Amnesty International condemns the death penalty in West Bengal’s new law for crimes against women

Amnesty International demanded the rescission of the bill on Violence against Women that was recently adopted, which proclaims capital punishment against those guilty of rape if the victim dies or ‘is in a persistent vegetative state. A bill passed today by the West Bengal government comes even as the news comes in of a gruesome incident that has rocked the nation and prompted angry protests and some riots within.

Aakar Patel, who is the Chair of the Board of Amnesty International India, burdened his indignation at the bill saying, “The state authorities must bring about justice and accountability in relation to the gruesome rape and killing of the woman doctor from the RG Kar Medical College and hospital in Kolkata in August. …however, the death penalty is never a remedy. It is not meant to be used as a stop gap measure to curb atrocities on women.” Patel made the point that there is no proof that the death penalty as such provide any solace and that it is a distinct deterrent for such crimes, “Patel also stated that even the Justice Verma Committee which was set up in 2012 to examine the laws, and criminal justice system in the context of sexual violence rape and criminal violence and Law Commission of India has also opposed the death penalty in cases of violence against women, which include rape.”

This legislative move is prompted by the events that happened on the 9th of August when a 31-year-old trainee doctor was raped and murdered at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital in Kolkata. The harshness of the offense resulted in public outcry, and several parts of the country’s headset protested carrying slogans vowing to restore justice and change the political landscape.

Due to rising public outrage and concerns on the inquiry’s manner and progress, it was on 13 August that the case was withdrawn from the Kolkata polymorphic High Court and reassigned to the CBI, blaming it on ‘serious lapses on the part of the hospital administration’ and fear of ‘tampering with the evidence’.

The Commission has also included spokesperson and advocate Patel who called upon the Commission to “make its investigations more vigorous and also definite and swift” and serve justice without having to impose the death penalty. He cautioned that ‘further procrastination will aggravate the problem of the fear, the impunity, and the uncertainty’ and aide the case of institutional and systematic changes. Mr. Patel’s view is that, “What is overdue is procedural and institutional change, which follows what causes many a crime (if not all) and focuses on what can be done to prevent it from happening in the first place.” He appealed to all Indian states, and West Bengal in particular, to adopt and implement in full the steps contained in the recommendations of the Justice Verma Committee which concern the training and reforming of the police, preventative strategies, and better handling of reports on sexual violence.

In particular, The Aprajita Woman and Child Bill Republic Amendment Act 2023 proposes to amend and consolidate many laws existing like the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita 2023 and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012. The amendments generally look to make the law on various types of rape committed in the state more stringent which is a trend that is becoming familiar as the country has witnessed a lot of serious crimes in the society.

Amnesty International, according to their statement, has always held and upheld the view that no country should issue a death penalty, Report on Torture 1999 most human rights activists believe that capital punishment is a form of torture, such as Article 3 of the European Convention. The organization argues that, […] Death penalty is the most severe form of punishment that violates human rights and such a punishment does not solve the real causes of violent crime.

The adoption of this new law in West Bengal has provoked a fresh discussion on whether there should be a death penalty in India and if yes then when it comes to the question of women whether the death penalty is just and suitable in such situations. One of the arguments for the inclusion of the clause is the fact that the provision is not unconstitutional as extreme measures can be justified for extreme violence. Others like Amnesty have taken the opposite view rather than harsher sentences there is a need to change the system and implement measures that will prevent violence and therefore ensure justice for the victims.