Former prime ministers unite against assisted dying as Grieve suggests it goes against the rule of law

Three former prime ministers have spoken out against the assisted dying bill as Dominic Grieve warned it would breach the rule of law.

Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Theresa May are all opposed to the bill, which does not have the support of a single former prime minister.

And former attorney general Mr Grieve claimed the bill would be blocked for several reasons by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

open image in gallery

He was one of five former government legal advisers who warned MPs to vote on Friday against the assisted dying bill, the adoption of which was held on a knife's edge. In their letter, they warn that the law would have serious implications for the British justice system and seeks to overturn decades of legal conventions. The times reported.

Mr Grieve cited previous ECHR rulings that decriminalization of assisted dying would violate state obligations if it was not accompanied by adequate safeguards against abuse and coercion, adding that the draft upcoming law does not provide such guarantees.

And in a further blow to Kim Leadbeater's private member's bill, Mr Johnson, Ms Truss and Baroness May have all joined in opposition to its passage. Although none of the former Conservative prime ministers will be able to vote on the measure on Friday, reports have confirmed that all three would oppose it if they did.

open image in gallery

Ms Truss said The Daily Telegraph she was totally opposed to the change, adding: This is wrong in principle: state bodies like the NHS and the justice system should be protecting lives, not ending them.

There is no doubt that, as we have seen in Canada, vulnerable people would be under appalling pressure to end their lives prematurely. The law would be ripe for exploitation by unscrupulous people. MPs should reject this terrible bill and focus instead on improving health services.

Sources close to Baroness May and Mr Johnson have made their opposition clear, while Rishi Sunak is yet to indicate how he plans to vote.

The major interventions come after Gordon Brown said he did not support legalizing assisted dying, arguing the state of the NHS means it is not the right time for momentous change.

The influential former Labor prime minister said the days spent with his wife Sarah beside the bed of their dying baby Jennifer were some of the most precious days of our lives.

open image in gallery

And, in an intervention that threatens to derail Ms Leadbeaters' Terminally Ill (End of Life) Adults Bill, Mr Brown instead called for the creation of a commission to design a fully funded strategy over 10 years for improved and comprehensive palliative care.

A few days before the historic vote, the result is on a razor's edge, with supporters of the bill believing they have enough support, while opponents believe they can block it.

Ms Leadbeater described her bill as the most stringent in the world, with three levels of scrutiny in the form of approval by two doctors and a High Court judge. It would also make coercion a misdemeanor punishable by up to 14 years in prison.

open image in gallery

The legislation, which covers England and Wales, states that only adults who are terminally ill, with less than six months to live and a constant desire to die would be eligible.

Leadbeater said opponents of plans to legalize assisted dying must not hear the stories of the terminally ill.

She called for the debate to focus on the problem we need to solve rather than on Cabinet members who have fallen out with other Cabinet members.

A cross-party group of MPs, including Conservative MP Ben Spencer, Liberal Democrat MP Munira Wilson and Labor MP Anna Dixon, co-sponsored a so-called demolition amendment, which would defeat the bill if enough MPs supported it .

Ms Dixon told BBC Radio 4s on Wednesday Today program: There are many complex legal and practical considerations that we believe a private member's bill will not allow us to adequately address, and that is why we have tabled this cross-party amendment.

The independent review would resemble a law commission or royal commission, and would allow experts to examine issues relating to, for example, coercion in much greater detail.

She continued: As legislators, when we make decisions, it is our responsibility not only to understand the legal implications, as I have suggested, but also to understand that broader societal impact. Who will be affected, how much will it cost?

There isn't as much evidence and that's why we believe an independent review, such as a royal commission, is needed to resolve these issues, Ms Dixon added.

Responding to claims that the bill was not given enough time to be debated, Ms Leadbeater told the programme: There are very clear and strict eligibility criteria for this legislation, so the concept of a slippery slope, I will reject it.

Once this bill is adopted, it cannot be modified; the title of the bill is intentionally reserved for terminally ill adults.