SC invokes emergency principle in ‘ right to die’

■ ‘ Right to life meaningless unless it encompasses individual dignity’ ◗

The Supreme Court on Friday made it clear that the “emergency principle” or the “principle of necessity” has to be given effect to withdraw medical treatment only when it is not practicable to obtain the patient’s consent for treatment and his/ her life is in danger.

The Constitution bench headed by the Chief Justice Dipak Misra said where a patient has already made a valid advance directive which is free from reasonable doubt and specifying that he/ she does not wish to be treated, then such a directive has to be given effect to. The court said right to

The court said a failure to legally recognise advance medical directives might amount to non- facilitation of the right to smoothen the dying process and the right to live with dignity

life and liberty as envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution is meaningless unless it encompasses individual dignity within its sphere. It has to be stated without any trace of doubt that the right to live with dignity also includes the smoothening of the process of dying in case of a terminally ill patient or a person in permanent vegetative state with no hope of recovery.

The court said a failure to legally recognise advance medical directives might amount to non- facilitation of the right to smoothen the dying process and the right to live with dignity. Further, a study of the position in other jurisdictions shows that Advance Directives have gained lawful recognition in several jurisdictions by way of legislation and in certain countries through judicial pronouncements. Though the sanctity of life has to be kept on a high pedestal, in cases of terminally ill persons or PVS patients where there is no hope for revival, priority shall be given to the Advance Directive and the right of self- determination.

Some of the guidelines framed by court:

The Advance Directive can be executed only by an adult who is of a sound and healthy state of mind and in a position to communicate, relate and comprehend the purpose and consequences of executing the document. It must be voluntarily executed and without any coercion or inducement or compulsion and after having full knowledge or information. It should have characteristics of an informed consent given without any undue influence or constraint.