Europe rights court rules Switzerland laws on assisted suicide too vague

[JURIST] The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) [official website] ruled [judgment, press release, PDF] Tuesday that Swiss law does not provide sufficient guidelines on the extent of the right to die, in violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights [PDF]. Article 8 protects an individual's right to respect for private life, which was interpreted by the court in the 2011 case Haas v. Switzerland [judgment, PDF] to include an individual's right to decide the way in which and at which point his or her life should end, so long as he was in a position to form his own judgment and act accordingly. In the present case of Gross v. Switzerland, applicant Alda Gross, an elderly Swiss woman, petitioned the ECHR [AP report] after she could not find a doctor to prescribe her a lethal dosage because she suffered from no clinical illnesses. She had argued she was entitled to end her life rather than become increasingly frail. The Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland [official website, in German] has previously ruled that a doctor could issue a lethal dosage to a patient after taking certain steps, but no distinction was ever made as to whether those guidelines applied strictly to those suffering from a terminal illness. Because of this absence of clear guidelines, the court limited itself to ruling that Gross's right to respect for her private life was violated without taking a stance on the substantive content of Switzerland's assisted suicide guidelines.

The right to die [JURIST news archive] has been a contentious issue around the world. The only European countries that allow assisted suicide are Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Switzerland. Last month, the Supreme Court of Ireland rejected an appeal [JURIST report] by a paralyzed woman seeking to allow her partner to help her commit suicide. Although Ireland decriminalized suicide in 1993, it is still a crime to assist another to commit suicide. In December a report released by the French government recommended [JURIST report] that the country permit doctors to "accelerate death" for terminally ill patients seeking doctor-assisted euthanasia. In August the High Court of England and Wales denied [JURIST report] the plea of a paralyzed man challenging the legitimacy of the Suicide Act 1961 and other laws barring his ability to commit suicide. In 2011 an Indian high court ruled [JURIST report] passive euthanasia was permitted under certain circumstances. In 2010 a German court ruled [JURIST report] that removing a patient from life support would not be a criminal offense if the patient had previously given consent.

 

About Paper Chase

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible format.

© Copyright JURIST Legal News and Research Services, Inc., 2013.