The result of this political process will be that in each
of these countries either the convention will be ratified
by its legislating bodies (in democratic countries: the parliaments)
or not be ratified, which would contradict the prior support
of its creation by its government.

Because this convention concerns the human rights of the disabled,
it is crucial to terminate the systematic and wide-spread
violation of human rights sanctioned by law legalizing psychiatric
coercive measures, compulsory hospitalization and forced treatment
as well as the arbitrary prolongation of imprisonment in the
forensic unit as punishment. If the convention is to be ratified
and thus become law in these countries without the psychiatric
special laws being invalidated, it would become the opposite
of what it intended: it would become another instrument against
the civil and human rights of all individuals who were psychiatrically/medically
slandered as allegedly being “mentally ill”. These “diagnoses”
are defined in the convention with the term “disabled” (Article
1, par. 2): “Persons with disabilities include those who
have long-term physical, mental, intellectual
or sensory impairments … ” [Bold
and underlining added by us]

The convention explicitly bears down on the legal discrimination
of persons with disabilities (Article 2, par. 3):
“… Discrimination on the basis of disability” means
any distinction, exclusion or restriction on the basis of
disability which has the purpose or effect of impairing or
nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal
basis with others, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms
in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any
other field. …”

The convention thereby explicitly forbids the possibilities
which the national constitutions leave open by annulling constitutional
rights with special laws if they have a “disability” as criterion.
However that is precisely the case with the Mental Health
Laws: the laws legalizing psychiatric confinement of non-criminals
as well as the special forensic laws of the Penal Code have
as an essential requirement a psychiatric assessment and/or
a compulsory examination for this. They must therefore be
abolished because they contradict the convention.

Moreover, in Article 12 the convention obligates a ratifying
state as follows:
Equal recognition before the law
1. States Parties reaffirm that persons with disabilities
have the right to recognition everywhere as persons before
the law.
2. States Parties shall recognize that persons with disabilities
enjoy legal capacity on an equal basis with others in all
aspects of life.

Thus any forced guardianship and the compulsory hospitalization,
including coercive treatment which is thereby made possible,
must be terminated. No longer can the words “protection” and
the alleged “well-being” of the persons concerned serve as
a cynical pretext for such measures.

To support this legal interpretation of the convention we
recommend commissioning an expertise by lawyers specialized
in international Human Rights, taking into account the specific
national laws.
We call on organizations for persons with disabilities to
urgently take a stance against a ratification of the convention
by the national legislators if it does not fulfill that which
it pledges: legally binding freedom from discrimination. Legal
discrimination is exercised in its most radical, brutal and
abhorrent form by the laws legalizing coercive psychiatry.
Should organizations for persons with disabilities nevertheless
press for a rapid ratification because they anticipate the
effects of positive discrimination from the convention, a
ratification without the abolishment of coercive psychiatry
would come at an intolerable price: the continuation of the
barbarity of coercive psychiatry with its torture-like practices
and the denial of self-determination by individuals who were
slandered in the psychiatric-medical jargon as alleged “mentally
ill”.