Clemency Powers in the U.S.
U.S. President Biden’s pardon of his son, Hunter Biden, has sparked debates on executive clemency powers.
Clemency originated from British monarchy and is seen as a political power to offer mercy beyond legal boundaries, as discussed by Alexander Hamilton during the U.S. Constitution's formation.
Debate on Legislative vs. Executive Clemency
Some argue that clemency should remain with the executive, as vesting it in the legislature could invite corruption and majority rule.
Others support this, emphasizing clemency as inherently political and necessary for true justice, as it factors in moral considerations.
Clemency Commission vs. Executive Power
Despite the potential for an independent clemency commission, it wouldn’t bind the President, as clemency remains a discretionary, subjective decision.
Historical examples (like President Gerald Ford pardoning Nixon) show clemency decisions may not be accepted by the public, but are ultimately made by the President.
Judicial Review of Clemency
It is believed that judicial review of clemency decisions is not practical.
In India, the Supreme Court can intervene in procedural violations, but clemency decisions remain subjective, as there’s no set standard.
Role of U.S. Congress
Congress may guide clemency through laws, but strict standards for clemency would be ineffective.
It is argued that no law can fully prevent misuse, as individuals in power can still act beyond regulations.
Reforms in India’s Clemency Process
In India, clemency powers require guidelines but trust in executive discretion is essential.
Reforms, especially in convict release processes, are needed, with a focus on rehabilitation and reformation, rather than solely punitive actions.
COMMENTS