teams shrewdly and cunningly change the entire narrative of the crime in favour of the rich and powerful. The hardened criminals and habitual offenders avoid incarceration easily, because prosecutors fail to produce sufficient evidence in court against them. Capital punishment is irreversible once a person is executed. Therefore, in a country like Pakistan such punishments cannot be given a clean chit because the criminal justice system is sordid and flawed. People like Aftab Masih have been sent to the gallows in the past and I am afraid that more people will follow in future. I therefore hold that Aftab Masih’s hanging was a miserable and dreadful one.

The writer is an advocate of the High Court and is lecturing on the Law of Succession. He can be reached at greenlaw123@hotmail.com