The Student Room Group

India is about to hang someone.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 200
Original post by DorianGrayism
Thanks for that clear reasoning


It's nonsense to suggest that in every situation, even that of genocide, it is wrong to assassinate the instigator.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by f1mad
Very good point. A classical example of how inconsistent the Indian justice system really is.


what justice system? Lol the best description of the indian supreme court i have seen is a banana republic kangaroo court, makes law as time goes on
Original post by James82
Again with Bin Laden it was a targeted operation in which only Bin Laden and those trying to protect him were killed.



would you call soldiers of the taliban innocent?
Reply 203
Original post by okapobcfc08
what the f are you talking about. First of all Baba Rajoana didnt even kill anyone. Second, he has served 17 years for conspiracy despite pleading guilty. Mate, you know very little dont you about indian system of justice don't you. Here look at this example, YES LOOK AT IT FIRST, then reply

Kishori Lal- a man involved in ethnic cleansing, 6 death sentances passed, let off because a) congress man and b) good behaviour?

Baba Rajoana - freedom fighter avenging for the generations wiped out by Butcher Beant, served 17 years in jail, openly admitted that only beanta and his traitors were the target, no ethnic cleanser. He should be hanged?

Finallly, FOR YOUR INFORMATION, as Baba Rajoana greatly argues, IF YOUR PEOPLE ARENT RECOGNISED IN YOUR COUNTRY'S CONSTITUTION, WHO DO YOU SEEK JUSTICE FROM? Please answer this question


He was involved in the planning of the bombing, that makes him jointly culpable.

Just because there are examples of cases that have been incorrect, doesn't mean you should just ignore the rule of law for everyone, otherwise what's the point in having a legal system?

Admittedly I don't know the constitution of India, but I do know it is a secular state, perhaps you could point me to the part of the Indian constitution where it says that it doesn't apply to Sikhs, then I can pass comment.
Reply 204
Original post by okapobcfc08
would you call soldiers of the taliban innocent?


Until proven guilty of something, yes.
Reply 205
Original post by DorianGrayism


If you want to say the Indian Legal System is guilty then that is a separate issue which you can campaign for.


Do your research.

You will find that the Indian Government censors any campaign for Sikh justice. Hence, by publicising this case Sikhs are able to gain world-wide media attention to show the world how corrupt the justice system is.
Original post by James82
He was involved in the planning of the bombing, that makes him jointly culpable.

Just because there are examples of cases that have been incorrect, doesn't mean you should just ignore the rule of law for everyone, otherwise what's the point in having a legal system?

Admittedly I don't know the constitution of India, but I do know it is a secular state, perhaps you could point me to the part of the Indian constitution where it says that it doesn't apply to Sikhs, then I can pass comment.


my friend first you say you dont know the constution of india so how can you comment accuratley on its judiciary? Please answer the last point of my previous post in capital if you can be so kind
Original post by f1mad
Do your research.

You will find that the Indian Government censors any campaign for Sikh justice. Hence, by publicising this case Sikhs are able to gain world-wide media attention to show the world how corrupt the justice system is.


can a prisoner of war be hanged?
Reply 208
Original post by okapobcfc08
my friend first you say you dont know the constution of india so how can you comment accuratley on its judiciary? Please answer the last point of my previous post in capital if you can be so kind


:yy:.

The legal system revolves around the "constitution of India". How can one come to a judgement about the overall case without consulting this?
Original post by f1mad
:yy:.

The legal system revolves around the "constitution of India". How can one come to a judgement about the overall case without consulting this?


trust
Reply 210
Original post by okapobcfc08
can a prisoner of war be hanged?


Under the Geneva Conventions of 1977, no.

"No sentence shall be passed and no penalty shall be executed on a person found guilty of an offence except pursuant to a conviction pronounced by a court offering the essential guarantees of independence and impartiality."
Original post by f1mad
Under the Geneva Conventions of 1977, no.

