Commenting on an incident of drunken driving resulting in the death of six people - not pedestrians or other fellow road users, but people sleeping on the pavement(news link) (news link2), he has this formula up his sleeve (link):
What would I have ruled had I been the judge? If the prosecution had demonstrated that the driver was drunk and killed a bunch of people, I would throw the book at the criminal. And in the imaginary situation, I would imagine the book to say the following in the case of drunken drivers turned killers.
First, for every person killed, the driver gets a 20 year sentence. Second, he has to pay monetary damages that are set equal to the life-time income of an average person. Ten of the 20 years have to be served in prison and ten outside, with prison years alternating. If the killer has resources to pay for the monetary damages, they will be recovered immediately. Any shortfall in the monetary damages will be recovered from the person's earnings during his time out of jail. After having finished the 20 years of sentence time, he will be free but his earnings will continue to make up for any shortfall in the monetary damages. The monetary damages are to go to the next of kin of the deceased.
So in the case of Alistair Pereira, since he killed 7 people, the total sentence time is set at 140 years. And total monetary damages to be around $200,000 (7 people times $700 person per year times 40 years of working life). He is wealthy and the family will be able to pay that off immediately. Alistair can then settle down to do his time in jail for the rest of his natural life. The $200,000 can go to help the families of those killed by Alistair.
Hmm, Now, they were construction workers, right - which means migrant workers - so what were they doing sleeping on the pavement? Why does Atanu - no fan of the Indian government (link) or politicians - not mention any culpability by
1) Builders for letting the workers sleep on the pavement
2) Government for not providing suitable housing
Or - most importantly -
3) On the pavement dwellers themselves?
Now, on raising the last question most people would jump to brand me a heartless bastard, but please consider the question yourself - the law has to apply equally.
The law
1) Providing safe and sound work premises
2) Providing safety/ safe environments to citizens
3) Penalises suicide attempts.
So why does the law not apply to everyone equally? Why do most people - including an oft-quoted blogger - not look at such incidents holistically? Because its far easier to blame the individual who actually lost control / drove over the pavement dwellers.
Notice that phrase - pavement dwellers - most drunk driving and subsequent loss of life in Mumbai which our mainstream media reported has that phrase. And little attention paid to it.
Why should we have pavement dwellers at all then? Why is not the Mumbai Corp'n or the Govts. of Maharashtra/India, the courts, citizens or anyone else addressing this point during such incidents? Convenience. If there's one thing we can bet on, its that most people in India want to take the easy route - and that unfortunately doesnt solve real-world problems.
This post, was a result of this(link) post by Atanu Dey.
Tag: Public Policy, Drunk Driving, Indian Law, India, Government of India.
0 comments:
Post a Comment