Filenews 30 January 2022 - by Marios Demetriou
"A good approach to the issue of euthanasia should essentially answer the four questions 'who, where, when and how', i.e. who, where, when and how will be entitled to exercise this right to euthanasia, and then we will have a comprehensive text that can help those who choose such a remedy, but also the state to ensure a fair application of this right."
The above is highlighted by the lawyer Alexandros Clerides in a relevant thorough study that he handed over to the Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights last Monday, January 24, 2022 on the occasion of the discussion of the issue of euthanasia – for the first time – by the Cypriot Parliament that marked the beginning of a social dialogue on this Cypriot taboo of death.
Al. Clerides represented the Pancyprian Bar Association in the session along with his colleague Achilleas Dimitriadis, while the General Director of the Ministry of Health, Christina Giannaki, the Secretary of the Pancyprian Medical Association and President of the Ethics Committee of the PiS, Michalis Anastasiades, the President of the National Bioethics Committee of Cyprus, Konstantinos Fellas, the Archimandrite Georgios Christodoulou on behalf of the Holy Synod of the Church of Dr Aristotelis Konstantinidis, associate professor of International Law and Human Rights Law at the University of Cyprus and Dr Stergios Mitas, assistant professor at the Law School of the University of Nicosia.
This was an ex officio examination following a joint recommendation by the members of the European Parliament from AKEL, DISY and the Movement of Ecologists, Irene Charalambidou, Giorgos Koukoumas, Ritas Theodorou Superman, Fotini Tsiridou, Marios Mavridis and Alexandra Attalidou.
We note that the conspiracy to commit euthanasia in Cyprus is a criminal offense, while there is no uniform regulation on the subject by the national laws of the Member States of the European Union. "The purpose of the text is to inform and educate the people who will enter the process to draft the bill and the regulations that will follow this law regarding euthanasia in Cyprus," Al says in the introduction to his multi-page work. Clerides.
The study includes, among other things, an analysis of the legal framework of Cyprus and other countries, European and non-European, that have already legislated on the issue, as well as a broader analysis of various aspects of the issue of euthanasia, "which of course should be taken into account so that the work which will be accepted by the Cypriot state as a whole can be done correctly and in a thorough manner". In this direction Al. Clerides concludes with specific suggestions by stating that "an amendment should be made to the Safeguarding and Protection of Patients' Rights Law of 2004 (1(I)/2005) in order to make an explicit reference that euthanasia is a "cure" and a doctor can, at the choice of the "patient", proceed to such treatment". Other key suggestions of the author of the study are "the amendment of the Penal Code, the creation of a new specific Law, the creation of a new specific Regulation and the protection of doctors and other persons involved in the process".
The text also refers to the relevant case law of the European Court of Human Rights, where in a recent text entitled "End of life and the European Convention on Human Rights, (April 2021)", it is underlined that "there is no euthanasia in Europe, as defined in Belgium and the Netherlands – as the appropriate termination of one's life at one's explicit request". But, as Al points out. "through the jurisprudence of the ECtHR on this issue, it was decided that each state has the discretion to decide on its own parameters and regulations. The European Court of Justice, in some very important judgments, where it examined the issue of euthanasia and how it is interpreted through the articles of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, came to decide that the right to the protection of life cannot be interpreted as conferring the right to death and that Article 2 of the Convention on the right to life is above all the other articles (p.s. Article 2 states that "the right of every person to life is protected by law. No death by intent may be imposed, except in the case of the execution of the death penalty following a court decision in the case of an offence punishable by law by that penalty').
Historical and theoretical background
As Al writes, "the English philosopher Roger Bacon referred to euthanasia for the first time, referring to the concept of death in peace, serenity and without anguish, pain or other annoyances of the dying person. It is divided into active and passive euthanasia. The first exists when specific positive acts or measures, such as the administration of a toxic substance by a third person, result in the death of the sufferer. The second exists when no measures are taken to prevent death, either by not starting or by discontinuing treatment that can prolong the victim's life. Also as active euthanasia can be considered the medically assisted suicide, where the patient is given by a doctor a toxic drug, which then the patient himself administers to himself, thus putting an end to his life. However, in order to answer the question of why euthanasia is considered a criminal offence, we need to look at it historically and religiously.
Suicide was condemned in ancient Greek law where it was considered an act that was directed against the interests of the city. The philosopher Aristotle states that the law forbids suicide and that the autochthonous man harms and does injustice to the city, while in no way will those who commit suicide be called brave. The Hippocratic Oath considered it unfair to take away life in any way and from him it is immediately understood the explicit prohibition of what we call today "assisted suicide". Also, euthanasia is removed from the Christian religion regardless of motive, however good that may be, precisely because it is an act of deliberate termination of life—of life that is a supreme gift of God. The attitude of the Orthodox Church in Greece on the issue, on the occasion of the legalization of euthanasia by the Dutch Parliament in 2002, when it announced at the time that "the beginning and the end of life are in the hands of God and euthanasia is in fact an assisted suicide, i.e. a combination of murder and suicide".
