OVERVIEW OF RELEVANT STANDARDS treatment of persons, including measures to treat mental disorders, when circumstances render treatment of this kind necessary as a last resort and the treatment is subject to legal safeguards. Many UN treaties include prohibitions on arbitrary detention. However, some UN treaty bodies contain positions that diverge from the standards set out by the UNCRPD.68 For example, the Human Rights Committee has considered that deprivation of liberty of persons with disabilities could be justifiable and necessary in some cases.69 Similarly, the UN Committee Against Torture, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, as well as UN soft law standards, such as the Nelson Mandela Rules, have accepted the possibility of lawful involuntary committal and involuntary treatment, provided there are adequate safeguards and reasonable accommodations.70 Such safeguards were notably laid down in the trainer’s manual drafted by the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) and Penal Reform International entitled “Introduction to the Nelson Mandela rules, international training programme”, which includes recommendations on special accommodations for people in prisons who have intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities.71 Other UN bodies aligned their position to the UNCRPD standards, calling for bans on deprivation of liberty on the basis of impairment and involuntary hospitalisation and forced institutionalisation. These bodies include the OHCHR,72 the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW Committee)73 and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD).74 1.3. DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY: TREATMENT OF PERSONS 1.3.1. EU STANDARDS The 2022 Recommendation on procedural rights of suspects and accused persons subject to pre-trial detention and on material detention conditions75 issued by the 30 EC specifically refers to the UNCRPD and contains special measures for persons with disabilities or serious medical conditions, requiring “appropriate care”. For persons diagnosed with mental health related medical conditions, it requires “specialised professional care where needed in specialised institutions or dedicated sections of the detention facility under medical supervision” in addition to “continuity of healthcare” for detainees in preparation for release where necessary. Paragraph 76 also states that Member States should take care to provide “appropriate activities for such detainees”. There are no additional EU standards specifically regulating the treatment of defendants and detainees with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities. 1.3.2. COUNCIL OF EUROPE STANDARDS According to the ECtHR, in certain cases, the inappropriate conditions of detention for persons with intellectual and or psychosocial disabilities can also amount to a violation of Art 3 ECHR. For detainees who are found not criminally responsible, when assessing a claim under Art 3 ECHR, the Court takes into consideration the cumulative effects of the conditions and the duration of the detention as well as the inadequacy of the medical treatment.76 As for the medical treatment, the Court requires a comprehensive therapeutic strategy aiming at treating the detainee, showing that there is an individual treatment plan in place for the applicant, and substantiating the administration of therapeutic treatment or the psychiatric care provided. According to the ECtHR, detaining such individuals in “establishments not suitable for incarceration of the mentally-ill, raises a serious issue under the Convention” or treating them “like other inmates, notwithstanding their particular state of health” may exacerbate the feeling of distress, anguish and fear of the person concerned.77 For example, in W.D. v. Belgium, the Court held that there had been a violation of Art 3 ECHR because the applicant was detained in a prison environment for more than nine