TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 8 °C Thursday 23 May, 2013

Savita’s family may take a case to the European Court of Human Rights

TheJournal.ie takes a look at the procedure – and why the failure to implement the Coroners’ Bill 2007 impacts this case.

Image: PA/PA Wire/Press Association Images

PRAVEEN HALAPPANAVAR’S LAWYER has told RTÉ that he plans to take a case to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) if the Government fails to announce a public inquiry into the death of his wife Savita by the end of the day.

The Halappanavar family have warned on numerous occasions that they want nothing less than a public investigation into the medical treatment received by the 31-year-old at Galway University Hospital last month.

Seventeen weeks pregnant, she was admitted after presenting with severe back pain on 21 October. It was discovered that she was miscarrying, an event which continued for two-and-a-half-days. Immediately afterwards, Savita was brought to a high-dependency unit suffering from septicaemia. She died four days later on 28 October.

Solicitor Gerard O’Donnell told RTÉ News that he had heard nothing from the Department of Health since receiving a letter confirming the family’s request for a public inquiry.

The process

If the family does bring proceedings to Strasbourg, there may be a fight to even have the case heard.

The ECHR receives allegations of violations of the European Convention on Human Rights after receiving applications from individuals or States.

The first stage is for the court to decide if the case is admissible as it can only deal with matters where all domestic remedies have been exhausted. In the well-known ABC versus Ireland, the court dismissed the State’s objection that ‘C’ had failed to exhaust all domestic remedies, agreeing there was no suitable domestic remedy available to her. In the cases of ‘A’ and ‘B’, the court accepted that any constitutional action in Ireland would have little prospect of success.

Fiona de Londras, Professor of Law, Durham Law School, told TheJournal.ie that the Halappanavar family would be relying on the same outcome if it brings its complaint to the ECHR.

“Unless he can establish that there was no reasonable prospect of succeeding in a judicial review in Ireland, it is unlikely that the Court would find he had exhausted all domestic remedies,” she explained.

According to the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, a human rights group which has been dealing with the family’s solicitor, none of the three investigations into Savita Halappanavar’s death fully satisfy Article 2 of the European Convention. The court has interpreted the article on a number of occasions, giving member States a duty to investigate suspicious deaths and, in certain circumstances, a positive duty to prevent foreseeable loss of life.

Mark Kelly, director at the ICCL said, “The HSE, HIQA and inquest procedures that have begun do not satisfy the requirements of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It appears to the Irish Council for Civil Liberties that, short of a full public inquiry, Mr Halappanavar may have no effective remedy in Ireland under Article 2. An application may proceed directly to Strasbourg if there are no effective domestic remedies for a potential violation of the Convention.”

The coroner’s role

An inquest in Ireland does not satisfy the article as coroners are still working under a 1962 Act which prohibits an inquest looking beyond the how, when and where. It cannot, therefore, be seen as an independent investigation into the circumstances of the death. Draft legislation to bring the Bill into line with the European Convention was entered in 2007 but never implemented.

Under current law, questions of civil or criminal liability cannot be considered or investigated at an inquest. The 50-year-old Act states, “Every inquest shall be confined to ascertaining the identity of the person in relation to whose death the inquest is being held and how, when, and where the death occurred.”

In 2007, then Justice Minister Michael McDowell introduced the Coroners Bill, which he said would bring “one of the State’s oldest public services into the 21st century”.

His department said the bill would “widen the current scope of the inquest from investigating the proximate medical cause of death to establishing in what circumstances the deceased met his or her death”.

A Coroners Review Group recommended this extension of the remit of the coroner in its 2000 report. It also asked for it to be expressed in positive terms in any new legislation.

At the time, McDowell said he was of the view that the new Bill would better fulfil the obligations placed on the State by the European Convention, particularly with regard to the Article 2 requirement to investigate certain deaths of people which involved the State.

The draft legislation currently sits at committee stage in the Seanad. At a conference dinner with the Coroners Society of Ireland in September this year, current Justice Minister Alan Shatter said the challenges with regard to public finances had affected plans to reform services.

“While it would be my intention to progress the Coroners Bill as soon as is practicable, the Government’s current legislative programme – particularly in the Justice area – is very heavy. I cannot, unfortunately, be definitive tonight on timeframes,” he added.

