3.1.2 NATIONAL FRAMEWORK CONCERNING DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY IPD. The first one is the stigma, the second is the lack of practical experience and the ability of professionals to recognise any disabilities and deficits that require some additional measures to be taken.168 The inhumane treatment of people during their compulsory treatment due to lack of any meaningful activities is the third one - not because of their behavior when accidents occur and the totally inhumane conditions they are forced to live in, but the very act of doing nothing for me is torture, and most often this torments them, not the very stay in the psychiatric hospital itself.169 According to the other interviewed judge one of the challenges is the lack of clarity about the way in which the prerequisites for compulsory treatment are evaluated. The existence of an intellectual or psychosocial disability is one of them but the public danger based on it is disputable. So far the case law derives the danger solely from the assessment. However, the expert witnesses do not assess the circle of contacts of the concerned person, including those who can provide care and informed consent for treatment.170 The same judge also underlines the issue with the informed consent for compulsory treatment which is not sought while for involuntary treatment it formally is. But it is impossible for the judges to decide whether the disabled person is able to give consent, who should give it instead of the person in case this is needed and in case when there are no relatives and close ones whether the municipal social workers appointed to do so, perform this duty indeed.171 Another challenge is related to a legislative gap. When a person is placed in a hospital for a forensic assessment while in detention during the trial proceedings and is declared criminally irresponsible at the first or second instance court, the restraint measure should be terminated. Then there is an option that the person is released after having committed a severe crime and left without treatment, supervision and care until the sentence/the court decision becomes final. The Criminal Procedure Code does not link this time during the proceedings with a compulsory treatment procedure or similar to it in case the court decides the person still poses a public danger or a danger of self-harm. The Bulgaria, Interview with District Court judge V.C on 13 May 2022. My experience shows that this need is never recognized in criminal proceedings by pre-trial authorities or the police. For me, how a person behaves in a courtroom is the first indicator that I need to take further action, which is to bring in experts to help me with the assessment. In my opinion, if justice deals with a person’s mental problems, it is only to clarify whether he was able to understand the nature and significance of what was done. I have rarely come across cases in practice where it is investigated whether, after committing the act, the person did not fall into a state of mental incompetence. The reason for this is the lack of such training. 169 Bulgaria, Interview with District Court judge V.C on 13 May 2022. 170 Bulgaria, Interview with Sofia Regional Court Judge M.T. on 13 May 2022. One legal question related to these cases is how the prerequisites for compulsory treatment are evaluated, because the existence of a mental illness/intellectual deficiency alone is not enough. For years, the legal practice has been inert and the public danger is derived from the assessment. The experts are not the witnesses who can say that there is such a danger and the personal circle of the person concerned has not been examined, respectively the potential of the close relatives and friends to provide care and to give informed consent was unexplored either. When there are no relatives to request the treatment and yet the court has taken the trouble to establish this, a person from the municipality is appointed to give informed consent instead of the person concerned. But these are anonymous people and we have no evidence that they do this after we appoint them 171 Bulgaria, Interview with Sofia Regional Court judge M.T. on 13 May 2022. The issues related to the need of involuntary treatment and the informed consent for it are problematic. For years we have been hearing these cases without ever establishing informed consent. How we are supposed to decide whether the person is able to give informed consent to be treated? How the persons are selected who, if he/she cannot give informed consent, give it instead? When there are relatives, we try to search and motivate someone. And when I say we try, we are still a few, because the rest of the judges do not and I can’t even blame them as the workload in Sofia is great and these cases are extremely unprestigious from the point of view of the idea of professional satisfaction. 168 Bulgarian Helsinki Committee 47