Psychiatric commitment: Over 50 years of case law from the European Court of Human Rights

Abstract

AbstractPurposeTo extensively review the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) case law concerning psychiatric commitment, and to estimate the role of this supranational jurisprudence in the practice of contemporary psychiatry.MethodUsing keywords to search the ECHR computerised database “HUDOC”, we reviewed all cases concerning psychiatric commitment registered between September 1953 and December 31, 2004. Four groups were identified: applications declared inadmissible; applications accepted but not judged by the Court; pending cases; and cases judged by the Court.ResultsOf the almost 118,000 decisions taken by the ECHR in this time frame, we found 108 situations concerning psychiatric commitment. 41 of these applications were considered by the Court to be inadmissible. 24 other cases were considered admissible but not judged by the ECHR. Three admissible cases were still pending at the end of 2004. The ECHR judged 40 cases, and found in 35 of them that one or several rights as guaranteed by the Convention had been violated.DiscussionThe ECHR protects the human rights of persons subjected to involuntary psychiatric commitment by creating supranational law in the following areas: definition of “unsoundness of mind”; conditions of lawfulness of detention; right to a review of detention by a Court; right to information; right to respect for private and family life; and conditions of confinement, which address inhuman and degrading treatment.The respective number of applications submitted to the ECHR did not depend on when the Convention had entered into force in that country.ConclusionThe possibility of an individual to access the ECHR depends on the degree of democracy in his country and on the access to legal assistance through non-governmental organisations or individual intervening parties.