debate on mercy killings in the mainly Catholic, ex-Communist, nation.
In a statement released by local media Monday, April 28, the Court said that "Parliament has no obligation to amend" current laws on the issue.
The decision, which came as a set-back for pro-choice activists, is believed to also effect euthanasia discussions in other nearby countries which like Hungary are seeking membership of the European Union in 2004.
DEBATE
Hungary’s public debate over mercy killings began in earnest in 1993, when Gyorgyi Binder drowned her 11-year old daughter in their bathtub at home, which she said was an effort to end the child’s suffering of an incurable disease.
The mother was initially sentenced to a two year jail sentence suspended for three years, but the supreme court overturned the ruling, saying that Binder had to go to jail for two years for manslaughter.
However then-President Arpad Goncz, used his powers to accord mercy to Binder and suspended the sentence. Following that case, constitutional jurist Albert Takacs and lawyer Ildiko Kmetty started a law sued demanding that the constitutional court ensures that mercy killings are not treated as manslaughter.
NURSE
Experts say that the court ruling was initiated by this law suit. However the euthanasia debate also heated up late 2002 when nurse Timea Faludi was sentenced to a 9 year prison term after admitting she killed more than a dozen mainly elderly patients.
The decision by the Constitutional Court will make it difficult ,if not impossible, for governments to introduce similar legislation as in Belgium or the Netherlands where euthanasia is limited to doctors ending the lives of incurably, terminally, ill patients who wish to die.
It also came as a boost for the relatively young pro-life movement in Hungary, in which several churches are participating. Yet some opinion polls have suggested that more than 6 out of 10 Hungarians still support euthanasia.
