ISSN 2410-3594
e-ISSN 2786-7382
UDC 34; 159.9
Scientific Journal of the National Academy of Internal Affairs
- legal personality; legal capacity; human rights protection; international standards; case law; disability
- https://doi.org/10.63341/naia-herald/3.2025.43
- Pages 43-59
The study aimed to identify and systematise the main standards of procedural fairness developed in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights concerning the procedures for limitation of legal capacity and guardianship, with a subsequent analysis of the peculiarities of their implementation in the national legal systems of European States. The study was conducted using a comprehensive methodological approach that combined a systematic method for analysing the interrelationships between the elements of procedural justice, a comparative legal method for comparing the approaches of different European legal systems, a case law analysis method for systematising key decisions, and a structural and functional analysis for studying the functioning of guardianship models. As a result of the systematisation of case law, five fundamental standards of procedural fairness were identified: the obligation to ensure personal participation or proper representation of a person in court proceedings, the application of an individual approach to the assessment of legal capacity and ensuring the proportionality of restriction measures, guaranteeing periodic review of decisions on the restriction of legal capacity, taking into account the will and preferences of the person in decision-making, and ensuring independent legal assistance. A comparative analysis of the implementation of the standards in the three countries under study revealed significant differences: the progressive Betreuung system in Germany with support without deprivation of rights, the decision-making support system in Finland without transfer of rights and the limited compliance of Ukrainian legislation with European requirements due to the lack of mandatory personal participation of a person in court hearings and mechanisms for periodic review of decisions. The practical significance of the study is determined by the creation of a methodological framework for assessing the effectiveness of national legal systems and developing practical recommendations for legislative reforms in the field of guardianship and incapacity. The findings of the study can be used by judicial authorities, legislators and human rights organisations to improve procedural safeguards and transition from traditional models of full guardianship to modern decision-making support mechanisms that respect the principles of human dignity and autonomy of persons with disabilities
References
[1] Bandura, R., & Raynai, P. (2023). Investing in mental health will be critical for Ukraineʼs economic future. Retrieved from https://csis.org/analysis/investing-mental-health-will-be-critical-ukraines-economic-future.
[2] Bodio, J. (2021). Guardian appointed for a disabled person and guardian appointed for a partially incapacitated person. Studia Iuridica Lublinensia, 30(4), 49-75.
[3] Borovska, I.A. (2020). On the issue of consideration of cases on recognition of an individual as incapacitated in the context of reforming the civil procedural legislation of Ukraine. Bulletin of Zaporizhzhia National University. Legal Sciences, 2, 38-44. doi: 10.26661/2616-9444-2020-2-05.
[4] Boyle, S., & Walsh, T. (2020). Procedural fairness in mental health review tribunals: The views of patient advocates. Psychiatry, Psychology, and Law, 28(2), 163-184. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2020.1767715.
[5] Cerekja, B., & Mucollari, O. (2024). Right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the ECHR: The balance between efficiency and fairness in European criminal law. Social & Legal Studies, 7(4), 146-156. doi: 10.32518/sals4.2024.146.
[6] Ciliberti, R. (2024). The ethical and legal protection of the vulnerable individual: Current status and prospects for the application of the guardianship institution in Italy. Medicina Historica, 8(1), article number e2024006.
[7] Craigie, J., Bach, M., Gurbai, S., Kanter, A., Kim, S.Y.H., Lewis, O., & Morgan, G. (2019). Legal capacity, mental capacity and supported decision-making: Report from l Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 62, 160-168. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2018.09.006.
[8] Degener, T. (2016). Disability in a human rights context. Laws, 5(3), article number 35. doi: 10.3390/laws5030035.
[9] Disability Nottinghamshire. (2020). Social model vs medical model of disability. Retrieved from https://www.disabilitynottinghamshire.org.uk/index.php/about/social-model-vs-medical-model-of-disability/.
[10] Dombrovska, A., Marchenko, V., & Kilimnik, I. (2022). The right to make a decision: Human rights of patients with mental disabilities. Public Administration and Law Review, 3(11), 81-88. doi: 10.36690/2674-5216-2022-3-81.
[11] Fiala-Butora, J. (2024). The influence of the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities on the European court of human rights in the area of mental health law: Divergence and unexplored potential. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 94, article number 101965. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.101965.
[12] Goss, R. (2023). The disappearing “minimum rights” of Article 6 ECHR: The unfortunate legacy of Ibrahim and Beuze. Human Rights Law Review, 23(4), article number ngad024. doi: 10.1093/hrlr/ngad024.
[13] Human Rights Law Centre. (2024). Incapacity, inhuman or degrading treatment, and the right of mentally ill persons to access the courts. Retrieved from https://www.hrlc.org.au/case-summaries/incapacity-inhuman-or-degrading-treatment-and-the-right-of-mentally-ill-persons-to-access-the-courts/.
[14] Inclusion Europe. (2022). Legal capacity. Retrieved from http://www.inclusion-europe.eu/legal-capacity/.
[15] Jager, F., Boyle, S., & Peron, A. (2024). Professional values and mental health tribunals: How healthcare professionalsʼ and lawyersʼ views are shaped by values, and how this might impede reform. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 45(7), 695-705. doi: 10.1080/01612840.2024.2346601.
