APPLICATION OF THE FRAMEWORK DECISIONS IN MEMBER STATES Bulgaria wrote that the reason why there was no data on PAS was because there was no case to begin with, including no case involving persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities.458 Slovenia also indicated it could not find any case involving persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities.459 The second issue found in respect of data concerns the absence of disaggregated data, which corresponds to the separation of compiled information into smaller units in order to elucidate underlying trends and patterns. A Portuguese participant evoked the difficulty to navigate cases without a functioning database offering research tools or filtering for research. Such possibility is paramount in order to better monitor the way in which persons with intellectual and/ or psychosocial disabilities are involved in such proceedings. Regarding the EAW FD, and in the case where databases are available at all, there is usually no disaggregated data, as was pointed out by Lithuania.460 This makes research on persons with intellectual and/ or psychosocial disabilities particularly difficult to find, as contrary to the three other framework decisions, EAW cases are more numerous. This would virtually mean that interested parties would have to go through hundreds of cases in order to find the ones involving such individuals. Concerning the TP FD, in states where data was gathered and available, the absence of disaggregation was also observed. Otherwise, there was merely a lack of cases involving persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities where transfer of prisoners was refused on fundamental rights grounds, as was pointed out by Slovenia. 461 Concerning the ESO FD, it was also found that when data was available, there was no disaggregated data on persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities. This shortcoming was pointed out by Bulgaria,462 Slovenia463 and Austria.464 The latter stated it was due to a lack of a unified process of the courts on the application of these measures. 106 Finally, it can be that disaggregated data is available, and reveals no violation of fundamental rights regarding persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities. Lithuania stated that several rulings have mentioned the possibility to postpone an EAW transfer in case of such violations, but this was never applied.465 5.3 LACK OF AWARENESS 5.3.1 LACK OF AWARENESS OF THE FRAMEWORK DECISIONS Another obstacle found in the context of this research was the general lack of knowledge on the four FDs and their application. Concerning the EAW FD, it was reported during the regional consultation workshop that there is a general lack of knowledge about the FDs other than the EAW FD. However, each proceeding differs from another: for instance, whether to use it at the pre-trial or post-trial stage, or which authority is involved. Also, it must be noted that not all FD proceedings include international transfers as a main tool. The EAW and TP FDs mainly focus on such transits whereas the ESO FD includes a transfer only when the individual has breached their obligation to report to the competent authorities, and the PAS FD does not contain any provision about a transfer whatsoever. It was added during the regional consultation workshop that the lack of awareness and knowledge about the ESO and TP FDs on the matter of transfers led to an overuse of the EAW FD, even when it was not the most adapted cross-border procedure. Germany reported, on this specific issue, a case where the EAW FD was used to transfer an individual, which was subsequently turned into a TP FD because it was viewed as more suitable for the person concerned.466 Concerning the ESO FD, Austria reported that it was applied in a very limited manner. Researchers also explained such perception by identifying a general lack of knowledge and/or awareness of the ESO FD’s existence and purpose.467 In Slovenia, the research could not identify