Dr Alex Allinson will ask Tynwald to support amendments to his Assisted Dying Bill which he believes will address concerns raised by the UK’s Ministry of Justice.

But he notes that the final decision on whether the bill will be recommended for Royal Assent rests with the Lord Chancellor.

The Isle of Man made history in March last year when it became the first jurisdiction in the British Isles to legalise assisted dying.

But a year after Dr Allinson’s private member’s bill completed its passage through the branches of Tynwald, the MoJ confirmed it would not be able to recommend it for Royal Assent, citing concerns over compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights.

Dr Allinson has tabled to a series of amendments for debate at the June sitting of Tynwald, together with an explanatory memorandum.

This reveals for the first time the specific issues that had been raised by the MoJ.

They relate to a 2022 judgment by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg involving the death by euthanasia of a woman in Belgium who had been suffering from chronic depression for around 40 years. She had not contacted her children.

Two criminal investigations concluded there were no grounds for prosecution. Euthanasia has been legal in Belgium since 2002.

But the woman’s son took the Belgian state to court, claiming a breach of the ECHR’s Articles 2 (right to life) and 8 (right to respect for private and family life).

He argued it had failed in its obligations to protect his mother’s life. He said she had not been in a hopeless medical situation and her suffering could have been alleviated.

The court ruled there had been no violation of the ECHR in respect of pre-euthanasia procedures and the act of euthanasia itself.

But it concluded there had been breach of Article 2 relating to shortcomings in the post-death review which it said was not sufficiently independent or effective.

The doctor involved could participate in reviewing the case, the system did not allow for full and rigorous scrutiny of the facts, and the subsequent criminal investigation was ineffective and excessively delayed.

In his explanatory memorandum, Dr Allinson said the MoJ are of the view that the Assisted Dying Bill needs to include all the provisions to satisfy the principles set out in the Mortier case, rather than rely on frameworks established by secondary legislation.

He said the Strasbourg judgment held that a permissive euthanasia regime can be compatible with the ECHR provided it operates within a framework that ensures decisions are taken freely and with full understanding, and there is an effective, independent system of post‑death review.

Dr Allinson has tabled 14 amendments to his bill.

He said: ‘The amendments collectively strengthen compliance with the ECHR by reinforcing the legislative framework through explicit duties to protect vulnerable persons, ensuring that decisions are free and informed, and introducing enhanced safeguards in higher‑risk cases.

‘Crucially, they establish a comprehensive system of independent post‑death review which directly addresses the procedural requirements identified in Mortier v Belgium.’