Crime management beyond jurisprudence

Even when a wrongdoer is repentant and stands corrected he is punished as an exemplary measure so that others can take the lesson

Repetition of various crimes one after another, murder most foul, ghastly, inhuman and barbarous, frequent child abuse and rape etc have considerably shaken the conscience of the nation and everybody including the media is appropriately vocal for a solution. Everybody is seeking speedy trial, as justice delayed is justice denied. But judicial process can start only after detection of the alleged offenders and calls for proof beyond doubt which is normally slow and cannot afford to be emotional beyond cast iron logic. Moreover, threat perception from judicial action is only one of the deterrent factors and therefore has only partial role in curbing crime.   In addition, we must keep in mind that prompt police action in some of the recent cases has not created any fear psychosis in the minds of the prospective criminals as is evident from identical recurrence. 

If our conscience, good sense and sense of morality become entirely dependent on threat perception from judiciary even in 21st century then our condition as humans is really lamentable. There is thus a crying necessity for finding out appropriate solution to the problem of evil and crime beyond jurisprudence for rescue of the humanity without belittling in the least the value of existing judicial action.
At the very outset it must be understood that crime is a socio-ethical problem which is required to be addressed by proper upbringing, education, training and constructive cultural interventions. White colour crimes committed by the so called literates are no less formidable than the ones committed by the illiterates. It can be removed by proper brainwashing in the literal sense of the term. If the downright unethical extremists can brainwash human minds and induce passion for committing heinous crimes at heavy risk and consequential disaster is it not possible to wash their brains away from unethical thoughts leading to crimes? After all, goodness is far more powerful than evil and hope for betterment is stronger than any grim reality. Unfortunately the history of humanity records only occasional endeavour for awakening individual and collective conscience. No mass movement for the same has ever been contemplated or chalked out by the state machinery. We have the same primitive or medieval mindset and machinery to combat crime with punishment and nothing else.
Use of force either at individual or at collective societal level has never attained anything durable. That is why in spite of more and more improvement of retribution system crime has never reduced, rather it has increased. Crime therefore needs to be treated like a disease for complete cure and not suppression with a palliative or pain killer. Our immediate emotional response to a criminal is invariably revengeful with anger and hatred. In spite of tremendous development in science and technology we human beings have remained more or less in primitive mindset while committing crimes and also while tackling the same. This does not mean that we should promote victimhood and thereby perpetrate crimes, never quite so. Rather we must seek permanent remedy of crimes through some better means as the penal measures have already proven to be inadequate and ineffective.
Hatred is never ended by hatred, but by love. Crime is never curbed by retribution but by transformation. Hate the sin and not the sinner, hate crime and not the criminal.  Such eternal ethical principles have no place in crime management. After all, upsurge of crimes cannot be allowed to perpetrate by practice of such eternal values. Transformation of a criminal is a long drawn and rather idealistic process. And public sense of morality and conscience are predominantly proportionate to fear of being caught and punished. The concept of transformation, redemption and the question of criminal justice therefore constitute a complex study of mankind.
Humans are intuitively aware of the inevitable operation of the law of karma or divine justice as well as fear from the rule of law. Still people commit crimes because of moral weakness and fatal infirmity. Should someone be punished for moral weakness, or given moral strength? Jurisprudence concerns deterrence of crimes through retribution and not moral transformation whereby inner motivation can be awakened against committing crimes. It may sound too idealistic, but let us remember when Gandhiji contemplated nonviolent movement against the mighty British imperialism it was also considered to be too idealistic to be effective. But truth is stronger than tradition, compassion is more effective than retribution and awakening inner motivation against committing crimes is invariably more desirable than condemnation and punishment. Moreover fear of failure in this regard is never preferable to not trying at all.
Innumerable tools have recently been discovered to induce any suggestion or emotion in our mind in indelible manner which can be effectively used instead of mere education on ethics and values as sermons which no one take very seriously nowadays. Methods of experiential learning used in training techniques can be adopted for teaching ethics and values for long lasting impact. Cultural interventions, particularly films and drama having direct cathartic impact can do a lot. Thus a lot can be contemplated and done and we are not really helpless with our advanced scientific knowledge of workings of human attitude and behaviour and suitable modification of the same.
Against any criminal our reaction is invariably revengeful. Punish the wrongdoer and thereby satisfy our motive of revenge. This short-sighted approach should be replaced by removal of wrongdoing for which punishment in individual cases cannot be the sole remedy. Revenge is regarded as a kind of wild justice suited to primitive, uncivilised mankind. It should ideally have no place in civilised society. But it exists not only in films but in real life also being fundamental to human nature. Hence our sense of justice rarely means anything beyond glorified revenge and retribution in the name of punishment.
The purpose of imposition of penalty is threefold- corrective, exemplary and eliminatory. Ideally the penalty is imposed to modify the wrongdoer and prevent him and others from committing the same anymore. Statistically it has failed to curb crimes and the jailbirds are seldom rectified and identical crimes are being repeated. Fear ceases to be a motivator after usage. Rather some good souls who commit crimes under compulsion are transformed into permanent criminals in the process of retribution.
Even when a wrongdoer is repentant and stands corrected he is punished as an exemplary measure so that others can take the lesson. When the criminal is beyond redemption and the nature of crime committed is dangerously heinous, death sentence is pronounced to get the society rid of the criminal. But all humans have the inherent capacity to change, and death penalty deprives them of the privilege of being redeemed.
The scope of crime management must be expanded from myopic focus on judiciary and cover compassion.  Mother beats her child and teacher scolds his students with apparent sternness but inward compassion. Giving indulgence and thereby spoiling them cannot be misconstrued as compassion. Compassion does not imply surrendering to wrongdoing or meek acceptance of misdeeds. Corrective penalty is just the other side of the coin of compassion. Moreover, ethics of compassion should never be confused with the ethics of victimhood or perpetration.   
For a systematic approach to crime management there is a crying necessity for identification of the psychological needs of target groups, suitable planning and designing for imparting requisite education and training on ethics and values, adequate counselling for attitudinal and behavioural change and constructive cultural interventions for transformation of lifestyle and way of living over and above speedy trial and delivery of justice. Leaving it altogether on common sense of the people and threat perception from judiciary can evidently meet with very little success. Time has come to give a fresh look on the matter and a constructive and systematic approach for course correction. 
    The writer is a columnist

Crime management beyond jurisprudence

Even when a wrongdoer is repentant and stands corrected he is punished as an exemplary measure so that others can take the lesson

Repetition of various crimes one after another, murder most foul, ghastly, inhuman and barbarous, frequent child abuse and rape etc have considerably shaken the conscience of the nation and everybody including the media is appropriately vocal for a solution. Everybody is seeking speedy trial, as justice delayed is justice denied. But judicial process can start only after detection of the alleged offenders and calls for proof beyond doubt which is normally slow and cannot afford to be emotional beyond cast iron logic. Moreover, threat perception from judicial action is only one of the deterrent factors and therefore has only partial role in curbing crime. In addition, we must keep in mind that prompt police action in some of the recent cases has not created any fear psychosis in the minds of the prospective criminals as is evident from identical recurrence. If our conscience, good sense and sense of morality become entirely dependent on threat perception from judiciary even in 21st century then our condition as humans is really lamentable. There is thus a crying necessity for finding out appropriate solution to the problem of evil and crime beyond jurisprudence for rescue of the humanity without belittling in the least the value of existing judicial action. At the very outset it must be understood that crime is a socio-ethical problem which is required to be addressed by proper upbringing, education, training and constructive cultural interventions. White colour crimes committed by the so called literates are no less formidable than the ones committed by the illiterates. It can be removed by proper brainwashing in the literal sense of the term. If the downright unethical extremists can brainwash human minds and induce passion for committing heinous crimes at heavy risk and consequential disaster is it not possible to wash their brains away from unethical thoughts leading to crimes? After all, goodness is far more powerful than evil and hope for betterment is stronger than any grim reality. Unfortunately the history of humanity records only occasional endeavour for awakening individual and collective conscience. No mass movement for the same has ever been contemplated or chalked out by the state machinery. We have the same primitive or medieval mindset and machinery to combat crime with punishment and nothing else. Use of force either at individual or at collective societal level has never attained anything durable. That is why in spite of more and more improvement of retribution system crime has never reduced, rather it has increased. Crime therefore needs to be treated like a disease for complete cure and not suppression with a palliative or pain killer. Our immediate emotional response to a criminal is invariably revengeful with anger and hatred. In spite of tremendous development in science and technology we human beings have remained more or less in primitive mindset while committing crimes and also while tackling the same. This does not mean that we should promote victimhood and thereby perpetrate crimes, never quite so. Rather we must seek permanent remedy of crimes through some better means as the penal measures have already proven to be inadequate and ineffective. Hatred is never ended by hatred, but by love. Crime is never curbed by retribution but by transformation. Hate the sin and not the sinner, hate crime and not the criminal. Such eternal ethical principles have no place in crime management. After all, upsurge of crimes cannot be allowed to perpetrate by practice of such eternal values. Transformation of a criminal is a long drawn and rather idealistic process. And public sense of morality and conscience are predominantly proportionate to fear of being caught and punished. The concept of transformation, redemption and the question of criminal justice therefore constitute a complex study of mankind. Humans are intuitively aware of the inevitable operation of the law of karma or divine justice as well as fear from the rule of law. Still people commit crimes because of moral weakness and fatal infirmity. Should someone be punished for moral weakness, or given moral strength? Jurisprudence concerns deterrence of crimes through retribution and not moral transformation whereby inner motivation can be awakened against committing crimes. It may sound too idealistic, but let us remember when Gandhiji contemplated nonviolent movement against the mighty British imperialism it was also considered to be too idealistic to be effective. But truth is stronger than tradition, compassion is more effective than retribution and awakening inner motivation against committing crimes is invariably more desirable than condemnation and punishment. Moreover fear of failure in this regard is never preferable to not trying at all. Innumerable tools have recently been discovered to induce any suggestion or emotion in our mind in indelible manner which can be effectively used instead of mere education on ethics and values as sermons which no one take very seriously nowadays. Methods of experiential learning used in training techniques can be adopted for teaching ethics and values for long lasting impact. Cultural interventions, particularly films and drama having direct cathartic impact can do a lot. Thus a lot can be contemplated and done and we are not really helpless with our advanced scientific knowledge of workings of human attitude and behaviour and suitable modification of the same. Against any criminal our reaction is invariably revengeful. Punish the wrongdoer and thereby satisfy our motive of revenge. This short-sighted approach should be replaced by removal of wrongdoing for which punishment in individual cases cannot be the sole remedy. Revenge is regarded as a kind of wild justice suited to primitive, uncivilised mankind. It should ideally have no place in civilised society. But it exists not only in films but in real life also being fundamental to human nature. Hence our sense of justice rarely means anything beyond glorified revenge and retribution in the name of punishment. The purpose of imposition of penalty is threefold- corrective, exemplary and eliminatory. Ideally the penalty is imposed to modify the wrongdoer and prevent him and others from committing the same anymore. Statistically it has failed to curb crimes and the jailbirds are seldom rectified and identical crimes are being repeated. Fear ceases to be a motivator after usage. Rather some good souls who commit crimes under compulsion are transformed into permanent criminals in the process of retribution. Even when a wrongdoer is repentant and stands corrected he is punished as an exemplary measure so that others can take the lesson. When the criminal is beyond redemption and the nature of crime committed is dangerously heinous, death sentence is pronounced to get the society rid of the criminal. But all humans have the inherent capacity to change, and death penalty deprives them of the privilege of being redeemed. The scope of crime management must be expanded from myopic focus on judiciary and cover compassion. Mother beats her child and teacher scolds his students with apparent sternness but inward compassion. Giving indulgence and thereby spoiling them cannot be misconstrued as compassion. Compassion does not imply surrendering to wrongdoing or meek acceptance of misdeeds. Corrective penalty is just the other side of the coin of compassion. Moreover, ethics of compassion should never be confused with the ethics of victimhood or perpetration. For a systematic approach to crime management there is a crying necessity for identification of the psychological needs of target groups, suitable planning and designing for imparting requisite education and training on ethics and values, adequate counselling for attitudinal and behavioural change and constructive cultural interventions for transformation of lifestyle and way of living over and above speedy trial and delivery of justice. Leaving it altogether on common sense of the people and threat perception from judiciary can evidently meet with very little success. Time has come to give a fresh look on the matter and a constructive and systematic approach for course correction. The writer is a columnist