A critical analysis of Basotho conception of euthanasia

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Author: Seeiso Jonas Koali
• DOI: 10.10520/EJC185613
• Published date: 01 January 2015
• Date: 01 January 2015
• Pages: 69-86
• Published By: National University of Lesotho

A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF BASOTHO CONCEPTION OF

EUTHANASIA

Seeiso Jonas Koali*

Abstract

This article takes a critical look at the moral

justification of the practice of active and involuntary

euthanasia among the Basotho. In this practice,

terminally ill aged people were left at the entrance of a

kraal to be trampled by cattle until they died. On the

other hand, it is argued that this practice violated both

the notion of intrinsic human dignity and the principle

of respect for autonomy. The paper concludes that there

is no moral justification for the practice of active and

involuntary euthanasia among the Basotho people

because this practice constituted murder.

Key words: Autonomy, Active and Involuntary Euthanasia,

Deontology, Human Dignity, Ubuntu.

Introduction

The debates for and against euthanasia have frequently been on the

Western literature. Less has been said about euthanasia specifically

in the African context. This article intends to differentiate two kinds

of dignity namely; extrinsic and intrinsic dignity, and argue that

Basotho communities confined themselves to only one kind of

dignity namely extrinsic dignity. While it is true that euthanasia can

be performed in many ways; it is however the aim of this article to

illustrate that Basotho communities were practicing both active

euthanasia and involuntary euthanasia through the motives of

extrinsic human dignity and it is argued that these types of

euthanasia are morally unacceptable.

70

LLJ Vol.23 NO.1

In Lesotho, the law is silent about the practice of euthanasia. Even

the ancestors of Basotho who happened to practice euthanasia were

doing it as a traditional practice, not because it was legal.1 Despite

this, there are individuals and family members who go through a

persistent agony due to terminal illness of their beloved family

members and the question is whether these family members can

also continue with the practice of traditional euthanasia because

there is no law that prohibits euthanasia in Lesotho? Or should

people be allowed to be killed when suffering from terminal illness

by expressing their medical preferences to the family elders.

This article firstly concludes that the practice of active euthanasia

and involuntary euthanasia among the Basotho community

violated the principle of beneficence which refers to a moral

obligation to act for the benefit of others because the practice was

not performed mercifully. This practice also violated the principle

of autonomy because the aged people were killed without their

informed consent. Secondly, it is argued that the practice of

euthanasia through the notion of ‘dying with dignity’ as

justification for euthanasia was a slogan used to mask the fact that

the remaining family members considered old people as a burden

to themselves. Hence this practice was simply used as a mechanism

to relieve their psychological suffering when seeing an old person

becoming helpless. Euthanasia in this paper is used to refer to

mercy-killing, while autonomy is used to refer to the capacity of

adults to express their preferences. Dying with dignity is the notion

*Lecturer, Department of Philosophy, National University of Lesotho,

Email: koaliseeiso@yahoo.com

**I would like to thank an anonymous referee for valuable comments on

the original manuscript for helping me to give euthanasia a two pronged

approach on moral aspect and customary law.

1 The Laws of Lerotholi a re the governing statute on Customary Law and

they do not provide for this practice.