在英格兰和威尔士协助死亡:康威的挑战- dsamjous Vu还是Jamais Vu?

K. Choong, Richard Wm Law
{"title":"在英格兰和威尔士协助死亡:康威的挑战- dsamjous Vu还是Jamais Vu?","authors":"K. Choong, Richard Wm Law","doi":"10.5771/9783845296777-123","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Assisted dying remains illegal in England and Wales in spite of several attempts having been made by campaigners to challenge the law. These were either through judicial review in the courts or the introduction Private Members’ Bills in Parliament. Recently, terminally ill Noel Conway joins the cause by seeking a declaration of incompatibility between the blanket ban on assisted dying as enshrined in section 2(1) Suicide Act 1961, with his right to respect for private life as protected by Article 8(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights. He also proposed a statutory scheme that he claimed would serve as sufficient protection for the weak and vulnerable, and which would in turn render the blanket ban an unnecessary and disproportionate interference with his Article 8(1) rights. However, given that these assertions have been made by previous campaigners, Conway’s decision to field these arguments has a strange sense of familiarity around them. Hence when his application failed to garner the sympathy of the High Court and the Court of Appeal in their recent judgments, this was hardly surprising since these two main routes which campaigners have pursued in the 21st century, have never met with success. By either overlooking or paying insufficient heed to their fates in previous campaigns, Conway’s challenge seemed destined for failure from the outset.","PeriodicalId":293218,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives of law and culture on the end-of-life legislations in France, Germany, India, Italy and United Kingdom","volume":"2016 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assisted Dying in England and Wales: Conway’s Challenge – Déjà Vu or Jamais Vu?\",\"authors\":\"K. Choong, Richard Wm Law\",\"doi\":\"10.5771/9783845296777-123\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Assisted dying remains illegal in England and Wales in spite of several attempts having been made by campaigners to challenge the law. These were either through judicial review in the courts or the introduction Private Members’ Bills in Parliament. Recently, terminally ill Noel Conway joins the cause by seeking a declaration of incompatibility between the blanket ban on assisted dying as enshrined in section 2(1) Suicide Act 1961, with his right to respect for private life as protected by Article 8(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights. He also proposed a statutory scheme that he claimed would serve as sufficient protection for the weak and vulnerable, and which would in turn render the blanket ban an unnecessary and disproportionate interference with his Article 8(1) rights. However, given that these assertions have been made by previous campaigners, Conway’s decision to field these arguments has a strange sense of familiarity around them. Hence when his application failed to garner the sympathy of the High Court and the Court of Appeal in their recent judgments, this was hardly surprising since these two main routes which campaigners have pursued in the 21st century, have never met with success. By either overlooking or paying insufficient heed to their fates in previous campaigns, Conway’s challenge seemed destined for failure from the outset.\",\"PeriodicalId\":293218,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perspectives of law and culture on the end-of-life legislations in France, Germany, India, Italy and United Kingdom\",\"volume\":\"2016 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perspectives of law and culture on the end-of-life legislations in France, Germany, India, Italy and United Kingdom\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845296777-123\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives of law and culture on the end-of-life legislations in France, Germany, India, Italy and United Kingdom","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845296777-123","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在英格兰和威尔士,协助死亡仍然是非法的,尽管活动人士多次试图挑战这项法律。这要么是通过法院的司法审查,要么是通过国会的私人法案。最近,身患绝症的诺埃尔·康威(Noel Conway)加入了这一行列,他寻求一项声明,表明1961年《自杀法》第2(1)条所规定的全面禁止协助死亡与《欧洲人权公约》第8(1)条所保护的尊重私生活的权利之间存在矛盾。他还提出了一项法定计划,他声称该计划将充分保护弱者和弱势群体,从而使全面禁令成为对他第8(1)条权利的不必要和不成比例的干涉。然而,考虑到这些主张是由以前的活动家提出的,康威决定反驳这些论点,对他们有一种奇怪的熟悉感。因此,当他的申请未能在高等法院和上诉法院最近的判决中获得同情时,这并不奇怪,因为这两条活动人士在21世纪所追求的主要路线从未取得成功。在之前的竞选中,康威要么忽视了他们的命运,要么对他们的命运关注不够,从一开始,他的挑战似乎就注定要失败。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assisted Dying in England and Wales: Conway’s Challenge – Déjà Vu or Jamais Vu?
Assisted dying remains illegal in England and Wales in spite of several attempts having been made by campaigners to challenge the law. These were either through judicial review in the courts or the introduction Private Members’ Bills in Parliament. Recently, terminally ill Noel Conway joins the cause by seeking a declaration of incompatibility between the blanket ban on assisted dying as enshrined in section 2(1) Suicide Act 1961, with his right to respect for private life as protected by Article 8(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights. He also proposed a statutory scheme that he claimed would serve as sufficient protection for the weak and vulnerable, and which would in turn render the blanket ban an unnecessary and disproportionate interference with his Article 8(1) rights. However, given that these assertions have been made by previous campaigners, Conway’s decision to field these arguments has a strange sense of familiarity around them. Hence when his application failed to garner the sympathy of the High Court and the Court of Appeal in their recent judgments, this was hardly surprising since these two main routes which campaigners have pursued in the 21st century, have never met with success. By either overlooking or paying insufficient heed to their fates in previous campaigns, Conway’s challenge seemed destined for failure from the outset.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信