NATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF CROSS-BORDER INSTRUMENTS
TO PERSONS WITH INTELLECTUAL AND/OR PSYCHOSOCIAL DISABILITIES IN LAW AND PRACTICE
18
major overcrowding problem.13 Refusals to surrender
persons under the EAW were confirmed by a legal expert
interviewed:
„The situation is so that according to the
case law of the European Court of Human
Rights, which in its turn is based on the
findings of the European Committee on the
Prevention of Torture, Lukiskes14 used to be
a prison, where it was presumed that if a
person was admitted to prison, they would
be subjected to conditions that violate
human rights. Now, Šiauliai Remand Prison
essentially is in the same situation. Because
whenever we talk about detention in the
Šiauliai Remand Prison, the European Court
of Human Rights immediately talks about
remuneration with Lithuania.“15
Regarding the identification of intellectual and/or
psychosocial disabilities in EAW cases, experts point
out that currently there is no formalised procedure or
guidelines for this:
European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (2014), Report to the Lithuanian
Government on the visit to Lithuania. Available in English:
https://rm.coe.int/1680697367.
14 Lukiškės Prison was closed in 2019 and the prisoners were dispersed to
other detention facilities.
15 Quote from one of the semi-structured interviews.
13
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents