The deputies adopted for the third time in committee on Wednesday June 11 the proposed law on assisted dying, by removing from the text two measures dividing the deputies: the creation of offenses of obstruction or incitement to this new right.
By show of hands, the Social Affairs Committee adopted this text from former MP Olivier Falorni, expected in the Chamber from June 22. In the event of new adoption by the Assembly, it would return to the Senate before the last word is given by the government to the Assembly on July 15, to try to bring about this commitment by Emmanuel Macron.
In the meantime, the commission has removed a much-discussed article, providing for offenses of obstruction and incitement to assisted dying. The offense of obstruction, increased according to the examinations, provided for a sentence of two years in prison and a fine of €30,000, modeled on obstruction of the voluntary termination of pregnancy.
In mirror image, the deputies then added an offense of incitement (one year in prison, €15,000 fine), demanded in particular by opponents of the text, and punishing possible pressure on a person to request assistance in dying.
The formulation of the offense of obstruction “goes much too far” for Thibault Bazin (LR), while Christophe Bentz (RN), opposed to the text, would have preferred to keep the offense of incitement to a minimum. Conversely, Sandrine Runel (PS) pleaded for “this offense of obstruction”, emphasizing “that there are still demonstrations against” abortion today. The general rapporteur, Philippe Vigier (MoDem), gave him a favorable opinion on the removal of the two measures, to find “a form of balance”. “But those who want to activate the obstacle, in whatever form it may take, will find us on their way,” he pointed out.
The text creates a supervised procedure for assisted dying, accessible under conditions to certain patients suffering from a serious and incurable condition. A lethal substance would be administered, but a debate still divides deputies on this point.
The text initially provided that it should be the patient who performs the procedure, or that a doctor or nurse should do it when they are not physically able to do so. An environmentalist amendment adopted on Wednesday, on the contrary, provides for giving the person the choice between self-administration and that by a caregiver. And this so “that in her last moments (…) she can have the choice to concentrate on what she wishes to exchange with her loved ones”, argued Danielle Simonnet (environmental group).
This would be a “red line” for many caregivers, retorted Agnès Firmin Le Bodo (Horizons). Philippe Vigier stressed that as it stands, the text would include contradictory injunctions, with another article still providing that self-administration is the rule and euthanasia the exception.
