CYIL vol. 8 (2017)

MARTIN ŠOLC CYIL 8 ȍ2017Ȏ The question of the beginning of human life was bypassed by the ECtHR also in the judgment of 27 August 2015, Application no. 46470/11, Parrillo v. Italy . The ECtHR came to the conclusion that Italian restrictive legislation prohibiting women from donating their in vitro made embryos to embryo-destructive research is not incompatible with the right to respect for women’s private life guaranteed under Article 8 and the right to the peaceful enjoyment of one’s own possessions under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. 53 The reasoning was quite laconic: according to the ECtHR, having regard to the economic and pecuniary scope of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, human embryos cannot be reduced to “possessions” within the meaning of that provision. A serious problem today in many parts of world is a wild clinical application of new stem cell therapies. 54 On the basis of the ECtHR decision of 6 May 2014, Application no. 62804/13, Durisotto v. Italy , the stem cell therapies, although predominantly experimental in their nature, come within the scope of an individual’s personal autonomy and a restriction of access to therapies can represent a violation of the autonomy. However, since personal autonomy is protected by the right to respect for private and family life under Article 8, access to new therapies can be limited if such interference is necessary in a democratic society for the protection of health. An important consequentialist factor interferes with a rather categorical approach to the protection of private life. The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine (usually known as Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine or Oviedo Convention , hereinafter “ Convention on Biomedicine ”) from 1997 is often considered an important milestone in international regulation of biomedicine. 55 To this day, it has been the world’s only international convention solely dedicated to questions of biomedicine and human rights and, at the same time, the world’s most comprehensive regulation of the matter. 56 Although ratified by only 29 out of 47 Council of Europe Member States, the imminent importance of the Convention on Biomedicine is widely acknowledged. 53 Protocol No. 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms from 20 March 1952. 54 Related to the so called method Stamina, which was restricted by Italian authorities and then became the subject of the ECtHR decision in Durisotto v. Italy , is the following paper: ABBOTT, Alison. Leaked files slam stem-cell therapy. Nature. (7 January 2014.) accessed 13 March 2017. For other information of „wild stem cell clinical therapies“, see RAPAPORT, Lisa. Websites often promote unproven stem cell therapies. Reuters . (8 August 2016.) accessed 7 April 2017. MacGREGOR, Casimir, PETERSEN, Alan, MUNSIE, Megan. Stem cell tourism: selling hope through unproven stem cell treatments – lessons from the X-Cell Center controversy. EuroStemCell . (30 April 2015.) accessed 7 April 2017. 55 See SCHREIBER, Hans-Ludwig. The European Bioethics Convention: Legal Aspects. In SCHAUER, Alfred J., SCHREIBER, Hans-Ludwig, RYN, Zdzisław, ANDRES, Janusz et al. Ethics in Medicine. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen, 2001, p. 242. 56 See ANDORNO, Roberto. The Oviedo Convention: A European Legal Framework at the Intersection of Human Rights and Health Law. Journal of International Biotechnology Law. (De Gruyter Recht, New York 2005, Vol. 2, No. 4), p. 133-134. accessed 8 April 2017. 5. The Council of Europe system of human rights protection: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine

438