An overwhelming majority of people supported the death sentence for Kasab. More importantly an overwhelming majority of those who were his victims (obviously relatives of those he killed) wanted him executed.
As a libertarian I am more concerned with what those who are affected by the crime think and want. Criminal laws are based on statues written by governments. The media focuses on what the people in general want. We lose sight of the person whose opinion should matter the most: the victim of the crime.
If you are robbed or injured, then your opinion should matter the most as to what punishment is suffered by the perpetrator of the crime. If you are killed, the opinion of your kin should matter as to what will happen to the murderer and his property. Laws should be victim centric.
The victim or if he is dead, the next of kin, should be able to demand reparations from the estate of the criminal besides being in a position – within broad guidelines – to decide the fate of the criminal.
Law must give priority to:
* Victim’s demand to be compensated
If you are robbed, you may have a right to recover not only what was stolen but also compensation for the mental trauma caused to you.
* Victims demand for punishment
You may ask for the guilty to be locked and he be put to hard labour and you be compensated from his earnings.
If the victim has been killed, his next of kin may want the death penalty and the property of the murderer to vest with them – again within guidelines – this could be allowed. Or the victim’s family may want the killer to be given a life sentence of hard labour and his earnings be used to compensate the victim’s family.
Admittedly this is not a complete legal treatise but some thoughts on how the law can evolve so as not to ignore the victim but to hold his opinion to be paramount before a judgment is passed.