A critical analysis of Basotho conception of euthanasia

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

A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF BASOTHO CONCEPTION OF

EUTHANASIA

Seeiso Jonas Koali*

Abstract

This article takes a critical look atthe moral

justification of the practice of active and involuntary

euthanasia among the Basotho. Inthis practice,

terminally illaged people were left at the entrance of a

kraal tobetrampled by cattle until they died. On the

other hand, itis argued that this practice violated both

the notion of intrinsic human dignity and the principle

of respect for autonomy. The paper concludes that there

isno 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; itis 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 itisargued that these types of

euthanasia are morally unacceptable.

70

LLJ Vol.23 NO.1

InLesotho, the law is silent about the practice of euthanasia. Even

the ancestors of Basotho who happened to practice euthanasia were

doing itas a traditional practice, notbecause it was legal.1 Despite

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

persistent agony due toterminal 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 isno law that prohibits euthanasia in Lesotho? Or should

people be allowed tobe 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 ofbeneficence which refers toa 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, itisargued that the practice of

euthanasia through the notion of‘dyingwith dignity’as

justification for euthanasia was a slogan used tomask 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 inthis paper isused torefer 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 ofPhilosophy, 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 meto 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 donot provide for this practice.