Illness through the eyes of Indian Legal System

Aanchal Sharrma

Remedial Blog Post – Mental

Narayan and Shikha in their article on the Indian Legal System and Mental Health deal with the changes in the legal system in our country and the kind of impact it has on the understanding of mental illnesses, its perception, and treatment. The article deals with three point of views, one is in Ancient India, second is changes observed during the colonial period and third, is the modern perspective which has emerged due to appeals by the United Nations and many human right activists. Through this essay, I am going to analyze the importance of the article, the changes in the legal system over time. I will focus on explaining that the legal system is important in creating informed opinions about mental health and about people with mental illnesses.

Ancient India had a distinct law, which was an independent school of legal theory and practice. This means it lacked any outside influence which I believe, could be both a positive and negative feature. A positive way to perceive this would be that it was only made for the Indian society, having a deeper understanding of local cultures and mindsets, and was not polluted by any outside negative force. A negative outlook would be that it was too confined to our own understanding of the society, and modern views were needed to help develop more accepting and inclusive mindsets. The ancient legal system was viewed as compatible with religious prescriptions and a space for philosophical discourse. The Arthshastra and the Manusmriti were considered legal authoritative guidelines at the time. But the ancient law was soon taken over by a more powerful force.

The colonial period brought many changes to Indian society, especially to the legal system in India, impacting the regulations on Mental Illness. Our present system is derived from the British system or the ‘English Common Law’. The earlier laws that were made were more concerned with the custodial aspects of mental illness and protection and welfare of the rest of the society. I feel like this legal feature could have been the reason for the perception of the mentally ill or disabled to be a threat to the rest of the society. The laws made the courts the judge for the competency and dangerousness of a patient, and diminished responsibility or welfare of society.

The later schools of thought brought a change to these laws, whose revision continues to date. The introduction of the UNCRPD (United Nations Convention for Rights of Persons with Disabilities) brought about a major change in the perception of the mental health issue as a human rights issue instead of a social welfare one. The UNCRPD stressed the importance of the patient requiring care and treatment, which needed to be the main focus of the laws. This was based on the idea of equality, dignity and legal capacity. Several human rights activists put pressure on provisions for the mentally sick in absolute terms and were against involuntary hospitalizations.

An important idea of the rights of an individual was brought to light by this article which I feel is not a need, but a necessity in our society today. With changing perceptions, the laws are being revised to focus instead on the rights of persons with mental illnesses rather than their competency and sense of responsibility. It is important that mental health is viewed at par with physical health. Mental ill persons are meant to be treated with care and concern, not with a sense of threat. Their suffering and issue need to be understood, and provisions in schools, offices, public spaces and legislations need to be made in their favor too. There is a deep sensitization of the society which needs to occur at this point of change in our society, where we are beginning to adapt and adjust to modern ways of thinking.

I feel the legal system is an important role in creating these opinions in our society. The legal system being the third pillar of democracy keeps a check on the community and all social groups in it. It stresses on equality before the law. Something that becomes a law, is understood as a given by the general society. Which is why, when the law perceives the mentally ill to be a threat, and to require protection from, general society tend to pick up on this viewpoint. Hence these revisions towards a more inclusive, safe environment can only be enforced by a strong judicial change. The judiciary can stand up for the equality of every citizen, in the most basic manner of the right to life, expression, and liberty.

The issue of the mentally ill is not a controversial but instead a misunderstood one. The article highlights in detail the different laws on marriage, making contracts, empowerment, prevention of exploitation, testamentary capacity, criminal liability and provisions they have for the sanity of the mind, and persons with mental illness. The informative article serves as a reference for knowing where we, as a country went wrong and what needs to be changed. A person, even if is mentally ill, is a person after all, and neither any law or mindset has the right to take that feature away from them.

References: 

Choudhary Laxmi Narayan and Deep Shikha, Indian legal system and mental health, Indian J Psychiatry, 2013 Jan