Press release, for immediate release
Dublin, 9 April 2013
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) today (9 April 2013) underlined the clear duty of medical practitioners to act with all due haste to save a patient’s life during a medical emergency, and the positive duty of the state to promptly and independently investigate deaths that occur following alleged shortcomings in medical care.
Today’s judgment in the case of Şentürk and Şentürk v Turkey, found Turkey in breach of Article 2 (right to life) of the European Convention for Human Rights following the failure of medics in several Turkish hospitals to provide appropriate emergency treatment to Mrs Şentürk, who had been experiencing a miscarriage, and required emergency surgery in order to save her life. As a result of the failure on the part of medics in several hospitals to provide appropriate care, Mrs Şentürk died.
The Court found that Mrs Şentürk had been the “victim of a flagrant dysfunction of the hospital services [and] had been deprived access to the necessary emergency care”. This led the Court to conclude that “the State failed in its responsibility to protect her physical integrity [and] that there has been a violation of Article 2 of the Convention”.
Speaking today on the Şentürk and Şentürk v Turkey judgment, Mark Kelly said:
“This judgment is of great significance, reaffirming the active duty a state has to act with all due haste to save a patient’s life during a medical emergency, as well as its positive duty to promptly and independently investigate deaths that occur following alleged shortcomings in medical care”
ENDS.
For further information, please contact:
Walter Jayawardene
Communications Manager
Irish Council for Civil Liberties
9-13 Blackhall Place
Dublin 7
Ireland
Tel. + 353 1 799 4503
Mob: +353 87 9981574
Fax. + 353 1 799 4512
E-mail walter.jayawardene@iccl.ie
Notes:
• The European Court of Human Rights judgment in Şentürk and Şentürk v Turkey (app no: 13423/09) was announced today (9 April 2013). A press release from the court is available at http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/fra-press/pages/search.aspx?i=003-4321152-5174395. The full text of the Judgment is currently only available in French, at http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/fra-press/pages/search.aspx#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-118336%22]}
• The above-quoted portion of the judgments is translated from paragraph 97 of the judgment, which reads: “victime d’un dysfonctionnement flagrant des services hospitaliers, la défunte a été privée de la possibilité d’avoir accès à des soins d’urgence appropriés. Ce constat suffit à la Cour pour estimer que l’Etat a manqué à son obligation de protéger son intégrité physique. Elleconclut en conséquence à une violation de l’article 2 de la Convention”.
• Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, obliges the state to conduct an effective official investigation into deaths in state care which meets a number of clear legal criteria. In particular, any investigation must:
o establish the cause of death of a patient in the care of the medical profession, whether in the public or private sector;
o enable any responsibility of the doctors / medical staff concerned to be established and any appropriate redress to be obtained;
o include all reasonable steps to secure evidence concerning the incident, including inter alia eyewitness testimony, forensic evidence, and, where appropriate, an autopsy providing a complete and accurate record of injury and an objective analysis of clinical findings, including the cause of death;
o be conducted in a prompt and reasonably expeditious manner;
o include a sufficient element of public scrutiny of the investigation to secure accountability in practice as well as in theory;
o involve the next-of-kin of the deceased in the investigative procedure to the extent necessary to safeguard his legitimate interests.