[16] Jovičić, S. (2021). ECHR v. UNCRPD: Ending restrictions on voting rights of persons with disabilities. ERA Forum, 22(3), 699-715. doi: 10.1007/s12027-021-00692-4.
[17] Kaluzhna, O., & Shevchuk, M. (2022). Unconditional grounds for challenges to judges in criminal proceedings of Ukraine and ECtHR standards. Access to Justice in Eastern Europe, 2(14), 46-82. doi: 10.33327/AJEE-18-5.1-a000110.
[18] Karjalainen, K. (2022). Strengthening the right to personal autonomy and protection of vulnerable adults: From human rights to domestic and european legislation on voluntary measures. In K. Karjalainen, Tornberg & A. Pursiainen (Eds.), International actors and the formation of laws (pp. 75-94). Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-98351-2_4.
[19] Keene, A.R., Kane, N.B., Kim, S.Y.H., & Owen, G.S. (2023). Mental capacity – why look for a paradigm shift? Medical Law Review, 31(3), 340-357. doi: 10.1093/medlaw/fwac052.
[20] Leloup, M. (2021). Who safeguards the guardians? A subjective right of judges to their independence under Article 6(1) ECHR. European Constitutional Law Review, 17(3), 432-461. doi: 10.1017/S1574019621000328.
[21] Martino, G.D. (2019). Protection of incapacitated persons: Evolution of law and fundamental rights. International Constitutional Law Journal, 7(2), 365-389. doi: 10.22364/iscflul.7.2.29.
[22] Melamed, Y., Doron, I., & Shnitt, D. (2007). Guardianship of people with mental disorders. Social Science & Medicine, 65(6), 1118-1123. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.04.040.
[23] Mental Disability Advocacy Center. (2008). Europeʼs highest human rights court holds that Russia violated rights of man with mental health disabilities. Retrieved from https://surl.lt/urxuux.
[24] Ministry of Health of Ukraine. (2018). Mental health system transformation in Ukraine: improving mental health services and bringing mental health care in line with international standards. Retrieved from https://moz.gov.ua/en/mental-health-system-transformation-in-ukraine-improving-mental-health-services-and-bringing-mental-health-care-in-line-with-international-standards.
[25] Näkki, K., Maki-Petäjä-Leinonen, A., Ervasti, K., & Solje, E. (2024). Evaluating the need for legal guardianship in people with dementia: Gaining insight into professionalsʼ assessment criteria. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 38(1), article number ebae005. doi: 10.1093/lawfam/ebae005.
[26] Popovych, I.M. (2020). Forensic examination as a source of evidence in individual proceedings. Scientific Bulletin of the Dnipro State University of Internal Affairs, 3, 200-207. doi: 10.31733/2078-3566-2020-3-200-207.
[27] Scholten, M. (2025). Mental capacity and supported decision-making. In Ethics in psychiatry (pp. 27-51). Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-024-2274-0_3.
[28] Seleznova, V., Pinchuk, I., Feldman, I., Virchenko, V., Wang, B., & Skokauskas, N. (2023). The battle for mental well-being in Ukraine: Mental health crisis and economic aspects of mental health services in wartime. Inter ber 28 28. doi: 10.1186/s13033-023-00598-3.
[29] Series, L., & Nilsson, A. (2018). Article 12 CRPD: Equal recognition before the law. In I. Bantekas, M.A. Stein & D. Anastasiou (Eds.), The UN Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities: A commentary (pp. 293-325). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[30] Shakargy, S. (2023). Capacitating personal capacity: Cross-border regulation of guardianship alternatives for adults. Journal of Private International Law, 19(3), 450-480. doi: 10.1080/17441048.2023.2294618.
[31] Starke, C., Baleis, J., Celler, B., & Marcinkowski, F. (2022). Fairness perceptions of algorithmic decision-making: A systematic review of the empirical literature. Big Data & Society, 9(2). doi: 10.1177/20539517221115189.
[32] Stavert, J. (2025). Capacity and incapacity: An appropriate border for non-consensual interventions? International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 98, article number 102042. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.102042.
[33] Swift, H. (2021). Comparative law research. Retrieved from https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/comparative_law1.html.
[34] The Lancet Psychiatry. (2020). Ukrainian mental health services and World Psychiatric Association Expert Committee recommendations. Retrieved from https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0366(20)30344-8/fulltext.
[35] United Nations Enable. (2024). Article 12 – Equal recognition before the law. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities/article-12-equal-recognition-before-the-law.html.
[36] United Nations in Ukraine. (2024). General comment No. 1 (Article 12: Equal recognition before the law). Retrieved from https://ukraine.un.org/en/133050-general-comment-no-1-article-12-equal-recognition-law.
[37] University of California San Francisco. (2024). Medical and social models of disability. Retrieved from https://odpc.ucsf.edu/clinical/patient-centered-care/medical-and-social-models-of-disability.
[38] University of Michigan Law Library. (2024). Legal systems – foreign, comparative, and international law. Retrieved from https://libguides.law.umich.edu/c.php?g=815412&p=5891391.
[39] Vogiatzis, N. (2022). Interpreting the right to interpretation under Article 6(3)(e) ECHR: A cautious evolution in the jurisprudence of the European Court o Law Review, 22(1), article number ngab027. doi: 10.1093/hrlr/ngab027.