This contribution examines deprivation of liberty in Belgian healthcare within the frameworks of the ECHR and CRPD. We develop and apply an ECHR-based framework to demonstrate that it is not the admissions to care facilities based on Belgium’s involuntary commitment law that give rise to the unjustified deprivation of liberty, but those based on representation regimes. This can be remedied by broadening Belgium’s involuntary commitment law. However, doing so would go against a CRPD-based framework, which is incompatible with the ECHR; the former opposes disability-based laws. Building on the right to legal capacity and to liberty, the scope of the CRPD’s approach is uncovered. It is suggested that to reconcile the two frameworks, Belgium’s involuntary commitment law should be abolished, and representation regimes should be changed to avoid (rather than to justify) deprivation of liberty. Although its desirability is open for discussion, this could solve a problem that occurs worldwide.

这项文稿在ECHR和CRPD的框架内研究了比利时医疗保健中的自由剥夺。我们开发并应用了基于ECHR的框架，以证明不是基于比利时非自愿承诺法的护理设施入场会导致无理剥夺自由，而是基于代表制的入场。可以通过扩大比利时的非自愿承诺法来补救。但是，这样做会违反基于CRPD的框架，该框架与ECHR不兼容；前者反对基于残疾的法律。在法律权利和自由权的基础上，《残疾人权利公约》的范围的方法已被发现。建议为了调和这两个框架，应废除比利时的非自愿承诺法，并应更改代表制，以避免（而不是为之）剥夺自由。尽管它的可取性已经开始讨论，但这可以解决世界范围内发生的问题。