## Facts

- Marie Fleming, a 59-year-old woman with late-stage multiple sclerosis, was almost completely paralysed, in severe pain, and wished to end her life with assistance from her partner.
- Ireland had decriminalised suicide but criminalised aiding, abetting, counselling, or procuring another’s suicide under Criminal Law (Suicide) Act 1993 § 2(2), punishable by up to 14 years’ imprisonment.
- Fleming’s partner was willing to assist only if doing so would not expose him to prosecution under § 2(2).
- Fleming sought (1) a declaration that § 2(2) was unconstitutional, and (2) a declaration that it was incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as applied domestically.
- A three-judge High Court dismissed her claims; she appealed only the constitutional and ECHR-compatibility rulings.
- The Supreme Court of Ireland (judgment delivered by the Chief Justice on behalf of the Court) heard the appeal.

## Issues

1. Whether the Constitution of Ireland protects a right to assisted suicide as part of autonomy, bodily integrity, privacy, or self-determination.
2. Whether § 2(2)’s prohibition on assisted suicide unconstitutionally discriminates against severely disabled persons who cannot end their lives without help.
3. Whether § 2(2) is incompatible with the ECHR (including Articles 2, 3, 8, and 14), warranting a declaration of incompatibility.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld § 2(2).
- The Court held the Constitution does not confer a right to assisted suicide or to have one’s life ended with another’s assistance.
- The Court rejected the claim that the law’s practical impact on persons with severe disabilities amounted to unconstitutional discrimination.
- The Court held the ECHR does not require Ireland to legalise assisted suicide and that the blanket prohibition fell within the State’s discretion under Convention doctrine.
- No declaration of incompatibility was granted.

## Legal Principles

- Constitutional protections for autonomy and bodily integrity, including the right to refuse medical treatment, do not entail a positive right to be assisted in dying.
- The constitutional duty to protect and vindicate life supports legislative authority to enact broad criminal prohibitions aimed at safeguarding life and preventing abuse of vulnerable persons.
- Equality guarantees do not bar all laws with differential practical effects; classifications connected to legitimate objectives and justified by the protection of vulnerable persons may be permissible.
- A general criminal ban on assisted suicide can be a proportionate response to risks of coercion, exploitation, and difficulties in reliably policing consent and voluntariness.
- Under the ECHR, States retain a wide margin of appreciation on assisted-suicide regulation; the Convention does not create a right to die or impose a duty to facilitate assisted suicide.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Court of Ireland held that Ireland’s criminal prohibition on assisting suicide is constitutional and ECHR-compliant, rejecting claims of a constitutional or Convention-based right to assisted dying and concluding that protecting life and vulnerable persons justified maintaining a general ban.


Fleming v. Ireland, [2013] IESC 19 (Ir. 2013)