The majority on the Constitutional Court considered that the euthanasia law supports the “free, informed, and conscious decision as to how and when to die” in cases of terminal illnesses or severe disability.
The court’s ruling rejected “considering solely and in isolation the fundamental right to life.”
The resolution states that the constitutional concept of life as a fundamental or legal right to be protected is not “disconnected from the will of the person who holds that right” nor is it “indifferent to their decisions on how and when to die.”
The court also said that the government has “the duty to provide the necessary means to enable the help of third parties” and thus administer euthanasia.
In addition, the court stated that palliative care “does not constitute an alternative in all situations of suffering” entailed in the law.
Two judges dissented from the ruling: Enrique Arnaldo and Concepción Espejel, who pointed out that the decision exceeds “the scope and limits of the jurisdiction that corresponds to the Court.”
Credit: Source link
