Topic 1 : State is in the room
Introduction: The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) of Uttarakhand, 2024, tabled in the state legislature, is the most recent example of an attempt to give legislative form to the Directive Principles of State Policy enshrined in Article 44 of the Constitution. It is debatable how state-wise UCCs contribute to the “endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India”.
Uttarakhand's UCC and the provision for live-in relationships
- Among other things, the proposed legislation is a pioneering attempt at regulating “live-in relationships”.
- The Uttarakhand UCC, for both marriage and live-in relationships, does accommodate “customs or usage” that govern some people.
- However, it adds a far-reaching caveat that they should not be “against public policy and morality”.
- The public policy framework that it lays down, holds alarming cues regarding violations of fundamental rights when “morality” is sought to be defined by governments.
Provision for live-in relationships brings the state into the picture
- There are openings in the law to think of coupledom beyond the institution of marriage, is a welcome interpretation.
- Yet, it falls short of what a rights-based approach on several counts.
- Notwithstanding the use of “partners” with regard to such relationships, it clearly defines them as those between a man and a woman, foreclosing an opportunity for inclusiveness irrespective of sexual orientation.
- Coming on the heels of the Supreme Court verdict in Supriyo vs Union of India that decided against marriage equality, it is not a surprising legal stance.
- It is noteworthy that one of the contentions in that case was the separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, with assertions from the latter to have the opportunity to legislate.
- The Uttarakhand UCC is an instance that attests to the apprehensions of the petitioners that legislatures are often non-responsive to claims by those who are deemed a “miniscule minority”.
Definition of live-in relationship in various laws of India
- Another aspect of the definition in the case of live-in relationships is to view them as “relationships in the nature of marriage”.
- There is ample invocation of this category of relationships in case law with regard to bigamy, desertion, maintenance as well as domestic violence in India.
- In S Khushboo vs Kanniammal (2010) and the Navtej Johar (2018) cases, the Supreme Court also upheld that consensual sexual relationships between adults are not an offence, even when the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (2023) in section 84 retains the exception of adultery.
- The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 includes “relationships in the nature of marriage” at par with those by consanguinity, marriage and being members of a joint family.
- This has been hailed as an instance of recognising the diverse ways in which intimate relationships are “lived”.
- It allows redressal routes for women in cases of violence even when there is no accordance of legalised status to such relationships. The Uttarakhand UCC would change that.
Uttarakhand’s UCC institutionalizes the live-in relationships
- It presents an opening of some kind of institutionalisation via the registration of live-in relationships.
- It does not clarify the legal status of partners for each other as next-of-kin, or modalities of acquisition of joint property, inheritance, and so on.
- However, it includes laudable provisions for maintenance for women upon desertion by a partner and the upholding of the legitimate status of children born into such relationships.
- It notes that children may also be born to such couples via surrogacy and assisted reproductive technologies, even when the laws regulating these modes of reproduction seek to limit access to primarily heterosexual married couples.
- It remains to be seen if the Uttarakhand UCC can open doors for some revisions on this count notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s recent adjudication about people who “cannot have it all” by opting out of marriages.
Global example of laws on live-in relationships
- Globally, alternatives to marriage have been legislated variously as “civil unions”, arguably as a means of recognising same-sex relationships, even when such civil unions have been opted for by heterosexual couples.
- France has the provision for Pacte Civil de Solidarité (PACS) which is essentially a contract between two people to “organise their life” together, that the state then recognises.
Uttarakhand’s UCC can bring moral policing
- In contrast, the Uttarakhand UCC seems to make the state a stakeholder in the relationship by entrusting registrars with the task of “conducting summary inquiry” and “verifications” with the assistance of local police on the veracity of the “statements” that those in a live-in relationship are required to submit.
- The content of these “statements” does not include any delineation of commitments towards each other by the partners, but merely an intimation to the state, supplied jointly.
- To that effect, it is not far-fetched to see this as a surveillance tool and not a mode of legalising such relationships.
- The powers given to the registrar and police are not just limited to acceptance or denial of registration of the statements, but extend to recommendation of police action.
- There are provisions for punishment for violations and lapses to the order of three to six months’ imprisonment and fines between Rs 10,000 to Rs 25,000.
- The registrar and the police are empowered to act on their “own motion or receipt of a complaint or information”.
- In a particularly worrisome provision, they are also required to inform parents/guardians of those who are below 21 years of age.
- These provisions open the floodgates to moral policing and severe intrusions on the privacy of citizens, especially for inter-faith and inter-caste couples.
Conclusion: In a socio-cultural context where practices of caste and religious heterosexual endogamy are the norm, citizens of a secular democracy who choose to be in non-normative relationships, deserve non-discrimination, recognition and protections and, at the very least, no threat of criminalisation and persecution at the hands of vigilantes.
Topic 2 : Taking cancer on
Introduction: For decades, oncologists have relied on chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery to treat cancer patients. CAR T-cell therapy is among the most promising recent developments, especially because it has shown the ability to eradicate advanced leukemias and lymphomas.
The history of treatment of cancer
- These are still the primary methods to treat the dreaded disease.
- In the past two decades, however, research has extended the frontiers of anti-cancer interventions.
- Drugs have been developed to home in on the molecule cancer cells require to survive and spread.
- Immune system-boosting drugs have shown the ability to shrink tumors in some patients with advanced malignancy.
Latest innovation in the treatment of cancer and India’s entry into this race
- CAR T-cell therapy is among the most promising recent developments, especially because it has shown the ability to eradicate advanced leukemias and lymphomas.
- Most of the early research in this field was conducted in laboratories in the US, Europe and China.
- In October, India joined this elite list after the country’s drug regulator approved a CAR T-cell therapy incubated at Tata Memorial Centre and IIT Bombay laboratories.
- Now, a 64-year-old former army doctor has become the first patient in the country to be free of cancer cells after being administered this therapy.
The mechanism of CAR-T cell therapy’s working
- CAR T-cell therapies are customized for each patient.
- It involves extracting T cells — they help orchestrate the immune response in a patient’s body — growing them in the laboratory, arming them against cancer via gene editing and infusing them back into the patient’s body.
- In other words, the patient is fortified with a living drug that’s constantly working against cancer.
- While it would be too early to say if the former army doctor has been cured for life, evidence from countries that have pioneered the treatment shows that CAR T-cell therapy is effective against relapse.
- The treatment is far less exacting for the patient compared to several sessions of chemotherapy.
- Laboratory and animal studies have shown that India’s homegrown therapy has significantly fewer side effects compared to those developed in the West.
The disease burden of cancer across the world and in India
- In the last decade, cancer mortality rates have declined in the developed countries.
- Cancer incidence and mortality, however, continue to rise, driven by spikes in the Global South.
- In India, where the disease claims about 8 lakh people every year, treatment is expensive for an overwhelming section of the population.
- The homegrown therapy costs about a tenth of the treatment in the US.
- However, at about Rs 40 lakh, it’s beyond the reach of most patients in the country.
- With more laboratories working on this oncological intervention, there is reasonable optimism that costs could come down appreciably in the next decade.
- The country will require inputs from its planners, scientists and policymakers to ensure that the products of such cutting-edge research reach the most vulnerable.
Conclusion: Homegrown therapy against the disease holds promise. Researchers and planners must work to cut costs.