The article deals with the problem of the “right to die” – a constitutional guarantee, which allows a person to voluntarily end his/her own life. The question has first been analysed in the scope of the right to life (Art. 2 para. 2 of the German Basic Law) and has been considered its back side, some sort of its negative dimension. However, as time passed by, the perspective changed, so now the discussion focuses on the right to self-determination. In the scope of this article the research covers the decisions made by the supreme courts of Germany and the European Court of Human Rights. The common conclusion shared by the German courts is the qualification of the right to voluntarily end one’s life as an act of self-expression and the realization of personal choice. The legal basis of the right to self-determination requires the installation of a close connection between the right to freedom of action (Art. 2 para. 1 of the German Basic Law) and the guarantee of human dignity (Art. 1 para. 1 of the German Basic Law). At the same time the counter-argument, which points at the impossibility of any personal realization without life and the contradiction to the “pro-life”-spirit of the German Constitution, which is expressed, inter alia, in Art. 2 para 2 of the German Basic Law, is considered to be unpersuasive, because the very decision to end life is being interpreted as an act of self-determination which is covered by the constitutional protection. This constitutional concept which has been designed by the German Constitutional Court had been acknowledged by other German courts which completed it with the state obligation to assist persons willing to end their lives. The European Court of Human Rights has not yet had an opportunity to express its position on the problem; however, keeping in mind the current legal trends it is highly probable that it will join the opinion held by the German courts. The author highlights the argumentative lacks of the right to die-concept not only by demonstrating its inner contradictions but also by drawing the inacceptable consequences the state support of the suicidal tendencies would lead to.