Armen Harutyunyan. “The law of the RA “About the transplantation of people organs and tissue’’ violates the human rights”

The Ombudsman of the RA Armen Harutyunyan applied to the Constitutional Court in February, challenging the statements of the Article 7 of the law of the RA “About the transplantation of people organs and tissue” (” the precondition for the agreement to take organs and tissues from cadaverous donor “) in conformity with the Constitution. The Constitutional Court will discuss the issue on June 8. This was the question which was discussed yesterday on the Public Health Committee, where the president of the National Assembly Committee of Health Ara Babloyan and the Ombudsman of RA Armen Harutyunyan were invited.

In 2002 according to the adopted law, the alive citizens could give an agreement to become a donor of organs and tissues after their death. In other words, if a man alive would not give such an agreement, no one had the right to take organs from him. In the law adopted in 2009 it is planned: “According to the law of the RA organs and tissues cannot be taken from the cadaverous for the transplantation only in case the person refused to become a donor of tissues and organs after his death during his life”. It means that if a man alive does not say that he does not agree to be a donor, it will be considered that he is a donor.
The author of the changes in the law “About the transplantation of people organs and tissue” Ara Babloyan claims that there was no Armenian legislation in this area before, and the existing law was not so effective. According to Babloyan, the medicine in Armenia has been developing for the last 20 years, but people continue to die because of the lack of donors. As Babloyan mentions the old law was operating 8 years, and during those 8 years no man alive has given an agreement to become a donor. Babloyan is sure that the new law will give a chance to save lives of many people, who need the transplantation of organs and tissue.
Armen Harutyunyan insists that this law is only good from the point of view of medicine, but it contains a great danger in the conditions of Armenia, because such a law will foster more corruption in the country, and if the organs were being taken and sold illegally before, it will become legal now.
There is also a danger that the citizens of Armenia will become donors for other countries. For the benefit of this assumption is talking the fact that, as the experts mention, only the transplantation of kidney is made in Armenia, even the liver surgery is not done and the heart transplantation will not be in the near future. In other words, except the kidneys other organs will be exported to abroad.
There is also a danger that the relatives of people died in hospitals will think that their relative was killed for organs. In addition to it the Ombudsman claims that the organs’ owner’s rights of the basic liberty and managing their own body are being violated. “If alive you did not realize that you do not want your organs to be used, then you are a potential donor”. But many people even do not know their basic rights, and the person who does not want to be a donor after death, cannot only know about this law to refuse it.
The Ombudsmen also thinks that there is a duality and suspense in the law, which also causes a number of possible violations. In the new version of the law it is planned: “In the register of organs and tissue donors and recipients in case of the absence of his decision as a cadaverous donor, organs and tissues can be taken on the agreement of his family (relatives) for the transplantation”. In other words, there are two different legal approaches here: on the one hand, each person, who being alive did not refuse to be a donor, is a potential donor, on the other hand, if there is no agreement, his relatives may be asked for it. These two approaches, according to Harutyunyan, contradict each other and create a mess, while every law must be clear and understandable.
The member of SC, academician, pharmacologist Emil Gabrielyan expressed an opinion that a gold average should be found between health and human-donor rights. “One of the first provisions of the World Health Organization is that the man has the right to protect his health. If we do not solve this issue in our country and hope a help of other countries for the transplantation , it’s also no way out, not everyone can find millions. If a person is saved in Belgium or in another country, he can die in Armenia because of the lack of donors. How is the campaign of blood transfusion done? Taking into account the social-psychological, religious, national peculiarities, we need to explain that being donor of organs is a big human step. If we keep this industry in such condition, the medicine will not develop,” he said.
The member of SC, the Illuminator of the medical center “St. Gregory” Ara Minasyan expressed an indignation that the public has not told about the changes of the law. “Why do we know about the law so much later, moreover, after it is adopted? Personally I heard on TV by chance from the speech by Armen Harutyunyan. You always have been very openly, why it was closed this time. He mentioned that while this change of this law existed in 2002, but the field of the medicine was not developed. “A huge of logistics base, financial resources are needed. Existing things become old very quickly. This law can operate, if the entire population is protected by the insurance companies and the state. The legal health field is not created, the full practical medicine will drop under attack. Except it when the patient’s condition worsens, the doctor is pinched on the wall as if he did not do something.
The member of SC, the lawyer Gregory Badiryan expressed a concern that the law will open the door in front of illegal eftanazy: “The doctors, who always fight to save the lives of dying, maybe they will think that at least it may be more likely to save another life,” he said.
I can make three conclusions, “said the Chairman of SC V. Manukyan, or the old law did not work, or the mentality of our people id is against it, or even, no one has tried to use the old law for the previous eight years. If an attempt has been made to use it, a public opinion would be formed, technologies would be created. And the same extremity towards all the laws exists in our country: if it has not been worked- renew it.”

“There was an agreement only in one problem,” concluded the president of the SC Health and Social Affairs Committee Derenik Dumanyan, “No one was against the idea of organs or tissue transplantation, and there is a problem, the law adopted in 2002 has not been able to form a corresponding system, the provisions were changed after 8 years in order to form it, but most people see serious dangers related to the most spread problems”.