Constitutional Morality and Passive Euthanasia: Reconstructing End of Life Jurisprudence in India

Abstract

In India, the recognition of passive euthanasia has brought about a major shift in the concept of life, dignity, autonomy and personal liberty which is guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. In Common Cause v Union of India, the Supreme Court upheld the legality of passive euthanasia, and advance medical directives, and thus remodeled the Indian concept of end-of-life law through the prism of constitutional morality. The article critically explores the judicial reasoning from the narrow interpretation in Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab, to the progressive recognition of dignified death in Aruna Ramachandra Shanbaug v. Union of India and culmination of the same in the Common Cause judgment. The study examines the development of constitutional morality as a way to reconcile the conflicting values of individual autonomy, medical ethics, state interests and the sanctity of life. It also reviews the use of “living wills”, informed consent and judicial protection in cases of “passive euthanasia”. Comparative International practices are also explored and ethical dilemma surrounding end of life decision making in India is discussed. It believes that the passive euthanasia is a change in the constitution where it recognises the human dignity and decisional autonomy as a fundamental component of a human being's right to life and the right to have a dignified death