of poisoning seven terminally ill patients. that ruling came a day after another french court said that a quadriplegic man should be allowed to die. but within hours of that decision, the european court of human rights stepped in with a rare emergency ruling blocking the french judge's decision at the request of the man's parents. that ruling by the european court of human rights has been echoed in separate cases in the u.k., where assisted suicide carries a jail sentence of up to 40 years. >> the london supreme court has ruled against appeals from a paralyzed car crash victim, the widow of a man with an so-called locked in syndrome. the uk's highest court turned down the appeals, though not unanimously. >> by majority of 7-2, we dismiss the appeal. >> a bitter disappointment for plaintiff hall lamb. he has been in constant pain since a car accident left him paralyzed from the neck down 23 years ago. >> they're telling me i have 10 years of suffering. i haven't committed a crime. i'm now at the stage where there's anger with me now. this is the right thing to do. >> the other plaintiff is battling on behalf of her late husband, tony. he wanted doctors to help him in his life because his condition in

benefit to all ok just very briefly the kurdish broadcaster know once i'm reading here the european court of human rights to look into their case do you believe very briefly anything will come out of it. it depends because. i've been the i really don't know because we see different things happening we see for example last year in paris three kurdish activists being murdered we see very different kinds of policies anti courage policies being adopted by european governments and these are not disconnected from the european court of human rights so this is a political question rather than a question of justice because as long as the kurdish issue is treated ok as a question of terrorism this will not go very far i don't think great thank you very much dillard to recur dish activists we appreciate time. now online at r t v dot com christian orthodox activists threw eggs on holy water at members of marlin mountains run by the head of their concert in moscow the gig never took place however due to a bomb threat all the details of the story available for you online also with. a new robotic suit has been approved

s immunity before the european court of human rights. and actually, there seems to be more room for potential success there than i've had in the u.s. courts because in a more recent case, the european court found that a employee of the kuwaiti embassy in paris who had been fired and then tried to sue in the local labor courts in paris and had his claim denied because of the sovereign immunity of kuwait, the european court found he could in fact bring his claim. because he was not performing any sovereign functions, that they couldn't deny him his civil rights to bring his employment claim. now, in the united states, in the u.s. courts, the u.s. courts have viewed employment matters as protected by the sovereign immunity. so i think there is some room, some potential to use that case by analogy for staff members who work for international organizations, at least within the jurisdiction of the european court which covers some 37 to 38 european countries, including russia and ukraine, that they in fact may apply that and we might be able to

the european court of human rights has built a solid case law on application of article eight of the uropean convention of human rights which protects the right to private life, including the protection of personal data and the protection of personal image. in a landmark case, the court acknowledged the rights of states to employ secret surveillance against terrorism, but it is also moved "that state may not adopt whatever method they deem appropriate." says, was due to the danger in the surveillance or undermining or even destroying democracy on the ground of defending it, as the court said. in 1978,ruling came five years before snowden was born. so we have clear principles and we have a clear case on this coming from the court of human rights. so whatever the state [indiscernible] or by going to your wastepaper bin, the basic question remains the same. proportionate and is ultimately necessary? >> thorbjorn jagland the secretary-general of the council of europe and also happens to be chair of the nobel peace prize committee. last week, edward snowden made his second appearance befor

s immunity before the european court of human rights. and actually, there seems to be more room for potential success there than i've had in the u.s. courts because in a more recent found e european court at a employee of the kuwaiti embassy in paris who had been fired and then tried to sue in the local labor courts in paris and had his claim denied because of the sovereign immunity of kuwait, the european court found he could in fact bring his claim. because he was not performing any sovereign functions, that they couldn't deny him his civil rights to bring his employment claim. now, in the united states, in the u.s. courts, the u.s. courts have viewed employment matters as protected by the sovereign immunity. so i think there is some room, some potential to use that case by analogy for staff members who work for international organizations, at least within the jurisdiction of the european court which covers some 37 to 38 european countries, including russia and ukraine, that they in fact may apply that and we might be able to get around

s immunity before the european court of human rights.

s immunity before the european court of human rights. who then had his claim denied, the european court found that he could, in fact, bring he claim because he was not performing any sovereign functions, that they couldn't deny him his civil rights to bring his employment clachl. now, in the united states, in the u.s. courts, the u.s. courts have viewed employment matters as part of protected by the sovereign immunity. so i think there is some potential to use that for staff members who work for international organizations at least within the jurisdiction of the court which covers some 37 or 38 european countries. the problem is there's no one guarding the guardians. the proverbial problems of who is going to be in charge. who's providing the oversight. in theory, it's the diplomats. it's the member states that are supposed to be providing the oversighted. many achl bas doors then go to work for these international organizations. this also creates, obviously, a clear conflict of interest. no one wants to accept the apple cart. this also