Report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/22/53, Annex (1 February 2013) (Juan Mendez) • “The mandate has previously declared that there can be no therapeutic justification for the use of solitary confinement and prolonged restraint of persons with disabilities in psychiatric institutions; both prolonged seclusion and restraint may constitute torture and ill-treatment … The Special Rapporteur has addressed the issue of solitary confinement and stated that its imposition, of any duration, on persons with mental disabilities is cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment … Moreover, any restraint on people with mental disabilities for even a short period of time may constitute torture and ill-treatment …It is essential that an absolute ban on all coercive and nonconsensual measures, including restraint and solitary confinement of people with psychological or intellectual disabilities, should apply in all places of deprivation of liberty, including in psychiatric and social care institutions. The environment of patient powerlessness and abusive treatment of persons with disabilities in which restraint and seclusion is used can lead to other non-consensual treatment, such as forced medication and electroshock procedures.” [63] • Therefore, the Special Rapporteur calls on all State Parties to: “Impose an absolute ban on all forced and non-consensual medical interventions against persons with disabilities, including the non-consensual administration of psychosurgery, electroshock and mind-altering drugs such as narcoleptics, the use of restraint and solitary confinement, for both long- and short-term application.” [89(c)] Approach of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment regarding the rights of persons institutionalized and treated medically without informed consent, CAT/OP/27/2 (26 January 2016) • “Restraints, physical or pharmacological, are forms of deprivation of liberty and, subject to all safeguards and procedures applicable to the latter, should be considered only as measures of last resort for safety reasons. The State must take into account, however, that there is an inherently high potential for abuse of such restraints and as such these must be applied, if at all, within a strict framework that sets out the criteria and duration for their use, as well as procedures related to supervision, monitoring, review and appeal. Restraints must never be used for the convenience of staff, next of kin or others. Any restraint has to be recorded precisely and be subject to administrative accountability, including independent complaint mechanisms and judicial review.” [9] 68