Saturday, February 9, would have been just another day had news channels not begun beaming the news of 2001 Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru’s hanging. Not that it made much of a difference to the man/woman on the street going about his/her business on an exceptionally sunny day, marking the onset of spring in Delhi.

Not, also, that the news brought a collective sigh of relief from the masses.

But there was something unique, something out of the ordinary, about the event. For once, most political parties —at least the Congress, the BJP, the Shiv Sena and the CPM — sounded as one, acknowledging victory of the rule of law. National Conference chief and chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Omar Abdullah, was beamed live from his house in Srinagar — in his I-didn’t-do-it tone.

As for the media’s role, that, too, seemed on usual parameters — a newsbreak, followed by live coverage, and then the follow-ups: from family/relatives, to people involved (or not involved) with Guru’s hanging, the officials in the know, and any other news related to the newsbreak.

Interestingly, most reports were choosy about the word ‘execution’, but for those who wanted to defame the hanging as one that raised several questions of politics: that “justice must not just be done; in a state that cares for legitimacy, it must be seen to be done”, and that “there is a gnawing suspicion among people that it was carried out on the eve of the winter session of Parliament and with several state elections round the corner”.

The Hindu wrote: “Between Afzal Guru’s hanging at Tihar and the executions of Satwant Singh and Kehar Singh at the same jail lies a gap of 22 years. In this time, India has risen tremendously in economic and strategic terms but the decline in our collective morality is evident in the indecorous secrecy which has attended the latest execution.”

What has added fuel to ‘secrecy’ fire is the fact that timelines and facts leading to the execution do not match up. While the government, as reported by the media, has said that the execution was a last-minute planning, the authorities, again as reported by the media, at Tihar Jail, where Afzal Guru was kept and later hanged, gave a completely different picture of how his family was informed well in advance through Speed Post.

At the same time, it is felt that the media is required to exercise restraint over what it writes and what it reports. Guru, after all, was no saint. He had been the mastermind of the attack on the very symbol of Indian democracy; he had been one of the chief perpetrators of a crime that not only challenged the total machinery of the country but also the very existence of the nation.

In such cases, the media must understand that it should not be an outlet for the fodder provided by loose-talking politicians.

Take, for example, the Owaisis. Immediately after Guru’s hanging, Asaduddin Owaisi, whose brother and floor leader of Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul Muslimeen in Andhra Pradesh assembly Akbaruddin stands accused of hate speech and is under judicial remand, attempted to stir up a controversy. Asaduddin went to the levels of alleging that the Centre's decision to hang Guru would, as oneindianews.com reported, “indeed reinforce a sense of alienation and injustice among Kashmiri youths”.

A tight lid needs to be kept on such loose cannons, who could themselves be accused of trying to work against the Indian Constitution. And one way to do that is for the media to avoid giving them space to air their views.

But is Afzal Guru’s hanging really something that we Indians did not want? Not so, as is apparent from the predominant voices on both the orthodox media and social media. Some samples:

@dattadeepanjan: At least some great news: Afzal Guru Hanged....he should have been hanged 10 years ago.

@Ruchir78: Had #AfzalGuru been hanged in 2006, likes of #Kasab would have hesitated to attack India on #26/11..

@Robinhood_Mhere: Morning Good News... Afzal Guru hanged in jail, parliament attack main conspirator. Applause !! Applause !!

The Times of India reported that “some Twitter members fought a battle of wits and competed in sarcasm, satire and humour”.
@rameshsrivats: Afzal Guru hanged. His career - Started in Parliament, ended in Tihar Jail. Familiar path.

@iSahilShah: They should tell us at least a day before so that we would be ready with our tweets. #Hanged #AfzalGuru

While the government was slammed for taking 12 years to complete the ‘due process’ of law and hang the conspirator behind the dastardly attack on Parliament, Narendra Modi’s tweet — “Der aaye, durust aaye! (it came late, but it came alright)” — was a reflection of many Indians think.

In hanging Guru, the government has reiterated its commitment to fight terrorism and done away with the charge that India is a “soft state”. One only wishes the death sentence on Guru was carried out earlier. Pakistan, then, would have thought twice before unleashing Ajmal Kasab and company on Mumbai in 2008.

One also wishes the government had taken the nation into confidence in hanging both Afzal Guru and Ajmal Kasab, as the law allows their families to know that the convict would be meted out the punishment.

There can be many theories about why that was not done. To prevent any kind of conflagration following the two hanging? Yes. The government was not bound to announce that the death sentences were to be carried out since both Kasab and Guru were not political prisoners? Could be.

Detractors are open to question them all but as police officer-turned social activist Kiran Bedi tweeted, “Afzal Guru case needed a closure. It disturbs some and settles others! Always damned if u do, doomed if you don’t! Governance is tough!”

It sure is.