Earlier this week, Savita’s father Andanappa Yalagi said the family did not trust or understand the HSE investigation and appealed for a public inquiry.

Savita: Family give Health Minister public inquiry ‘ultimatum’

Read next:

Comments (55 Comments)

  • If it had been an Irish family would there have been all this controversy? I genuinely would like to know, I’m not being sarcastic by the way, but wonder would this have got as much publicity as it has done. I know a young girl only 30 who died in the coombe about 5 weeks ago after delivering twins and it made a small paragraph in the national papers. Why wasn’t this case highlighted aswel?

    Reply
    • The scandal isn’t because she was foreign; it’s because she was a human like all the rest of us who deserved to live.

      Reply
    • That’s not the question I asked, I just wonder what people think, would it have blown up like it has. I’m glad it has by the way, I just wonder if they were Irish would it have been brushed under the carpet

      Reply
    • Their would have been this controversy if an Irish family had of pushed for a public enquiry as hard as Mr. Halappanavar is.
      Did that family go to a solicitor and demand an enquiry into the death?? Was that mother denied a life saving operation based on religious beliefs or some other complication that could not be helped.

      Reply
    • I agree, Chris there were 2 deaths in the Coombe around the same time. I remember the young woman you are referring to. She lived and worked in Clondalkin. I don’t know the circumstances surrounding her case, but I believe they left her in labour for 2 days before the 2nd twin was born .

      Reply
    • Yes Ann that’s the case I’m talking about and by all accounts could be just as scandalous as the Savita case

      Reply
    • I think you are spot on in your assertion Chris. I think the fact Savita was Indian is a big factor in why the couldn’t sweep it under the carpet. This shower are a disgrace and so are every health minister for the last 20years. Legislate it now and stop the cow towing to the catholic church you bunch of cowards.

      Reply
    • doesn’t matter whether the family was ‘foreign’ or Irish
      the ultimatum to Reilly could not be entertained.
      there are many, many sad cases every year, where families believe – rightly or wrongly, that their loved ones died or suffered, because of incompetence/ negligence by doctors, hospitals, HSE.
      i know of a couple of such cases, myself.
      why should there be a public inquiery for one high profile case ??

      Reply
    • And so it begins.

      I knew it would only be a matter of time before the vilification of the Hapannavaar family would begin. I said that the chair of the HSE inquiry would, despite all his experience, be in for a terrible shock at the hornets nest into which he had entered, and the same goes for this unfortunate family. This is just the start, it will undoubtedly get worse. I hope they are very strong and have good and steadfast support, because they will need all of it.

      If the story you tell about the lose of a woman’s life in the Coombe is true, then her family too deserves an independent inquiry if that is what they want. They may however have decided they do not wish to make their case public (which we should respect) and/or that they are satisfied with whatever inquiries are taking place, and that too is their right. Whatever they decide, It has no bearing at all on the wishes or decisions of a different family and a different case.

      Every patient and every person in the state has rights which they are permitted to vindicate to the extent that they see fit. Every patient and every person has rights to privacy, which they are entitled to exercise or not as they see fit. It is not for any other person to tell them how, when or in what circumstances they should do so. And to suggest that it is a matter of the nationality of the patient is nothing more than a red herring, and an insulting one at that.

      Reply
    • Do you think he should have gone down the Irish route of suing for damages?

      That is how Irish people deal with such cases: take civil proceedings and 5 or 6 years later, damages are awarded.

      Is not this what you and your ilk cannot grasp – the man wants justice, not money.

      Reply
    • Gillys 29/11/12 #

      Well said Chris.

      The only issue concerning TD’s is not the Church but the next general election.
      Very disappointing but the public voted these people in…

      Reply
    • 100% agree with you Katie. I hope Praveen takes our miserable shower of government ministers to the cleaners. I hope he makes Reilly, Kenny et al look like the cowards and cow towing catholic church fools that they are.

      Reply
    • It’s mainly a religious issue – Catholicism in Ireland is at tipping point – it seems in in the place we most need experts to do their job (in hospitals) properly they seem to be still entrapped in an era where religion ruled with an iron fist partnered by the morons running the state and its laws. Sex abuse scandals and now this situation has really put the church back on its behind and Ireland is really re looking at its whole religious fibre. Because of his beliefs the doctor who refused her right to life is probably up ‘ating the alter’ every Sunday morning and this is the fundamental point – how the hell could he still have refused her- we need legislation now otherwise the next woman in that situation will either be doctored by a religious nut job or a doctor afraid to make a decision because of the law – I hope the doctors and the state get what’s coming to them

      Reply
    • Who says he is not eventually going to sue, of course he is. Do you think the solicitor is doing a freebe? They want to find fault then sue.

