Vigilantism: legal boundaries and citizen’s rights

Educator

New member
This article has been written by Srijoyee Chakraborty pursuing a course from .

This article has been edited and published by Shashwat Kaushik.


Introduction​


Doesn’t it feel good to take up law and justice in your own hands or to feel the supreme power over others? Most civilians have this notion that even if justice prevails, the criminal or the guilty person doesn’t get immediate trials or convicted by the court then and there. So it may seem that some people wish that if they would control the judiciary system, it would be different and easier to punish the real falter, as well as dispose of the cases which are pending before the courts as early as possible. Sometimes, this kind of thought has outrageous consequences and later it results in such people who are known as ‘vigilantes’.

The word ‘vigilant’ refers to the person who takes up law in his own hands. Basically, this is nothing but an upheaval to the judiciary system without having any formal authority. The legality placed on certain countries that follow the legal norms for their own smooth functioning of government can never accept this out-of-box jingoistic attitude in a person as the legal system works in favour of evidence and specified regulations. Vigilantism is beyond any legal boundaries and a thorough crime. It is more than a reaction to a crime; it is an exercise in power. To be clear, the bench of judges sits unbiased and with the power of the Constitution inside the Court, and they run their way of investigation through the weightage of evidence along with the decisive thoughts that are submitted in the court, while on the other side these vigilantes doesn’t follow any specific set of rules and there might be a chance of bias according to their own interests. On one hand, they are committing such things in ‘good faith’ for those who are deprived of justice; on the other hand, they are disrupting and violating the law and order system of a country. These vigilantes think of their empirical power and feel that showing off this heroic act will be appreciated with paramount dignity. Such happened in the case of . And this leads to horrible consequences in utter disgust in respect to demeaning the judiciary system. The citizens have the right to voice their opinion or take a stand against the wrong but they don’t have the right to dominate justice. Mostly they are not predictable and can go at a certain level to stop crimes by committing crimes themselves. For this, the judges are there to maintain the stigma of a society. The main motto should always be a problem-solving mentality rather than a problem-creating mentality, as 487.8 people are committing crimes as per recent data in India. The Fundamental Rights in India enshrined in Part III (Article 12–35) of the Constitution of India guarantee civil liberties such that all Indians can lead their lives in peace and harmony as citizens of India. Even though there are armies, combats, and policemen to look after the government, it is also our duty as citizens of our country to establish harmony and solitude.

Such cases of , André Bamberski, and a famous case of a mother killing her daughter’s murderer inside a courtroom in Germany are some of the famous vigilante cases throughout the world. Therefore, it all depends on different kinds of persons and their ideologies, or what they do if they are given a huge amount of power, or will they do it for good faith, or they make excuses for their crimes. On the contrary, vigilantism escalates more than the real crime rate. It can only happen in a non-realistic world, such as in superhero movies like Batman, Spiderman, etc. But such kinds of people idolise these super heroes, thinking that they would be appreciated as they are shown in the movies. As of the last update during recent years, there were no such cases of pivotal role in vigilantism found except the case of cow vigilantism, where the Supreme Court of India convicted a few for taking law into their own hands by attacking some specific community people. This shows nothing but hatred for another religion by being biased and blindfolded with their own thoughts and mentality.

Recent cases of vigilantism​


Even these types of cases can be found around the globe:

  • In Georgia, one black man named Auhmad Arbery was attacked by the whiteheads neighbourhood while he was jogging. Later, a jury convicted those three men for killing him. When they were asked about the same, they replied that they had seen Arbery in some underconstructed buildings, and he had been in burglaries. Though the police officer couldn’t find any evidence against Arbery, nor were there any complaints of him.

In some research, it has been found that it happens when trust of people decreases in government and they have nothing left to do, so they take up charges by themselves. Under current law, and since Roe v. Wade in 1973, women have the constitutional right to an abortion until the foetus is viable and can survive outside the womb, about the 24th week of pregnancy. The Texas law is unusual in that it is not enforced by the government or government officials. Instead, it authorises private citizens to bring civil suits and recover $10,000 from any doctor who performs an abortion or any person who aids or abets an abortion.

Advantages​


When one side of this holds wrong, the other side of vigilantism is not that harmful if it can be used in a good way. As it can be seen in the rarest of rare cases or where justice is being delayed to give punitive actions to the main accused or the offender, there should be some power given to society so that the criminals get afraid while doing any further heinous crimes, and this way crime can be lessened. So that while doing such unacceptable wrong things, his psychological mind would think a number of times about what he’s getting as punishment.

Disadvantages​


Nowadays, violence has been a walking cake in society; it shows it doesn’t exist but one trigger can uplift the whole society with their level of discrimination and certain beliefs. In the Europe refugee crisis during 2015-2016, a vigilant group sprung up in the European states as perceived paralysis in responding to the massive influx of people from a foreign country. Some of them were even called “Islam intruders” and were treated as untouchables. Vigilantism can be in various ways, like individual or collective, violent or non-violent, private or public, defensive or offensive, spontaneous or institutionalised. The Supreme Court of India declared that vigilantism isn’t permissible in any way possible, especially after the mob lynching case that occurred recently. It has also been said that vigilantes are anti-democratic and they lack certain constitutional values as they have extralegal behaviour that is not even legal. In recent cases, Maharashtra, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh have seen more vigilantism cases than other states in India. Specially, it has been arising because of the gradual increase of social media users from whom these vigilantes are trying to gain fame and recognition for their own so-called heroic deeds. Even on these online platforms the master-minds of opinion gets ready to call upon their own judgements on some trivial issues, not knowing the particular fact, or any kind of legal matter and this also gains extra support on the part of vigilantes which excites them to take up law in their own hands. It can also be seen that while legal orders or judgements are broadcasted on social media platforms, both pessimistic and optimistic words are driven by their own point of view and are submitted without having the full knowledge about the weightage of evidence served during the trials by both parties, as if they were to sit on the chair of a justice. Therefore, these small incidents too, in this advanced technological era, affect the minds of vigilantes and drive them towards wrongdoing without any anticipation. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution refers to violation of human dignity while taking up vigilantism; Articles 14 and 15 refer to violation of the right to equality and prohibition of discrimination under the Constitution of India, which also leads to rigorous punishment for the vigilantes.

Cow vigilantism in India​


The act of taking the matter into one’s own hands or a group of people to punish the people or group of people who are or are suspected of harming, killing cows or consuming beef. This has become a very common practice in India, which might also be addressed as an issue. This practice is backed by strong religious beliefs, traditions, political influence or other socioeconimic factors.

Religious significance​


Cow is considered to be a sacred animal and a symbol of motherhood. The protection of cows is an integral part of Hindu culture and is also ingrained in religious texts and books. Slaughtering and killing of cows is on a rise these days which has also led to various protection moments and criminalisation of slaughtering of cows in many states of India.

Political factors​


This cow vigilantism has also been exploited by various political group for their own motives. Some right wing Hindu parties have used this cow vigilantism as a way to fullfil their own agendas and to gather votes in the name of protection. This can be used as tool for targeting minority groups for, e.g., Muslims.

Socioeconomic factors​


In rural areas a large section of people is dependent on cattle rearing for their daily livelihood which has also become a cause for cow vigilantism. Cow is an essential source of earning for people who live in village areas because people earn money by selling cow milk. Cow vigilantism is also fuelled because beef industry is mainly dominated by Muslims; this in turn is leading to social and political unrest.

Societal impact​


Cow vigilantism has a very serious impact on the state of India which has created a wave of fear and insecurity among minority sections of the country. The rise of mob lynching and extrajudicial killing is raising concerns about the safety and protection of individuals rights and the rule of law. Also, this cow vigilantism is also damaging to India’s reputation internally.

To address this issue, the government must take a strong measure against this violence and ensure equal protections of all the citizens irrespective of their religious beliefs or the religions they preach. The government must also promote communal harmony, peace and prevent hate speech, etc., to control the issue of cow vigilantism. These are few fueling points of cow vigilantism; tackling these will definitely bring cow vigilantism under control.

Conclusion​


Therefore, to take up measures against these wrong happenings:

  • One has to take preventive measures against these vigilantes in appropriate and immediate time.
  • A special task force should be appointed to track these vigilantes before any unprecedented things occur.
  • More judicial approaches should be taken to solve irregular issues.
  • More courts should be established to dispose of the pending cases smoothly and swiftly.
  • Punishment should be absolutely given to the offenders and criminals in a jurisdictive way by not mitigating the punishment.
  • A way to give damages to the victim should be implemented if there’s no part of fault in that person being attacked.

This way it can be handled wisely.

References​


The post appeared first on .
 
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock