IMPLEMENTATION UNDER NATIONAL LAW General recommendations for deprivation of liberty of persons with intellectual and/ or psychosocial disabilities • Ensure that the basis for the deprivation of liberty is a measure of last resort, including in the context of pre-trial detention, and allowed only in compliance with international human rights standards in accordance with States’ obligations. • For all proceedings concerning persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities, establish a multidisciplinary approach in case management by social workers/service providers, psychiatrists/psychologists, relatives/close persons and judges with a view on providing the individual with the support needed and prepare for release into the community. Recommendations on duration and review of deprivation of liberty of persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities • Abolish the possibility of unlimited detention for persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities in accordance with the UNCRPD. • Provide sufficient and effective remedies during the execution of the deprivation of liberty, including appeals and regular automatic reviews which include reviews specifically dedicated to the specific needs of the person concerned. • Ensure adequate and suitable legal representation for persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities during execution of custodial measures (i.e., review proceedings, ad hoc complaints, etc.). 64 2.6. DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY: TREATMENT 2.6.1. (MATERIAL) DETENTION CONDITIONS The research revealed multiple concerns related to the conditions of detention for persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities during deprivation of liberty, including regarding treatment and material detention conditions that are not compliant with international standards. Grievances regarding standards of conditions of detention have been raised in all places of deprivation of liberty, including prisons, psychiatric hospitals and forensic centres. Of concern are, for example, infrastructure and unsanitary environments, as reported in Italy and Bulgaria, and mistreatment and verbal and physical abuse of detainees with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities by staff, as well as by other detainees (e.g., in prisons in Lithuania or psychiatric hospitals in Bulgaria). Notwithstanding, conditions of detention in the partner countries vary significantly depending on whether the person was found criminally responsible and which kind of detention a person is subjected to: ordinary prison sentence, preventive detention, security measures, compulsory psychiatric treatment, etc. There was a general consensus among experts and participants involved in the project that prison is not an adequate place for persons with mental health issues, and, in fact, the environment and regime of a prison often worsens existing mental health issues or causes the development of mental health challenges. The CPT is clearly in favour of a separation of institutions (i.e., prisons with prisoners to be separated from persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities who are in need of therapy and therapeutic measures). Contrary to this, the UNCRPD Committee follows the opinion that there should not be a separation, but instead, each individual should receive the care and support they need in the community with others in order to reduce and limit stigmatisation and isolation (see Section 1.2.).