“Unwarranted boycott”

I respect Roda Hakim’s right to criticize me for applying to defend Ajmal Amir Kasab as freedom of expression and dissent are prerequisites of a democracy ("Unwarranted boycott,” Readers’ Forum, Parsiana, January 21, 2009). I like to think that she agrees that violent reactions have no place in a free society and disapproves of the vandalism on my premises.

Perhaps, Hakim could be kind enough to explain how the Bombay Parsi Puncha­yet could pressurize me to wash my hands of this case?

I have forwarded to her a copy of my essay "Why should an obvious killer be defended?” and my personal letter to Kasab. In the former, I have tried to explain that if there is no defence there can be no trial and thus no conviction and that a trial is essential to give the prosecution the opportunity to negate any defences which are raised, apart from ensuring that the accused is punished within the law rather than mistreated.

Patriotic feelings impelled me to believe that independent-minded and caring Parsis have a role to play in explosive issues involving Muslims and Hindus and should involve themselves, if they can contribute, on such a national and sensitive issue such as this. Does our religion not indicate that God’s love extends even to a convict who has paid the price his actions merit?

The word "bawa,” regardless of its origins, should be discouraged, for in the eyes of non-Parsis it depicts an old-fashioned, inflexible and semi-educated Parsi who coughs enthusiastically, has a loud voice and refuses to move with the times. KAIKHUSHRU LAM

klm92@hotmail.com

Barrister Lam’s credentials as an advocate of high repute are undoubtedly exemplary. Naturally, his views are based totally on the legal angle, whereas mine are based on the fear that there could be a backlash should he defend Kasab.

Though we live in difficult times, Parsis have never had to face any kind of victimization. However, with today’s parochial regional politics, why should Parsis be in the limelight for all the wrong reasons? My asking the Bombay Parsi Punchayet to intervene and make Lam change his mind is only because of this. Let the government sort out the defense for the militant.

Incidentally, the word "bawaji” does not connote what the learned barrister has conjured up. In Gujarat it is used as a mark of respect, albeit in a lighter vein.

RODA D. HAKIM

Baroda

vadhakim@yahoo.com

To debate the issue raised by barrister K. B. N. Lam’s offer to defend Ajmal Amir Kasab with the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) and particularly with chairman Dinshaw Mehta and his ilk is an exercise in futility.

This community boasts of a long line of legal luminaries who would be proud of a man like Lam who has done the right thing by upholding the rule of law and the sanctity of time-honored legal procedure. He is obviously also a brave man to defy the Shiv Sena like dictates of the BPP. Well done, Lam! I would truly like to shake your hand.

Dr H. S. ADENWALLA

Trichur

charlespinto@sify.com