      Reply
    • Gamma 29/11/12 #

      @Barry, wait a while the claim will come. the man deserves to be compensated don’t get me wrong, but if all the reports come (all 4, 5 if the European court of human rights orders one) back and say accidental death what happens then?

      Reply
    • Well said, Katie. Absolutely right.

      Reply
    • The reason this case is so public is because her husband has fought tooth and nail to highlight her case. He has taken leave from work and contacted every newspaper and news station he could find…..and he’s right! Why? Answer: To ensure this doesn’t happen to anyone else.
      Maybe if some else fought this hard, Savita might be alive now. He could be fighting for your sister, daughter, niece.

      Reply
  • The most shocking thing to me is that they left this woman , who was admitted to the hospital already suffering a miscarriage , for two and half days without doing anything for her ! Is this the norm for any woman suffering a miscarriage in Ireland because I personally think its barbaric and inhuman . Miscarriage is hard enough to deal with for a woman but to prolong her suffering physically and emotionally is beyond belief !!!

    Reply
    • Mary:
      why don’t you wait for the inquieries to be completed, before finding the medical staff guilty ??
      you probably know no more about what transpired than i do.
      IF after the evidence is examined, & people are then deemed guilty of negligence or whatever -
      then you will be entitled to condemn the quilty, to your heart’s content.

      Reply
    • Hi Mary, Ms Praveen’s miscarriage was an extreme case. Due to the fact that a foetal heartbeat was traced and the fact that in the early stages Ms Praveen was going through a standard miscarriage it would have limited the ability of doctors to act by way of termination. It was only when the situation became emergent that doctors would have been able to intervene, by which stage she was already gravely ill, and very little could have been done to save her.

      Reply
    • Michael O Toole
      I have not found the staff of the hospital guilty of anything . Why don’t you ready my comment again . I said if it was the ‘norm’ in thus country . It’s outrageous that anyone could be treated like this in this day or age

      Reply
    • James Connolly
      I under the medical facts you have laid out . My view is that any woman , whether on deaths door or otherwise, who had already be deemed by a professional team to be suffering miscarriage should not be left for hours or days in a hospital bed suffering ! A miscarriage in the early stages if pregnancy makes the foetus non viable and it will not live outside the womb.To leave any woman suffering is appalling and barbaric .
      As a medical professional you must know that mental anguish suffered by these women is often worse than the physical anguish . It’s bad enough that they lose their babies but to left suffering whether for hours or days is not in my opinion a humane thing to do .
      In the case if Savita the woman also lost her life . I know this is not always the normal outcome as in general I think Irish Hospitals are safe and I have the greatest respect for them but if this is this it is the common practice in hospitals to leave women suffering when there is no hope of a living baby , I think the entire practice should be reviewed. Surely this cannot be in the best interests of the patient !
      I

      Reply
    • Hi Mary, you are absolutely correct in everything you say.
      The viability of the foetus means you cannot intervene in the traditional manner, so if the mother feels pain, instead of laying out all the morphine the mother can handle the staff have to lay out the risks of providing the medication against potential damage to the foetus regardless of the “common sense” knowledge that if a foetus miscarriages in the first trimester it is unviable.
      The ideal scenario is being able to assess a patient on the knowledge and experience of the medical and clinical staff, without having to take into account laws, of course taking into account industry accepted ethics, guidelines and standards.

      Reply
    • Mary McCarthy::
      ok – i have just re-read your comment, & you said -
      “The most shocking thing to me is that they left this woman , who was admitted to the hospital already suffering a miscarriage , for two and half days without doing anything for her”
      now if you had placed a small two lettered word ‘IF’ at the beginning of your sentence, i could agree with you-
      but you didn’t

      the inquieries have just begun – the facys have not been established.
      as i said to you previously -
      why don’t you wait for the inquieries to be completed, before finding the medical staff guilty ??

