On Monday, the detailed verdict in response to a review petition filed by Mumtaz Qadri, the convicted killer of former Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer, against his death sentence stated that Qadri’s counsel failed to prove through any convincing argument that the slain governor had committed blasphemy. Not only was the counsel unable to find any flaw in the previous record, but also attempted to reargue the entire case including Islamic arguments, which although do not fall into the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, had nevertheless been extensively dealt with in the Islamabad High Court’s judgement. However, since no blasphemy accusation was proved in the first place, arguments pertaining to the Islamic injunctions were also irrelevant. In response to pleas for a larger bench for review, it was stated that a party to the case has no purview to determine the size of the bench. The question then is, should a self-confessed killer who murdered a Governor he was guarding ruthlessly in broad daylight, and went on to justify the atrocity he committed, even worthy of the concessions he pleads for? The glaring answer is no. However, even if the depravity which renders Qadri unworthy, or the lagging proceedings which have caused such a lengthy delay are set aside, the fact is that all the intricacies of the case have been scrutinised, analysed and reviewed, and the only move left is to carry out the sentence. And while in principle the death penalty is to be opposed, the fact that it appears tremendously sagacious and apt in this case cannot be denied. In considering this case, it is not solely the barbarity of the act that needs to be contemplated but also the primitive and dangerous nature of the thinking that it reflects. The notion that self-defined motives, whether they are fallaciously dubbed religiously ordained or not, are enough to justify taking the law into your own hands has terribly grim implications. As is revealed in this case too, such thinking makes one content with taking someone else’s life based on information that is pure hearsay. And sadly this is always the case when one call on the local mosque loudspeaker is enough to instigate hundreds and send them running to kill innocents. When supporters of this mentality, like religious parties and others who threaten to mobilise against the hanging of Qadri, come forth, the need to set a precedent and send a clear message to similar vigilantes becomes even more imperative. These men, whom Jinnah dubbed ‘Mullahs with a divine mission’ have held the nation hostage since a long time, especially since Zia came to power. In the midst of such perversion, Qadri’s act and the support he has garnered from the unfortunately large numbers of similarly fanatical people is a disgusting blot on the face of the nation, which needs to be wiped off as soon as possible. *