"Is freedom superior to the value of life?"
The position of the Cypriot Church on the issue of euthanasia was expressed at the meeting of the Human Rights Committee in the Parliament last Monday by the Chief Secretary of the Holy Synod, Archimandrite Georgios Christodoulou (Doctor of Theology and Professor at the Pancyprian Gymnasium of Nicosia) who stated, among other things, that "this issue has been of great concern to the Synod of the Church of Cyprus, which is always open to dialogue and listens of course to the messages of modern data.
The issue, he added, that the Church has been raising from the outset, is whether man has the right to possess absolute ownership rights to his biological existence. And at the end of the day, is man's freedom superior to the value of life? And since the issue of the visible prospect of misuse of the issue of euthanasia has been raised by the lawyers present, yes euthanasia can possibly be turned into eugenic, social and even Nazi if the term is allowed.
The Church is clear in the sense that life goes back to the supreme principle that is God. So the man who accepts the will of God, precisely in the humanly way, even the pain, reduces him as a participation in the sufferings of Christ himself according to Orthodox anthropology and theology. That's why there is the hope of the afterlife that gives another dimension to this problem we are discussing today." In response to a question by Irene Charalambidou "why does it negate?", Archimandrite Georgios said that "the Church is not exhausted in contradictions, which is why life is always overshadowed. If you pay attention to the ecclesiastical liturgical tradition, man is honoured from the day of conception, so he has an ontological continuity from conception to the end of death, in the sense that—for those who believe—death is the beginning of another life." In a statement after the meeting, the archimandrite invoked the ancient Greek tradition and the medical oath of Hippocrates, as well as the Greek-Christian tradition. "All this," he said, has been discussed in a spirit of dialogue, and I come back with a more optimistic note, that in this metaphysical absence, where despair is essentially favoured, especially in the moments of the climax of pain and death, there is the faint hope and expectation of the godly man for the afterlife, and this hope gives more endurance and fortitude."
The challenge of mapping death...
"The recent raising of the issue of euthanasia refers us again to the view of death in the context of our daily lives," Professor Konstantinos Fellas, president of the Cyprus National Bioethics Committee, vice-rector of the University of Nicosia, said in a note to the Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights. "Demographic, cultural, social, and economic factors—it is added to the note—are involved in the effort to understand and manage the unquestionable truth of death, seeking the correct position of science towards patients with an imminent outcome. Have we finally deconstructed the taboo of death?
The infant reality of society today is coloured intensely, or even more intensely, by the denial of grief, pain and suffering caused by the surrounding atmosphere of death. So we lose the enjoyment of life, in the sorrow of the end. The problem of euthanasia is of great concern to Bioethics, as proposals and clarifications are urgently sought on key questions that arise, about the right to a dignified death, the right to refuse a proposed treatment and the medical assistance to euthanasia. The ethical questions about euthanasia to which Bioethics attempts to provide answers are many and sometimes contradictory to each other. Some of them are: Is euthanasia a crime? Is it of moral value to distinguish between active and passive euthanasia? What is the relationship between euthanasia and medical duty?
The Cyprus National Bioethics Committee attempts to contribute substantially and constructively to the public debate on euthanasia through a series of initiatives: 1) issuing an opinion, 2) conducting a nationwide survey on the attitudes, knowledge and perceptions of Cypriots regarding euthanasia, 3) conducting research among the members of the Pancyprian Medical Association on euthanasia and 4) conducting a scientific conference on euthanasia. The ever-increasing dynamics of euthanasia find human society powerless to evaluate and classify it as acceptable or not, for the reason that it is a challenge to map death, prepare for its unquestionable coming, clearly recognize our mortality, and synthesize Ars Moriendi's art. Because it presupposes the group, cathartic encounter of the community with our divine and our hidden, at a time when social and family ties have been loosened, while contact with the divine is going through its own existential crisis. Teamwork, in a process of self-recognition, support and participation are points of reference. The redefinition of the concept of death is a central coordinate for people at the end of their lives, who are called upon to take responsibility for their own processes in closing chapters, preparing their accounts, embracing them with reconciliation and mutual forgiveness, in order to bring about peace."
"Life is a right and not an obligation"...
"The legalization of euthanasia is progress, because it concerns the morality and the personal freedom of everyone," Alexandra Attalidou, MP for the Movement of Ecologists, told "F". He added: "If at the discretion of the individual it serves positively himself and the people close to him and does not violate the rights of anyone, it is absolutely a moral act. Every human being must have the right to choose when and how to die, with dignity as imposed by his conscience. Prolonging a miserable and painful life of a person who may not even react to the environment, with no chance of returning, does not have a positive effect on the lives of himself and those around him. Life is a right and not an obligation. The subjective perception of the dignity and value of each person's life must not be undermined by third parties."
Mrs. Attalidou spoke at last Monday's debate in parliament "about the right of individual dignity, of free choice, of self-determination in the body and in the life of each of us. There must—she said—be self-determination even in death, provided of course that it is legislated and that any possibility of abuse of the law is ruled out."
