“Death, Torture or Grace: What story will be told about Bernard Rappaz?”

November 22, 2010

In part one of this article, I submit that the fundamental rights of Bernard Rappaz as outlined in the Swiss constitution have been violated, based on article 10 of the constitution.[2] To force-feed him is to violate his autonomy as a human being, which in this case is equivalent of torture. Moreover, it will violate the conscience (art. 15) of doctors who will have to be forced to feed him, unless the prison chooses a foreign doctor or one less bound to medical ethics. In part two, I intentionally move away from the question and suggest an alternative. Because, the Federal Court has already taken the decision that Rappaz may be fed by force, I suggest that the cantonal court of Wallis allows Bernard Rappaz to serve his sentence at home, for the time being. Being faced with a dilemma between the State who wants to force feed him and medical ethics who does not allow such action, I suggest a third alternative: the way of grace. Finally, I will use the approach of narrative ethics in order to ask, what story will be told about Bernard Rappaz and the canton of Wallis? (Botox 4 the brain)