Informe Jurídico sobre la Sentencia del caso Guachalá Chimbo y otros vs. Ecuador de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos
Fecha
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Acceso al texto completo solo para la Comunidad PUCP
Resumen
El presente informe jurídico analizó la responsabilidad del Estado del Ecuador
por la violación de los derechos a la libertad personal, acceso a la información y
salud del señor Luis Eduardo Guachalá Chimbo, una persona con discapacidad,
en el contexto de su segundo internamiento involuntario en el Hospital
psiquiátrico Julio Endara. Para el análisis, se empleó principalmente la
Convención Americana de Derechos Humanos, la Convención sobre Derechos
de las Personas con Discapacidad y la jurisprudencia de la Corte Interamericana
y el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos.
Entre las principales conclusiones se determinó que, en primer lugar, se violó el
derecho a la libertad personal del señor Guachalá porque su segundo
internamiento involuntario constituyó una privación arbitraria de libertad al no
regularizarse el consentimiento para su internamiento, que en un inicio fue
brindado por su madre al encontrarse este en una situación de emergencia
psiquiátrica. En segundo lugar, se violó el derecho de acceso a la información
porque no se brindó la información para que el señor Guachalá brinde su
consentimiento de ser internado, luego de su emergencia psiquiátrica. Asimismo,
porque no se brindó en ningún momento información sobre su diagnóstico y
tratamiento. En tercer lugar, se violó el derecho a la salud porque el tratamiento
brindado no tuvo en cuenta todos los elementos esenciales del derecho a la
salud.
This legal report analyzed the responsibility of the State of Ecuador for the violation of the rights to personal liberty, access to information and health of Mr. Luis Eduardo Guachalá Chimbo, a person with disabilities, in the context of his second involuntary internment in the Julio Endara Psychiatric Hospital. For the analysis, the American Convention on Human Rights, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court and the European Court of Human Rights were mainly used. Among the main conclusions it was determined, firstly, right to personal liberty of Mr. Guachalá was violated because his second involuntary internment constituted an arbitrary deprivation of liberty by not regularizing the consent for his internment, which was initially provided by his mother because he was in a psychiatric emergency. Secondly, the right to access to information was violated because the information was not provided for Mr. Guachalá to give his consent to be internment, after his psychiatric emergency. Also, because at no time was information provided about his diagnosis and treatment. Third, the right to health was violated because his treatment did not consider all the essential elements of the right to health.
This legal report analyzed the responsibility of the State of Ecuador for the violation of the rights to personal liberty, access to information and health of Mr. Luis Eduardo Guachalá Chimbo, a person with disabilities, in the context of his second involuntary internment in the Julio Endara Psychiatric Hospital. For the analysis, the American Convention on Human Rights, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court and the European Court of Human Rights were mainly used. Among the main conclusions it was determined, firstly, right to personal liberty of Mr. Guachalá was violated because his second involuntary internment constituted an arbitrary deprivation of liberty by not regularizing the consent for his internment, which was initially provided by his mother because he was in a psychiatric emergency. Secondly, the right to access to information was violated because the information was not provided for Mr. Guachalá to give his consent to be internment, after his psychiatric emergency. Also, because at no time was information provided about his diagnosis and treatment. Third, the right to health was violated because his treatment did not consider all the essential elements of the right to health.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Responsabilidad del Estado (Derecho internacional), Personas con discapacidad--Derechos humanos, Detención, Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos--Jurisprudencia
Citación
Colecciones
item.page.endorsement
item.page.review
item.page.supplemented
item.page.referenced
Licencia Creative Commons
Excepto donde se indique lo contrario, la licencia de este ítem se describe como info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess
