Suicide’s no crime, and you can’t drive someone to it

Kalikho Pul, who split the Congress party and manipulated a friendly governor to become chief minister of Arunachal Pradesh last February, committed suicide earlier this month. The Supreme Court had struck down the governor’s actions, ousting Pul. Finding the humiliation and hurt unbearable, he killed himself.

In India, suicide is a crime. That makes Pul a criminal. This defies common sense. It is crazy to have a law punishing somebody who is already dead. Those committing suicide merit sympathy, not criminalization. Indeed, many states give cash compensation to the families of those committing suicide. Logically, it follows that suicide must be removed from the list of crimes.

Having made suicide a crime, the law also makes abetment to suicide a crime. The dictionary tells you that “abetment” means assistance. If a doctor gives deadly pills to help somebody commit suicide, that is abetment. I believe humans have a right to take their own lives, and that assisting such unfortunates should not be called criminal.

However, one rarely hears of such persons being arrested. What’s common is for policemen and judges to interpret “abetment” to mean “driving people to suicide”. This phrase is loved by the media but is too diffuse and ambiguous to have a place in the laws of most countries.

In India, when somebody commits suicide, relatives and friends can often obtain the arrest of those accused of mental anguish that caused the death. For instance, six sadhus were recently arrested in Nashik for driving to suicide a follower who was not doing enough for their cause. A female AAP worker accused a male colleague of harassment in a suicide note, and he was arrested. A male student in Chennai was arrested after a female colleague he had quarrelled with killed herself.

To call such demands and quarrels “abetment to suicide” is to twist the English vocabulary out of shape. Millions of couples and colleagues have quarrels. In a tiny percentage of cases, this may lead to suicide. Yet humans surely have the right to disagree, quarrel and make demands on one another, provided no criminal demands or acts are involved. Even if you want to drive somebody to suicide you cannot achieve it through harassment, because 99.99% of people will not commit suicide under any circumstances. Three million people died of starvation in the most horrible conditions in the 1943 Bengal famine, but didn’t commit suicide.

On average, only 0.01% of people commit suicide in countries across the globe. They do so not because harassment is commoner in their cases but because of mental illness and depression. Women are surely harassed more than men, yet the male suicide rate is typically thrice the female rate globally, because men are more depression-prone.

Rich US and poor India have similar suicide rates of around 11 per lakh people. Regional cultural factors matter. Puducherry has India’s highest suicide rate, with Kerala and Tamil Nadu typically coming next. A study by Anuradha Bose in The Lancet in 2004 found that the suicide rate among Tamil girls aged 10-19 years was 148 per lakh people, ten times the global average. Tamil Nadu, Puducherry and Kerala have among the best economic and social indicators in India. Their high suicide rates could reflect local cultural factors.

Kalikho Pul killed himself because the Supreme Court ruled against him. The causality is clear. His relatives could say that the judges “drove him to suicide”. Given their behaviour in other cases, consistency would require the police to arrest the honourable judges for “abetment”. If spouses and colleagues can be arrested for abetment in cases where the causality is less clear, why exempt Supreme Court judges? The answer is that the entire concept of “driving to suicide” is ill-founded, and should be junked.

Thousands of students commit suicide because they have done badly in exams. Should their teachers be arrested for “abetment” through tough exam papers? Should their parents be arrested for “abetment” by having high expectations of their children?

There are surely cases where violence, blackmail and criminal intimidation lead suicide-prone people to commit suicide. But in all such cases the harassers should be prosecuted for the relevant crime — violence, blackmail, intimidation and so on. Why invent an additional crime called abetment to suicide?

The focus needs to shift to the 0.01% of people who suffer from mental problems that make them suicide prone. They need medical care, counselling and sympathy. They must not be dubbed criminals.

2 thoughts on “Suicide’s no crime, and you can’t drive someone to it

  • 2016.Sep.11 at 20:08
    Permalink

    If you and your readers were to go through a WHO Report, ‘Preventing Suicide A Global Imperative’, you’d probably find, at the end of it, that many of the claims made in the article ‘…you can’t drive someone to it’ stand discredited. To quote a few lines from the report,

    1. MYTH: Only people with mental disorders are suicidal. FACT: Suicidal behaviour indicates deep unhappiness but not necessarily mental disorder … not all people who take their own lives have a mental disorder
    2. No single factor is sufficient to explain why a person died by suicide: suicidal behaviour is a complex phenomenon that is influenced by several interacting factors − personal, social, psychological, cultural, biological and environmental
    3. … broad generalizations of risk factors are counterproductive
    4. There are indications that for each adult who died of suicide there may have been more than 20 others attempting suicide
    5. This problem of poor-quality mortality data is not unique to suicide, but given the sensitivity of suicide – and the illegality of suicidal behaviour in some countries – it is likely that under-reporting and misclassification are greater problems for suicide than for most other causes of death
    6. It is possible that the very wide range in estimated suicide rates reported for different countries and regions is an artefact of different reporting and recording practices
    7. With regard to age, suicide rates are highest in persons aged 70 years or over for both men and women in almost all regions of the world
    8. The numbers differ between countries, but it is the low- and middle-income countries that bear most of the global suicide burden, with an estimated 75% of all suicides occurring in these countries
    9. Despite being a leading cause of death worldwide, suicide has remained a low public health priority. Suicide prevention and research on suicide have not received the financial or human investment they desperately need Unquote

    First work towards eliminating factors responsible for driving patients to the brink of suicide (especially those in ICUs, and I say this from first-hand knowledge); then, and only then, think of legalizing assisted suicide, please. Abetment to suicide is not something to be airily whisked away with random stats and ‘facts’ chosen by an economist for public consumption. That, too, in a country focused only on the young and tech-savvy, on privatization of all essential services, a country notorious for unpunished genocides and homicides by State and non-State actors. Suicide and Abetment to Suicide happens to be a matter of Life and Death, Mr Aiyar, a matter of deep concern to the common man for whom every day becomes a battle for survival.

    Causes of suicide/suicidal thoughts/suicidal attempts need to be documented on a case-to-case basis, and classified under Suicide, for adoption, by governments., of long-term strategies to prevent Suicide. The person committing suicide should not be held guilty; those driving him to it must.

    Reply
  • 2016.Aug.24 at 18:44
    Permalink

    Goverment should think about this. A person who is alraedy in trouble is harassed by Govt. This requires a change in law makers mind. Depressed people attempt suicide. Why harass them?

    Good article.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*