AIADMK chief J. Jayalalitha too can hardly disagree. The plea for commutation has, on the other hand, found support from two segments of the political spectrum. Defence Minister George Fernandes has apparently spoken for the anti-Congress and anti-`family' sections in the NDA, in appealing for clemency for the four. Lingering sympathies for the Eelam cause, if not the LTTE, are bound to be seen inthe endorsement of the appeal by the Pattali Makkal Katchi and, in a more guarded manner, by the DMK, both of the NDA. It is a trivialisation of the Rajiv tragedy that the Congress-led clamour represents. And the special pleading for the commutation distorts the demand as pressed by others with no petty-political concerns. It is not an issue that should divide the nation on either party or parochial lines. If the distractions from both sides are ignored, it should be clear how the case deserves to be closed. By seeing that justice is done, but justice tempered with mercy.

Justice delayed may not necessarily be justice denied. The delay in this case, of eight long years, can even be claimed to be a tribute to a reasonably thorough and transparent process of justice. The corollary to this claim that of a free, liberal and humane society -- will be strengthened by the clemency sought by eminent leaders of opinion, including jurists of eminence. The petition to the President for mercy -- for Nalini, Murugan,Perarivalan and Chinna Santhan merits a sympathetic consideration and a positive response not because the case against them is not established. This line of argument by some civil liberties activists may actually serve to strengthen the anti-commutation camp. Worse, by focussing on legalist hole-picking, it misses the larger consideration that should lead to a presidential pardon. The point is that such a pardon, far from amounting to an acquittal, will be a more effective answer to a terrorist crime than the enforcement of the final sentence.

The debate over abolition of capital punishment may not yet be over, and some may prefer the provision for the "rarest-of-rare-instances" exception as realistic. Whether a political crime can be included in this exceptional category is open to question. Even more so is the assumption that capital punishment can be a deterrent against crimes of this kind, committed in this case by a "human bomb" on behalf of an organisation that does not fight shy of using suicidesquads. Some other countries have lived and coped successfully enough with mindless terrorism without resort to the firing squad or the hangman's noose. There is no reason why proudly democratic India should emulate any poorer example.