The dropping of plans for High Court judges to have a key role in the process of 'assisted dying' under the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has rung alarm bells with legal experts who said today the change would weaken vital safeguards. In an amendment to the bill, currently going through line-by-line scrutiny in the House of Commons, the measure's sponsor Kim Leadbeater MP proposed replacing a judge with a panel of experts to approve applications.
Tamasin Perkins, partner at international firm Charles Russell Speechlys described the change as a 'cause for concern'. She added: 'When MPs voted on the bill the involvement of the High Court was seen as an important safeguard and reassurance; removing it is a worrying U-turn. The court system in England and Wales is tested and has been proven to be able to handle difficult decisions, whereas the new tribunal is untested and uncertain, and we still do not know exactly what is being proposed,' Perkins said.
Alexa Payet, partner at national law firm Michelmores, said Leadbeater's proposed amendment appeared to heed the advice of retired High Court judge Sir Nicholas Mostyn, who pointed out to the bill committee that the High Court does not have capacity to deal with assisted dying cases.
However she added: 'Many will view this suggestion as a weakening of the safeguards imposed by the bill which are vital to protect the uncapacious and vulnerable who might be pressured into ending their own life. Clearly a balance must be struck between ensuring appropriate safeguards are in place and avoiding the creation of legislation which is practically unworkable due to the pressures on the justice system.
'Whichever approach is adopted, it would be wise for lawmakers to include a requirement for an advocate to the Court to be appointed to ensure that the evidence in support of an application is appropriately tested.'
Earlier, the Law Society had warned that the impact of the measure on the High Court must be addressed. Legal aid, on a non-means-tested basis should be available to those seeking legal advice as part of the process, it said.
Society president Richard Atkinson said: ’We are focused on supporting an informed and unbiased discussion on the bill. There must be strong independent monitoring and review mechanisms in place with robust, accessible and independent safeguards to ensure people are using the scheme of their own accord. Parliament should closely examine how a person’s capacity to decide to end their own life is defined and assessed.'
1 Reader's comment