ECHR case of Aerts v. Belgium, application number 25357/94, 30/07/1998
"The first complaint of the applicant:
The applicant complains to the European Court of Human Rights that he had been detained in breach of Article 5 § 1 (e) of the Convention on account of his continued detention in the psychiatric wing of a prison, pending his transfer to the Social Protection Centre X, which had been designated as his place of detention by the Mental Health Board's decision of 22 March 1998.
In considering the first complaint of the applicant, the court found a violation of Article 5 § 1 and gave the following grounds (see paragraphs 42 – 50 of Aerts v. Belgium):
Any deprivation of liberty must be done “in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law” and be “lawful.” As such it:
-
must conform to the substantive and procedural rules of the national law
-
should be in keeping with the aim of Article 5, namely to protect the individual from arbitrariness
Moreover
-
there must be a relationship between the ground of permitted deprivation of liberty relied on and the place and conditions of detention.
The Commission found a breach (and the court agreed) of the national law which had foreseen the detention of a mentally ill person in prison as a provisional measure only, pending designation of the institution where the person was to be detained (the applicant spent seven months in the psychiatric wing of the prison waiting for the transfer to his proper place of detention after its designation).
The detention of a person of unsound mind should be “lawful” in the meaning of Article 5 § 1e, if it takes place in a hospital, clinic or other appropriate institution. Thus the psychiatric wing of the prison is an inappropriate place for the applicant (as there was neither regular medical attention nor therapeutic environment).
"
No comments:
Post a Comment