The assisted dying Bill is ‘wholly inadequate’ and puts vulnerable people at risk, a former High Court judge has warned.
In a major intervention, Sir James Munby, one of Britain’s most eminent retired judges, said gaps in the Bill would create a ‘secret process’ where decisions could be made without the public’s knowledge.
The former head of the High Court’s family division said the proposed legislation was ‘defective’ and fell ‘lamentably short of providing adequate safeguards’.
His damning verdict comes as MPs prepare to vote on the potential legislation, proposed by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, on November 29.
The Bill would allow terminally ill adults expected to die within six months to seek help to end their life. Two doctors and a High Court judge would have to verify that they were eligible and had made their decision voluntarily.
It is a free vote, meaning MPs can vote according to conscience rather than the party whip, but many have voiced concerns. Ministers have been told not to express their views and Health Secretary Wes Streeting has come under fire for setting out his objections.
Laying out his opposition to the plans yesterday, Sir James said the Bill does not allow for an ‘open and transparent process’. On the contrary, he said, it ‘permits a secret process which can give us no confidence that it will enable the court to identify and prevent possible abuses’.
He added: ‘There can be no room here for secrecy or concealment. If there is to be a judicial process, it must be open and transparent.’
Sir James Munby, one of Britain’s most eminent retired judges, pictured, said gaps in the Bill would create a ‘secret process’ where decisions could be made without the public’s knowledge
Ministers have been told not to express their views and Health Secretary Wes Streeting, pictured, has come under fire for setting out his objections
Sir James warned that judges would be able to decide cases where patients met the criteria ‘without hearing from the patient and with no input of any sort from the patient’s partner or relatives’.
He cautioned that there was no route to appeal a judge’s decision which meant that the patient’s partner and relatives may not have a say over the outcome. Sir James was also critical of the fact that the draft legislation gives High Court judges the final decision on whether an assisted death can go ahead.
He said it was not the role of the judiciary to decide who had an assisted death, saying ‘it is not what judges do and not what judges are for’.
He added: ‘All in all, in relation to the involvement of the judges in the process, the Leadbeater Bill falls lamentably short of providing adequate safeguards.’ He also warned that the cases would be a huge strain on an already overloaded court system, saying there were not enough judges to take the cases.
His intervention came as Catholic bishops said the Bill ‘put compassion under threat’ and warned it would put the most vulnerable at risk. They said they were ‘alarmed’ by the legislation which could lead to older, sick and disabled people being ‘pressured’ into ending their lives.
Sir James’ damning verdict comes as MPs prepare to vote on the potential legislation, proposed by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater. pictured,
In a statement, the Catholic Bishops of England, Wales and Scotland criticised the Bill as lacking in compassion.
‘We believe that genuine compassion is under threat because of the attempts in Parliament to legalise assisted suicide. Compassion means to enter into and share the suffering of another person. It means never giving up on anyone or abandoning them.
‘It means loving them to the natural end of their life, even if and when they struggle to find meaning and purpose.’
They said that palliative care with expert pain relief was the best way to treat people near the end of their lives.
The bishops also warned that, though the Bill promises safeguards, many of these had been forgotten in other countries that had introduced assisted dying.
