It's Women's Day today, and I guess there could possibly be no better day than today to write about Aruna Shanbaug. I believe all of us are aware of the Aruna Shanbaug case. We all know how it is a real-life instance of Guzaarish-esque euthanasia.
Even after knowing the above, I came across a hard-hitting, disturbing and unfortunately, true and factual article.
Now, I do understand the risks with euthanasia being a risky precedent for the not-so-rarest-of-the-rare cases, but here's precisely my point:
How does one identify what falls under rarest-of-the-rare?
As a related example, allow me to mention the case of ICC's 2.5 m rule under the UDRS, that gained prominence when Ian Bell was not given out lbw. Despite all indicators and parameters used in the review clearly being fit enough cases for a dismissal, the batsman was let off due to a theoretical technicality.
In theory, the hawk-eye technology could accurately predict the ball's trajectory only upto 2.5 meters from the stumps, and not any closer.
Hence, despite all actual considerations fulfilling an LBW criteria, the batsman was given not out, because he was struck well forward, 2.5 m from the stumps, thus activating the theoretical possibility, besides the technology's inadequacy.
However, it is important to note that better sense has since prevailed and rightly so.
Surely, Aruna Shanbaug has already suffered a terrible lot, and the vegetative state that she has been in, she has long been a victim of extreme pain, injustice and bestiality.
Can't we display practical activism as used in the UDRS and ensure Aruna gets a dignified end to her travails and incessant suffering?
Even more importantly, while all the news and noise has been about her, why don't we decide to punish beasts like Sohanlal Bhartha Walmiki, who committed such a heinous crime and are a menace to society, in the gravest possible manner?
We could be scared of this being a precedent that might trigger euthanasia petitions piling up after this alright. But what stops us from making a precedent out of punishing such criminals PROMPTLY and MOST SEVERELY, so that no pervert ever dares to even think on such lines?
It's time practical and common sense solutions win over theoretical, draconian and obsolete word-of-the-book.
It's time the 2.5 meters are bridged.
Even after knowing the above, I came across a hard-hitting, disturbing and unfortunately, true and factual article.
Now, I do understand the risks with euthanasia being a risky precedent for the not-so-rarest-of-the-rare cases, but here's precisely my point:
How does one identify what falls under rarest-of-the-rare?
As a related example, allow me to mention the case of ICC's 2.5 m rule under the UDRS, that gained prominence when Ian Bell was not given out lbw. Despite all indicators and parameters used in the review clearly being fit enough cases for a dismissal, the batsman was let off due to a theoretical technicality.
In theory, the hawk-eye technology could accurately predict the ball's trajectory only upto 2.5 meters from the stumps, and not any closer.
Hence, despite all actual considerations fulfilling an LBW criteria, the batsman was given not out, because he was struck well forward, 2.5 m from the stumps, thus activating the theoretical possibility, besides the technology's inadequacy.
However, it is important to note that better sense has since prevailed and rightly so.
Surely, Aruna Shanbaug has already suffered a terrible lot, and the vegetative state that she has been in, she has long been a victim of extreme pain, injustice and bestiality.
Can't we display practical activism as used in the UDRS and ensure Aruna gets a dignified end to her travails and incessant suffering?
Even more importantly, while all the news and noise has been about her, why don't we decide to punish beasts like Sohanlal Bhartha Walmiki, who committed such a heinous crime and are a menace to society, in the gravest possible manner?
We could be scared of this being a precedent that might trigger euthanasia petitions piling up after this alright. But what stops us from making a precedent out of punishing such criminals PROMPTLY and MOST SEVERELY, so that no pervert ever dares to even think on such lines?
It's time practical and common sense solutions win over theoretical, draconian and obsolete word-of-the-book.
It's time the 2.5 meters are bridged.