"No sentence shall be passed and no penalty shall be executed on a person found guilty of an offence except pursuant to a conviction pronounced by a court offering the essential guarantees of independence and impartiality."


exactly so baba rajoana cant be hanged on international law
Reply 212
Original post by okapobcfc08
exactly so baba rajoana cant be hanged on international law


:yy:.

Exactly: India claims to be the "world's largest democracy".

Yeah right.
Reply 213
Original post by okapobcfc08
my friend first you say you dont know the constution of india so how can you comment accuratley on its judiciary?


You don't need to know a country's entire constitution to have an opinion on their judiciary, I am basing my opinion on my belief in the rule of law, not the Indian constitution.


Original post by okapobcfc08
Please answer the last point of my previous post in capital if you can be so kind


It is a view expressed by Babba Roajana, I have already asked you to point me to the part of the constitution that proves his claim, if his claim is correct that Sikhs aren't represented in the constitution then I can make further comment.
Original post by f1mad
:yy:.

Exactly: India claims to be the "world's largest democracy".

Yeah right.


let it be known that congress govt of indian needs to go back to university to read politics. The name of the game for congress is to dampen Khalistani fires, yet by idiotically announcing a potential hanging of Baba Rajoana they have stoked the flames even further, not even clever
Original post by James82
You don't need to know a country's entire constitution to have an opinion on their judiciary, I am basing my opinion on my belief in the rule of law, not the Indian constitution.




It is a view expressed by Babba Roajana, I have already asked you to point me to the part of the constitution that proves his claim, if his claim is correct that Sikhs aren't represented in the constitution then I can make further comment.


fair play on the first point. On the second one, of course yes Sikhs are not represented in the constitution they got bundled in with the hindus, jains, buddhists and the like as all hindus. If you know anything about Sikhism, classing us as Hindu is in my view insulting bordering on racist. BABA RAJOANA WAS A POLICE OFFICER OF PANJAB I THINK HE KNOWS THE CONSTITUTION INSIDE OUT DONT YOU
Reply 216
Original post by okapobcfc08
exactly so baba rajoana cant be hanged on international law


Which bit am I missing? There is nothing in the text quoted that says prisoners of war can't be hanged.

Is he even a prisoner of war?
Reply 217
Original post by okapobcfc08
fair play on the first point. On the second one, of course yes Sikhs are not represented in the constitution they got bundled in with the hindus, jains, buddhists and the like as all hindus. If you know anything about Sikhism, classing us as Hindu is in my view insulting bordering on racist. BABA RAJOANA WAS A POLICE OFFICER OF PANJAB I THINK HE KNOWS THE CONSTITUTION INSIDE OUT DONT YOU


Calm down.

Another example: the Sikh marriage Act has not been passed. Sikh marriage is classified under the "Hindu marriage Act".

Pakistan has passed this Act. Why can't India do the same?

Hmm... tough one.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by James82
Which bit am I missing? There is nothing in the text quoted that says prisoners of war can't be hanged.

Is he even a prisoner of war?


yes he is. What about this mate article 25b I think its game set and match to the Khalistan movement and Baba Rajoana.

Explanation II In sub clause (b) of clause reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly
Reply 219
Original post by okapobcfc08
fair play on the first point. On the second one, of course yes Sikhs are not represented in the constitution they got bundled in with the hindus, jains, buddhists and the like as all hindus. If you know anything about Sikhism, classing us as Hindu is in my view insulting bordering on racist. BABA RAJOANA WAS A POLICE OFFICER OF PANJAB I THINK HE KNOWS THE CONSTITUTION INSIDE OUT DONT YOU


I doubt it, it's a very long document. I know that 99% of British police officers wouldn't have the first idea about the UK constitution, most of them probably don't even know we have one.

Besides, the whole point of a secular state is that you have constitution that doesn't represent any religion, but all people in a country.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending