JOURNAL ARTICLE

Killing in the Name Of? Capital Punishment in Colonial and Postcolonial India.

  • Published In: Law & History Review, 2023, v. 41, n. 2. P. 365 1 of 3

  • Database: Historical Abstracts with Full Text 2 of 3

  • Authored By: McClure, Alastair 3 of 3

Abstract

Unlike whipping, which was quickly abolished following independence, India has continued to hold tightly to the noose's rope and remains a retentionist country to our present day. Notably, though the number of executions would fall dramatically in the first decades of India's postcolonial history, the list of crimes made punishable by death has grown ever longer in recent years. Rather than positing the continued presence of the death penalty as an anachronism ill-suited for a modern democracy, this article takes seriously the legal and discursive developments that allowed the most infamous of penal institutions to travel safely across India's twentieth century. From something that begun as a distilled expression of racialised colonial state power, like many other state institutions during this period, the death penalty would undergo a series of changes to remain relevant amidst new organizing political principles of representative democracy and popular will. Moving from the first formal efforts at abolition in the 1920s, through constitutional assembly debates in the 1940s, and Supreme Court judgements between 1967-83, the article positions capital punishment as a product of both deep colonial inheritances, and a particular process of postcolonial translation. Becoming fully couched in the language of popular sentiment by the culmination of this legal transformation, this violence would become well-positioned to grow within a national political culture increasingly organised around majoritarian expressions of national belonging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Additional Information

  • Source:Law & History Review. 2023/05, Vol. 41, Issue 2, p365
  • Document Type:Article
  • Subject Area:History
  • Publication Date:2023
  • ISSN:0738-2480
  • DOI:10.1017/S0738248022000335
  • Accession Number:169712951
  • Copyright Statement:Copyright of Law & History Review is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Looking to go deeper into this topic? Look for more articles on EBSCOhost.