Canada’s deportation of Jamaican man with mental
disability ‘cruel treatment’, UN experts say
GENEVA (21 May 2015)
- Canada’s deportation of a Jamaican man with a mental disability who
had spent much of his life in Canada amounted to cruel and inhuman treatment,
effectively leaving him without the medical and family support he depended on,
a UN Committee has found after examining the case.
The Geneva-based Human Rights Committee said Canada
should allow the man, A.H.G., to return to Canada if he wished and give him
adequate compensation.
A.H.G., 52, who emigrated to Canada when he was 18 years
old, was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia in 1993.
He was deported to
Jamaica on 29 August 2011, after the Canadian authorities ruled that he was not
eligible to be in the country on the grounds of serious criminality, in
particular as a result of his conviction in 2005 of assault with a weapon.
In its findings, the 18-member Committee recognised
Canada’s legitimate interest in protecting the general public but highlighted
that A.H.G.’s criminal offences were recognised to be related to his mental
illness.
The Committee experts noted that in 2005, after A.H.G. was evicted
from his home and started living in shelters, he had difficulty in taking his
medication and experienced psychotic relapses.
The Committee said that the deportation of A.H.G., “a
mentally ill person in need of special protection who lived most of his life in
Canada, on account of criminal offences recognised to be related to his mental
illness, and which has effectively resulted in the abrupt withdrawal of
available medical and family support on which a person in his vulnerable
position is necessarily dependent, constituted a violation by the State party
of its obligations under article 7 of the Covenant."
Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights states that: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.”
The Committee highlighted that that the
aim of article 7 is to protect both the dignity and the physical and mental
integrity of the individual.
The Canadian authorities had argued that A.H.G.’s removal
was “reasonable in the circumstances and proportionate to the gravity of the
crimes committed, and the danger posed to the Canadian public.”
The Human Rights Committee monitors implementation of the
ICCPR by States parties. It considered this case under the First Optional
Protocol to the Covenant which gives the Committee competence to examine
individual complaints.
ENDS
*The Committee published its views on 21 May here:
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CCPR/Pages/Jurisprudence.aspx
For more information and media requests, please contact
Liz Throssell (+41 (0) 22 917 9466/ ethrossell@ohchr.org
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(ICCPR): http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CCPR.aspx
To learn more about the Human Rights Committee visit:
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/index.htm
Human Rights Committee individual complaints procedure:
UN Human Rights, follow us on social media:
Twitter: http://twitter.com/UNrightswire
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/UNOHCHR
Storify: http://storify.com/UNrightswire
Nema komentara:
Objavi komentar