Search

On October 24, 2018 the Italian Constitutional Court held that the absolute ban on assisted suicide provided for by Art. 580 of the Italian criminal code is unconstitutional under certain conditions. On the one hand, this Article «serves the purpose of protecting interests that are worthy of protection by the legal system» (p. 6), such as life and the protection of weak and vulnerable people. On the other hand, in specific situations like the one in the DJ Fabo's case, the assistance to die «may seem to the sick person to be the only way out of being kept alive by artificial methods that are no longer desired, and which he or she has the right to refuse» (p. 8). In particular the Court has set four conditions under which the absolute prohibition of suicide assistance can turn to be unconstitutional, and namely in those cases in which «assisted persons are (a) affected by an illness that is incurable and (b) causes physical or psychological suffering, which they find absolutely intolerable, and who are (c) kept alive by means of life support treatments, but remain (d) capable of making free and informed decisions» (p. 8). In such a situation the absolute ban on suicide assistance obliges the patient to «undergo a slower process, in a scenario that corresponds less well to the patient's vision of a dignified death and which is marked by more pain and suffering for the people close to the patient» (p. 9). Being aware of the impact and scope of its remarks and of the values at stake, the Court decided not to immediately declare the unconstitutionality of art. 580 of the criminal code, but rather to postpone the official discussion of the questions of constitutionality to the hearing on September 24, 2019. In a «“collaborative” and “dialogical”» perspective, the Court thus called upon the Parliament to regulate a subject which is at the «intersection between values of primary importance, the balancing of which presupposes, in a direct and immediate way, choices that the legislator is, first of all, authorized to make» (p. 11). As already known, the Parliament has not passed a law on assisted suicide so far; the Court will therefore decide at the hearing on September 24 how to amend what has already defined as a «unconstitutional regulatory scheme» (p. 11). Against this background and considering the reasoning of the Court in December 2018, the Authors of this Document - legal scholars and professionals with long-standing experience in these topics - decided to open an interdisciplinary discussion on the main legal end-of-life issues. Starting from the Order but without limiting the analysis to it, the Working Group met on a monthly basis at the University of Trento and with the support of the Jean Monnet BioTell Project, addressing and studying in depth the large number of tricky issues raised by the Order of the Constitutional Court and linked to a possible Parliament decision. The results of these discussions have been gathered and developed in the Document together with some operational proposals, offering a “constitutionally oriented” and scientific grounded understanding of end-of-life issues. The Working Group thus aimed to contribute to the public debate suggested by the Court, which must be truly informed and plural due to the impact on institutional choices. On September 25, the Constitutional Court ruled the impunity of those who foster the suicide under the conditions expressed in the Court press release reporting the Court's judgment.

Si ricorda anzitutto che il diritto all’esistenza libera e dignitosa previsto dalla Costituzione italiana, dalla Carta sociale europea e dalla Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’UE comporta il diritto all’assistenza nelle situazioni di bisogno che ognuno può vivere durante la propria esperienza di vita. Si approfondisce anche la distinzione tra i contenuti minimi del diritto all’assistenza sociale ricavabili da tali norme e i livelli essenziali delle prestazioni dell’assistenza sociale che devono essere assicurati su tutto il territorio nazionale, anche con finanziamenti statali. Nella situazione italiana in cui i bisogni cre- scono e i fondi scarseggiano tale diritto non è assicurato a tutti, né dallo Stato, né dalle Regioni e dai Comuni, né da enti del privato sociale agevolati dai pubblici poteri, sia perché le agevolazioni fiscali e i trasferimenti monetari sono insufficienti a garantire livelli minimi di sussistenza, tali da far uscire dalle situazioni di povertà e di indigenza cronica, sia perché i livelli essenziali delle prestazioni concernenti l’assistenza sociale non sono stati ancora determinati per tutti i settori, sia per la loro complessa o scarsa prevedibilità (in cui però scelte tecniche e scelte politiche sono strettamente collegate), sia per la loro indubbia ricaduta finanziaria ritenuta incompatibile con le necessità finanziarie statali collegate alla crisi economica, o sono stabiliti da leggi statali troppo vaghe o poco attuate. A tale mancata determinazione generale tentano di sopperire misure legislative assistenziali disposte con leggi statali di dubbia legittimità costituzionale, sia altri strumenti politico-tecnici, tra cui il nuovo ISEE, il nomenclatore nazionale dei servizi, la determinazione dei fabbisogni standard delle funzioni fondamentali dei Comuni in materia di gestione dei servizi sociali a livello locale, che potrebbe finalmente costituire il presupposto per un sistema nazionale omogeneo dell’assistenza sociale