Friday 2 August 2013
The Constitutional Council has just approved the law allowing research on human embryos. Its decision and the accompanying commentary is part of the government outline and its majority.
Today, in a political decision, the Constitutional Council extends the obstinacy of the government and refuses to protect the human embryo. No surprises there as for any issue concerning the embryo. The sages validate the de facto transformation of the embryo into a laboratory chemical. The Council refers to its decisions in 1974/94, already qualified at the time of Praetorian, without examining the particularly techno-scientific aspect of the submitted text, which makes the human embryo prey to scientism and the market, which was not the case in 1974 or 1994.
The Council refuses to see the change in nature that the new act entails.
It was satisfied with presenting end to end its own arguments used in 1974/1994 to authorise abortions and the in-vitro fertilisation. However, research using human embryos as permitted in the draft law, not only reverses the law of bioethics of 2011, which prohibited it, but it also goes beyond the laws on abortion and IVF. Abortion remains a deviation from the fundamental principle of not violating the life of a human being, IVF is not supposed to deliver embryos to the pharmaceutical industry! The Constitutional Council does not examine the real consequences of the concerned law. It denies the overthrow of a fundamental ethical principle: respect for humans from the beginning of life. The principle of protection of the human embryo becomes an exception.
The Council doesn’t argue the fundamentals.
Considering that the conditions for authorisation from the law are "neither vague nor ambiguous", it does not hesitate to declare them - in accordance with "the objective of constitutional value of accessibility and intelligibility of the law", without justification or argument. However, the blur around these conditions is all the more unacceptable in a system of authorisation.
With this decision it places itself at the service of the Government.
In so doing, it appropriates the position of the Government, which justifies the change in the law, with action against the unlawfulness of the Jérôme Lejeune Foundation relating to the illegal decisions of the Agency of biomedicine. These remedies which, according to the Constitutional Council, "sow trouble among researchers”. In other words, the Foundation, with whom the Court of Appeal agreed and which had for object to enforce the law, is clearly designated as a troublemaker. On the other hand is allowed to research those that have registered their work outside the legal framework. The Constitutional Council and the Government thus share the same motto: "change the rule to be in good standing."
France no longer has the tools nor political and legal leaders capable of defending humans during its embryonic period. In this context the Foundation will enlist international bodies to restore real scope to the protection of these human beings. The Jérôme Lejeune Foundation points out that the Court of Justice of the EU has recently banned the patenting of innovations involving the destruction of human embryos, on behalf of their humanity. The Jérôme Lejeune Foundation already contributes as much energy possible for the success of the European Citizens' Initiative One of US, which aims to stop European subsidies for research on human embryos. The initiative has already attracted 850,000 signatures and must reach one million by the end of October to be presented to the European Commission and Parliament.