New Delhi: Highlighting legislative inaction on the crucial issue of passive euthanasia despite the “pious hope” expressed by it eight years ago to frame a law, Supreme Court again on Wednesday urged the Centre to bring legislation addressing the practice of euthanasia and/or the withdrawal of medical treatment as it is related to right to life with dignity.A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K V Viswanathan said that a law had not been framed despite two law commission reports and several private members’ bills being introduced in Parliament, but there was no sustained legislative deliberation on the issue. It said that court’s intervention to frame guidelines was never intended to supplant legislative wisdom, but only to operate as a temporary constitutional bridge until Parliament discharges its role.“There are moments when legislative inaction speaks more loudly than legislative action, and the absence of regulation with regard to the issue at hand presents one such instance. Despite the profound constitutional, ethical, and medical dimensions involved, the field continues to remain largely unregulated by legislation in India. Due to this legislative vacuum, this Court has, from time to time, been constrained to step in and frame guidelines, not as a matter of institutional preference, but as a matter of constitutional necessity, in order to safeguard the sanctity of fundamental rights, more particularly the right to life with dignity,” it said.The court said that a constitution bench in 2018 had hoped that the legislature would intervene and enact an appropriate law to establish a coherent and comprehensive regulatory framework governing the subject but it did not happen.“In our view, this “pious hope” has now become an imminent necessity as nearly eight years have passed since the decision of this Court in Common Cause 2018 (supra), yet the legislative void remains. It must be emphasised that the cumulative effect of prolonged legislative inaction is leaving citizens, particularly those situated at the most vulnerable threshold of life, exposed to serious and systemic risk,” it said.It said in the absence of a clear and comprehensive legislation, end-of-life decisions stand imperilled by the possibility that considerations wholly extraneous to medical science or the patient’s autonomy, most notably financial distress, lack of insurance coverage, or socio-economic vulnerability, may imperceptibly shape outcomes. “Such a vacuum creates the danger that decisions ostensibly grounded in compassion or clinical futility may, in reality, be driven by the inability of families to sustain prolonged and expensive medical intervention, thereby blurring the line between a genuine best-interest determination and an act compelled by economic exhaustion,” it said.It said the responsibility for enacting a comprehensive, coherent, and enduring statutory framework continues to rest exclusively within Parliament’s legislative domain. “It must be emphasised that any guidelines this Court formulates are bound to be limited in their scope and efficacy. A legislative exercise is inherently more robust as it necessarily involves the engagement of a multitude of stakeholders from various fields, allowing for a broader range of issues to be considered, anticipated, and thereby addressed. Therefore, we urge the Union Govt to consider enacting a comprehensive legislation on the subject,” it said.