      Reply
  • Never compare yourself against anyone else, there will always be better and worse than you.

    Reply
  • There is a disturbing lack of objectivity in the Dail. I know its ultimately impossible to leave your biases at the door but I dont think the extent to which Clare Daly’s bill was voted down reflects the current popular feeling on abortion, i.e the government continues to not do what they have been elected to do, namely listen to us, the people of Ireland. Now, of course, theres the flipside, where I’m completely wrong and actually, statistically, they perfectly represent the people, and we just are not at a stage where the Irish people are ready to move into the 21st century.

    Reply
  • I was told in no uncertain term , thin this column , by the know-alls , that the family would accept an inquest as a public inquiry, it would be too much to expect an apology , but I will take it as given. This man ought to get on with his obvious grieving first and then lawyer up. Not the other way around. This is pathetic. Giving an ultimatum before prelim. investigations are carried out. I greatly sympathise with but there is a way to approach all serious matter in life [and death].

    Reply
    • i don’t think it’s the husband who should get the blame for the ultimatum.
      i would be inclined to blame his advisors/ supporters.
      i believe Parveen has been in this country a few years – nevertheless, he can’t know very much about what’s involved in public inquieries, in this state.
      if what happened to his wife here, happened in India – i don’t think a request for a public inquiery would be entertained.
      i heard the Indian correspondent for the I. Times say that c. 20,000 women died each year in India, as a result of having abortions.

      Reply
    • She died because she didn’t have an abortion Michael, not because she did. And his name is Praveen.

      Reply
    • mr zedabelzer:
      who said she died because she had an abortion ????
      no one.

      i will get on to the HSE & ask them to terminate all inquieries,
      cause mr knowall zedabelzer of the Journal.ie, has examined all the evidence, interviewed witnesses from all sides,
      & he has given his judgement.
      no point at all now, in wasting scarce resources in an inquiery, cause we know the answer.

      Reply
    • It’s Ms. And before you start throwing stones, you are the one throwing around unsubstantiated statistics about death rates in India caused by abortions. I welcome any and all inquiries into this case. My tax money well spent.

      Reply
    • @ zedabelzer
      what i asked you was -
      ‘who said she died because she had an abortion ????’
      & you haven’t told me who said that here.

      as for me “throwing around unsubstantiated statistics” – what i said was –
      “i heard the Indian correspondent for the I. Times say that c. 20,000 women died each year in India, as a result of having abortions.”
      & i did indeed hear the gentleman in question say what i have quoted him as having said.
      i believe it was on Newstalk, – one morning last week.
      incidentally – he also quoted the number of abortions carried out in India, each year – i don’t recall the number, but it was millions.

      Reply
    • There are in excess of 1.2bn people living in India. That gives 600m women. 20,000/600m is 0.003 of a percent. Ireland’s is 0.0003 of a percent. So while India’s death rate is higher, Ireland’s is actually worse, as we’re we to allow termination in the same way India does our statistics would almost certainly rise, and while India’s population is 300 times higher than Ireland’s, it’s death rate due to termination is only 10 times worse than Ireland, where termination is not available on demand.

      Reply
    • Michael, you heard ME say it. Same as you heard some guy on the news talk about death rates of women who had abortions in India. Both unsubstantiated. I believe that Savita died because she was refused an abortion, but am of course waiting for the outcome of the inquiry(s). And I believe that the findings will show that. Of course I have no proof of that now. You repeatedly state that Praveen is being ill advised by his supporters, or pro-abortionists as you like to call them across many of your comments, when in fact you have no proof that they are acting as his advisors. You also say that you aren’t a member of either side when you are clearly Pro Life. Or Anti-choice which is more accurate. And her nationality has nothing to do with it. If it were my daughter who died in Savita’s circumstances, you would see me on the steps of every court in this land, and this continent and I would not rest until I saw justice.

      Reply
  • mart_n 29/11/12 #

    Would it not be very hard for him to bring a case forward considering his own refusal to cooperate so far? He can’t honestly claim that ‘all domestic remedies have been exhausted’, yet.

