A culturally and socially backward-looking country can turn technological advances into weapons of destruction. One inescapable illustration of this is the link between sex determination tests and female foeticide in India. The results are showing in the changed sex ratio, with the female side dropping quite perceptibly. Female foeticide is now reinforcing the effects of female infanticide, which usually requires less technologically advanced means. The non-governmental organization, Centre for Enquiry into Health Themes, has filed a public interest litigation before the Supreme Court regarding the failure of the health departments of 11 states to implement the existing law against the misuse of sex determination tests. Its concerns are both urgent and relevant. But there is something a little askew in the direction in which Cehat has gone. The law courts are there to see whether the law is being followed, or, perhaps, whether fundamental rights are being violated. Necessarily, they cannot ignore PILs which come up before them. This is ultimately a problem. The PIL forces the court to look towards areas which are the responsibility of the various arms of the administration. The court, for example, should not be compelled to look into schoolchildren's midday meals or the state of decay of foodgrains in storehouses. By the same argument, health secretaries of different states should be held to account for their failures by the state executive. Whatever they might say to a court, the effect would merely be a public reiteration of the fact that there exists a law by the name of Pre-Natal Diagnostics Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act. The presence of a law is no guarantee of social change, and, tragically enough, very few laws in the social sphere act as deterrents. Piling up the courts' already overloaded tables is really not a solution. Organizations and pressure groups need to work with the people, and form opinion strong enough to affect the working of the administration. This is what pressure groups do most of the time all over the world. A practice as deep-seated as the destruction of females - female infanticide was a wellknown crime long before female foeticide became popular - is the result of a social disease. Economics does have a part to play, so the poor should be a major target for change in this matter. But unfortunately, the greatest offenders are the well-off and educated. Here, harsh penalties, both legal and social, should be relentlessly exacted. That is only possible if society as a whole becomes sensitive to the magnitude of the crime, so much so that nobody's neighbour can get away with murder. The courts can only wait for the result, they cannot prompt the cause.