European Court rules assisted suicide case inadmissible for abuse of rights

The case of an elderly woman who sought to end her life under Switzerland's assisted suicide laws because she feared the "decline of her physical and mental faculties" has been declared inadmissible by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).  

Alda Gross filed a complaint against the Swiss Government after doctors refused to provide her with a lethal dose of drugs on the grounds that she was not suffering from a terminal illness.
 
In its Chamber judgment in 2013, the ECHR held, by a majority, that there had been a violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights, and that Swiss law was not sufficiently clear as to the circumstances under which assisted suicide would be permitted.

The case was subsequently referred to the Grand Chamber at the request of the Swiss Government. However, in January 2014, the Swiss Government informed the Court that Ms Gross had ended her life in 2010 with the help of assisted suicide group, EXIT, after she obtained a medical prescription for a lethal dose of sodium pentobarbital.

The Court had not been informed of the incident by her legal counsel, who said he was unaware of Ms Gross' death since he had only contacted her via an intermediary, a voluntarily worker at EXIT.

In its chamber judgment this week, the ECHR ruled that Ms Gross "had taken special precautions to prevent information about her death from being disclosed to her counsel and thus to the Court" to prevent the Court from discontinuing the proceedings.

The Court found that her conduct had constituted an abuse of the right of individual application, and declared the application inadmissible.

Responding to the outcome, Paul Coleman of Alliance Defending Freedom said: "Because the government has an obligation to protect life, not assist in promoting death, we are pleased to see this bad decision thrown out despite the extraordinary circumstances.

"The lawsuit's claim that a person should be able to do whatever he or she pleases does not override national laws rightfully designed to protect the weak and vulnerable."

To read a press release on the judgment click here >