    Reply
  • I have a few issues with this very sad case,I suppose the first one is would any court in the land have convicted any doctor in this country for terminating savitas pregnancy if the doctor believed her life was in grave danger as unfortunately proved to be the case? Is the way forward a public enquiry??……we all know our track records on enquiries…I also must say (if I’m honest) I don’t like the threat of “hold a public enquiry or we will take the case to Europe”…………if you have no faith in the HSE,the Govt etc take your case to Europe and get the answers you have a right to get but the media frenzy around this case is not helping…..that of course is just my opinion.

    Reply
    • Hi Olive, nobody knows whether a doctor would be convicted or not, as there are two separate laws telling you two separate things – and not many doctors are willing to put their career on the line for a test case.
      As regards the media, I agree, it is time to get on with ensuring this doesn’t happen again.

      Reply
  • and learn to spell!

    Reply
  • alan 29/11/12 #

    or keep reading about it. they say reading a lot is the best way to improve your writing

    Reply
    • John F 29/11/12 #

      MEGA FAIL! It’s best practice to start a sentence with a capital letter, you also used a full stop in place of a comma and left out a full stop at the end of your rant! Hope it wasn’t too much of a hard fall off that high horse!;-)

      Reply
  • I hope they do, unfortunately the government seems to need even more pressure put on them.

    Reply
  • I read the impressive article above which is legally sound and accurate. Katie Does and James Connolly are accurate and objective.

    I am puzzled by the obsessions expressed with Praveen’s nationality and the uniformed comments on the quality of the legal advice he has taken. Regretfully, Irish law does not entitle Praveen as of legal right to compel the Irish State to grant him the objective and transparent inquiry that is the least that he deserves after this appalling tragedy. He does not have grounds for Judicial Review. Therefore, he is backed into the position that he can only go to Europe.

    Instead of criticising Praveen and his solicitor, we should be happy that he is asserting these rights because in doing so he exposes matters of enormous public concern.

    At the same time, I can see how authority respecting, compliant and passive Irish people ingrained with respect for their “betters” are thrown by Praveen’s assertiveness. I applauded his strength and courage and I endorse what he is doing. Please don’t feel threatened or challenged by Praveen’s actions.

    Petr Tarasov is polite and restrained. Some of the comments are xenophobic.

    The fact is that the wrong done to Savita and to Praveen stands in its own right, independently of the wrongs done to others in Ireland and Praveen is entitled to vindicate his rights. He may be a role model for others and I am pleased to see how many posters on this thread accept and understand Praveen’s actions.

    At least those who could not previously understand the legal reasons for Praveen’s statement of intention can now understand why a Coroners’s Inquest, HIQA investigation and HSE investigation do not satisfy the human rights of Praveen.

    It is important not to impugn the motives of Praveen and solicitor. They must not be defamed. IP addresses are traceable and the cloak of anonymity is less effective than many posters think.

    I would be willing to contribute to a legal fund to support Praveen’s efforts.

    Reply
  • He is correct to take his case there, the powers that be showed their contempt in numerous ways, mainly 1. Make up of initial HSE investigation,2. Kennys ridiculous decent man speech, 3. Reillys late in the day meet up. I would be following the same path as him. Remember justice delayed is justice denied. No point in waiting years until the witnesses are far afield.

    Reply
  • Many many people are now sick to their teeth with this chappie. Who the hell does he think he is? Demanding meeting with Taoiseach, going to EUropean court. let him go, but let him also pay for it. If this had been an Irish national. Things would have been so different.

    Reply
  • People can be taught to hate and they can be taught how to spell..
    But apparently it’s only one or the other..

    Reply
  • I hope he does go to the EU court of Human Rights and I hope that the EU forces this (church) state to bring their outdated laws in alignment with modern Ireland. It is a national disgrace that we the people are willing to let government after government consistantly fail us. The church of course can and will lobby all it wants to prevent abortion laws being introduced but they are fighting a losing battle. And they know it. A bunch of old creepy nonces trying to take the high ground and dictate what a woman can do to her body? You couldnt make this stuff up! Any organisation that is lead by an individual that has repeatedly covered up child rape not to mention numerous other atrocities would want to look at their own history before they attempt to start preaching morals. I would also submit that Enda and his moronic cohorts are finished at the next election anyway, they have repeatedly failed to live up to their promises.

    Reply
  • It’s typing , there’s a difference

    Reply
  • Hi Penelope what’s the problem

    Reply
  • There’s this thing called a reply button. Not meaning to be snide but it’s useful.

    Reply

Add New Comment