What is Common Cause Case
In 2002, Common Cause, a registered society had written to the Ministries of Law & Justice, Health & Family Welfare, and Company Affairs, also addressing the State Governments, on the issue of the right to die with dignity. Denying them the right to die in a dignified manner extends their suffering.
Common Cause VS Union of India
Common Cause, an organization that involves itself in various matters of public interest, filed a public interest petition pursuant to Article 32 of the Constitution of India in an effort to bring transparency to the collection of money used by candidates in the process of election. Common Cause argued that Article 324 of Constitution of India coupled with the cumulative effect of three statutory provisions – Section 293A of the Companies Act 1956, Section 13A of the Income-tax Act 1961, and Section 77 of the Representation of People Act 1950 – had the purpose of bringing transparency to the process of election-funding. Without such transparency, those already in power were capable of collecting inordinate amounts of “black money,” allowing them to retain power through re-election and creating a vicious cycle that pollutes democracy . The political parties subject to the petition admitted that no tax filings or other election-related disclosures had been made but argued that they did not have any income liable to be taxed.
Arguments In Favor of Petitioners
- Every individual has a right to self-determination, and thus should be permitted to choose their own fate.
- The modern medical technology has found out so many drugs and medicines that unnecessarily prolong life of causing a lot of distress and agony to the patients and his/her relatives thereof.
- It is better to die rather than being under persistent pain and suffering using medication that does not cure but prolongs the life of patients.
- In cases of incurable, degenerative, disabling or debilitating condition a person should be allowed to die in dignity as in majority of the cases the mercy petition is filed by the sufferers, of the family members or any such caretakers. The burden upon the family is so huge and cuts across various domains such as financial, emotional, time, physical, mental and social aspects.
Arguments In Favor of the Respondent
- Not all deaths are painful;
- The ‘Right to life’ under Art.21 is a natural right inherited on birth by every citizen , but euthanasia/suicide is an unnatural termination or extinction of life and, therefore it is hostile and inconsistent with the concept of ‘right to life’ and thus Right to life does not include right to die.
- It is the duty of the State to protect life and euthanasia would undermine the physician’s duty to provide care and save life of the patients.
- Allowing euthanasia will discourage the search and invention of new cures and treatments for the terminally ill and thus there won’t be any prospect with regard to the discovery of possible cure for the disease in near future.
- Euthanasia would weaken society’s respect for the sanctity of life.
Comments
Post a Comment