Statement–Argument — Should sale of vital human organs be made legal in India? Arguments: I. No. It goes against our culture. II. No. Legalisation can fuel coercion, exploitation, and other unhealthy practices if safeguards fail. III. Yes. A regulated framework could curb illegal trafficking and reduce black-market harms.

Introduction / Context:
Organ-shortage policy weighs ethical risks (coercion, inequity) against harms from illicit markets and preventable deaths. The proposal to legalise organ sale must be justified by governance capacity and net social benefit.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• There is unmet demand for organs; black markets can be dangerous and exploitative.
• Design choices include consent standards, price caps, eligibility, transparency, enforcement, and post-operative care.
• Appeals to “culture” are not, by themselves, policy analyses.

Concept / Approach:
Arguments are strong when they articulate concrete mechanisms or risks aligned with core goals: saving lives, fairness, and preventing exploitation. Vague or purely cultural claims carry little policy weight without operational reasoning.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) I (culture) lacks operational content—norms matter but cannot by themselves evaluate safety, equity, or enforcement. Weak.2) II flags concrete hazards (coercion, asymmetry of information, undue inducement). These are well-recognised risks that, if poorly regulated, could worsen outcomes. Strong.3) III contends that a transparent, accountable legal system may reduce black-market harms and improve patient safety. Strong, contingent on robust regulation.4) Because II and III address the central trade-off (exploitation vs. harm-reduction via regulation), both are strong.

Verification / Alternative check:
Many jurisdictions prohibit organ sale but allow altruistic donation; others discuss regulated incentives (e.g., expense reimbursements). The debate everywhere hinges on II vs. III considerations.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“None/Only I/Only III” omit critical dimensions; “I and II” overweights culture and ignores potential benefits of regulated markets.

Common Pitfalls:
Equating legalisation with laissez-faire; ignoring enforcement and equity design.

Final Answer:
II and III are strong.