|
|
|
主要なのは3, 8, 14 http://www.justice4diane.org.uk/case.asp
|
|
|
|
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/1957438.stm
|
|
Diane Pretty's unsuccessful
application to the European Court of Human Rights claimed that the UK
government were violating five key rights. The judgement, delivered on
Monday, rejected all of these arguments.
|
|
Article 2 (right to life)
- no violation.
|
|
Diane Pretty claimed that
the existence of a right to life could also confer a right to die - which she
was therefore being denied.
|
|
The court ruled: "In
its case-law in this area the Court had placed consistent emphasis on the
obligation of the State to protect life.
|
|
"In these circumstances
it was not persuaded that 'the right to life' guaranteed in Article 2 could
be interpreted as involving a negative aspect.
|
|
"Article 2 could not,
without a distortion of language, be interpreted as conferring the
diametrically opposite right, namely a right to die; nor could it create a
right to self-determination in the sense of conferring on an individual the
entitlement to choose death rather than life."
|
|
Article 3 (prohibition of
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment) - no violation
|
|
Mrs Pretty said that denying
her the right to assisted suicide was, by prolonging her life, making her
endure such "inhuman or degrading treatment".
|
|
The judges ruled: "The
Court could not but be sympathetic to the applicant's apprehension that
without the possibility of ending her life she faced the prospect of a
distressing death.
|
|
"Nonetheless, the
positive obligation on the part of the State which had been invoked would
require that the State sanction actions intended to terminate life, an
obligation that could not be derived from Article 3." Article 8
(right to respect for private life) - no violation
|
|
Mrs Pretty claimed that this
article clearly gave her a right to self-determination, in particular the
ability to choose how to end it.
|
|
The ruling stated: "The
law in issue in this case, section 2 of the Suicide Act, was designed to
safeguard life by protecting the weak and vulnerable and especially those who
were not in a condition to take informed decisions against acts intended to
end life or to assist in ending life.
|
|
"The Court did not
consider that the blanket nature of the ban on assisted suicide was
disproportionate.
|
|
"It did not appear to
be arbitrary for the law to reflect the importance of the right to life, by
prohibiting assisted suicide while providing for a system of enforcement and
adjudication which allowed due regard to be given in each particular case to
the public interest in bringing a prosecution, as well as to the fair and
proper requirements of retribution and deterrence."
|
|
Article 9 (freedom of
conscience) - no violation
|
|
Mrs Pretty said that the
failure to provide a scheme to allow her to end her life violated this act by
preventing her from exercising her beliefs.
|
|
The ruling stated: "The
applicant's claims did not involve a form of manifestation of a religion or
belief, through worship, teaching, practice or observance as described in the
second sentence of the first paragraph.
|
|
"The term
"practice" did not cover each act which was motivated or influenced
by a religion or belief."
|
|
Article 14 (prohibition
of discrimination) - no violation.
|
|
Mrs Pretty said that the
current law discrimated against her, as an able-bodied person would be
legally able to commit suicide, whereas she could not without help.
|
|
The ruling stated:
"There was, in the Court's view, objective and reasonable justification
for not distinguishing in law between those who were and those who were not
physically capable of committing suicide.
|
|
"Cogent reasons existed
for not seeking to distinguish between those who were able and those who were
unable to commit suicide unaided.
|
|
"The borderline between
the two categories would often be a very fine one and to seek to build into
the law an exemption for those judged to be incapable of committing suicide
would seriously undermine the protection of life which the 1961 Act was intended
to safeguard and greatly increase the risk of abuse."
|
|
|