Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Oct 06, 2007
ePaper
Google



Opinion
News: ePaper | Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |

Opinion - Editorials Printer Friendly Page   Send this Article to a Friend

Undiluted commitment

An initiative to bring out a European Union declaration on the International Day against the death penalty (October 10) stands aborted, thanks to Poland’s veto. Its opposition has to do with internal compulsions rather than to the softening of its stance on the abominable practice. What is significant is that the protest to the move came not from anti-abolitionists, but from sections in the right-wing government who wanted to push the case against abortion and euthanasia through the backdoor. They reasoned that if the argument against capital punishment is that it violates the right to life, so does the termination of pregnancies and assisted suicide. Such a deduction is erroneous on many counts. The case against the death penalty is that the right to life is universal, absolute and inviolable and institutions of the state that are supposed to protect this fundamental right cannot resort to the practice even as a form of punishment. The attempt to expand the scope of the debate presumes that abortion and euthanasia constitute a violation of life. Indeed, the right of the mother to abort a foetus and the rights of the terminally ill to end their own lives are necessarily subject to severe qualifications. For instance, compelling grounds of the woman’s health, lack of autonomy in fertility decisions, her capacity to discharge the responsibilities of parenthood, and pregnancies resulting from rape are factors that underpin the case for abortion. Similarly, euthanasia or assisted suicide presupposes the consent of persons suffering an incurable illness, and the termination of life is to be carried out in a medically appropriate manner.

By implication therefore, indiscriminate recourse in either situation is precluded. Moreover, the state does not use its coercive power and, to that extent, the right to life is not at issue. Differences over the declaration (since vetoed) take away little from the EU’s common position as all the 27 states have abolished capital punishment — a precondition for membership. But the fundamentalist overtones to the controversy over abortion are generally well known. Given the enormous influence of the Catholic church in Poland, where public opinion on abortion is reportedly divided, it is not surprising that the country’s leadership has projected the issue in this manner ahead of the October general elections. The EU should strive to prevent any attempt to dilute the current consensus against capital punishment by bringing in other issues over which no agreement may be possible. The episode underlines the fact that progress on the complete elimination of capital punishment globally will depend on the effective observance of the rule of law and fostering universal respect for human rights in general.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail



Opinion

News: ePaper | Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary | Updates: Breaking News |


News Update


The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu