The greater good?: issues of proportionality and democracy in the doctrine of necessity as applied in Re A.
This article examines the criminal law doctrine of necessity as applied in the conjoined twins case (Re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) [2000] 4 All ER 961). It determines that the public law principle of proportionality underlies the doctrine, but identifies the preservation of life as the guiding principle behind the Court of Appeal's use of necessity in Re A. The article is critical of this elevation of the preservation of life under the doctrine of necessity and argues for an alternative conception of necessity based upon fundamental constitutional principles such as human rights and democracy. The principle of democracy has particular pertinence to the issue of necessity because it may be endangered by this common law justificatory defence. This conflict between democracy and necessity, it is argued, further supports the need for the constitutional value of democracy to play a key role in any application of necessity in future cases.
School of Law, University of Birmingham, UK.
Elizabeth
E
Wicks
D003416:Criminal Law; D003709:Democracy; D005066:Euthanasia, Passive / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D005260:Female; D006708:Homicide / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D006806:Human Rights / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D006801:Humans; D007223:Infant; D007603:Jurisprudence; D013514:Surgical Procedures, Operative / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D014428:Twins, Conjoined / Q000601:surgery*; D006113:United Kingdom; D026712:Value of Life