User:Wikipeacheye/sandbox

= R (Conway) v The Secretary of State for Justice = R (Conway) are a series of judgments in the courts of the United Kingdom running between 2016 and 2019. The case was brought by Noel Conway, a man with motor nearone disease, who wanted assistance to bring an end to his life at a time of his choosing when his condition deteriorated. In the United Kingdom, assisting somone to commit suicide is a criminal offence under section 2(1) of the Suicide Act 1961. The cases concern Conway's argument that section 2(1) of the Suicide Act is incompatible with his human rights.

High Court
Conway's argument was that a blanket ban on assisted suicide under the Suicide Act was disproportionate, and constituted an interference with his rights under Article 8(1) [LINK] of the European Convention of Human Rights [LINK]. He also put forward an alternative set of laws which he argued would allow people to assist others to commit suicide in certain circumstances, and would make a blanket ban unnecessary. He aruged that section 2(1) of the Suicide Act 1961 should be changed to allow people to seek assistance from another commit suicide by their own act, in accordance with the laws he proposed.

The Government accepted that the ban constitutes an interference with Conway's rights under Article 8 (this is well established under previous case law [reference to it in the judgment]). However, it argued that the ban is compatible with with those rights, such a ban being  '...'necessary in a democratic society' as a proportionate measure 'for the protection of health', 'for the protection of morals', and 'for the protection of the rights of others .'' It was also argued that whilst the ban is a blanket prohibition, this was necessary in order to protect the weak and vulnerable. Parliament had chosen to enact protection of members of the community and respect the sanctity of life.

The key reasonings...

In 2017, the High Court of the United Kingdom refused to make a declaration of incompatibility under section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998. Had it been made, the declaration would have held section 2(1) of the Suicide Act 1961 incompatible with Conway's right to respect for his private life (Article 8(1) of the European Convention of Human Rights).

Appeal to the Court of Appeal

Following the judgment, Conway appealed to the Court of Appeal. The case was heard....

Appeal to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
The Supreme Court considered the case on 27 November 2018 and refused permission to appeal. The court acknowledged the importance of the ongoing debate on assisted suicide, the law and the impact of the issue on Conway himself. They referred to a judgment in an earlier case in the European Court of Human Rights (link) (Nicklinson v United Kingdom (2015) [link]) which stated that it was for Member States (members of the ECHR) to decide whether the interference is justified. This meant that whilst the Supreme Court could consider the issue, and theoretically could issue a declaration that the existing law is incompatible with Conway's human rights, it would still be for Parliament to change the law. As a consequence, the court did not believe Conway's propsects of successs were high enough to proceed to hear the case.

High Court

 * R (on the application of Conway) (Claimant) v Secretary of State for Justice (Respondent) [2017]

Court of Appeal

 * R (on the application of Conway) (Appellant/Claimant) v Secretary of State for Justice (Respondent) [2018] EWCA Civ 1431