The first thing to realise about the debate on the death penalty is that it’s not a debate at all. Or at least not in the sense of two sides exchanging views and evidence. The pretence every time the issue is dredged up is that there is a civilised dialogue taking place; one side cites evidence from one country while another points to data from another. But even this pretence is fast ceasing to make much sense. 

One can understand the reasoning of those calling for the death penalty (not formally abolished, but merely suspended since 1995: the last execution was in 1987) to be reintroduced. What’s the use of juggling recidivists in and out of prison or drug lords, only to have them spend their time corrupting politics and the law enforcement agencies, the extent of which only now is starting to come to light? 

But the case is not quite put in that way, because the ‘debate’ about the death penalty is not really a debate. Rather it’s an ugly form of dog whistle politics that Labour and the MSM engage in periodically when they feel they need to attract votes. It has nothing to do with ‘justice’ but all about vengeance and everybody knows it. That’s why it’s only after an unusually horrific crime that these parties let slip their love of executions. Recently, the former attorney general, Yatin Varma, tried to bottom-feed in this way. He reminded people that when he was in office, he prepared a cabinet paper to bring back executions. Not to be outdone, the current prime minister has said that an alleged murderer would “not be allowed to live on this earth”. So the prime minister, not content with taking the Finance Ministry, is now looking to don the mantle of Torquemada as well. Both were reacting to the murder of an 11-year-old child. Previous murders have allowed others from their parties to vent similar feelings. What this practice indicates is that these politicians and parties are doing nothing more noble than fanning a feeling of vengeance amongst the populace and pandering to the mentality of the lynch mob. It is only out of a certain generosity of spirit that we flatter this by calling it a ‘debate’. 

And both Labour and the MSM know that this is nothing to do with law and order. If executions really were such an obvious answer, then how come in his nearly 10 years in power, Navin Ramgoolam did not bring executions back? Or why the MSM too is merely talking about executing people, but without lifting a finger to actually do it? It’s not like there is lack of demand within their own parties and voters. They know they are playing to bloodlust and nothing more. 

They also know that the architecture of law enforcement too does not actually play in favour of executions. The death penalty will presumably be exercised in only two types of cases: heinous murders and drug trafficking. Well then, the question is what is the record of the police in these cases? How many high-profile murder cases have remained unresolved for decades because of cock-ups and bungling? A list would be too long to include here. And concerning drugs, well, we just had a commission calling for the ADSU to be disbanded because of its unprofessionalism and corruption. 

Varma and Jugnauth know this, but it’s like water off a duck’s back. They are not interested in debate. They and their parties want cheap popularity and are willing to pursue it to the last drop of someone else’s hypothetical blood. 

For more views and in-depth analysis of current issues, Weekly magazine (Price: Rs 25) or subscribe to Weekly for Rs110 a month. (Free delivery to your doorstep). Email us on: weekly@lexpress.mu