Here’s a detailed analysis of the ECHR decision in I.C. v. Republic of Moldova:
1. Essence of the decision in 3-5 sentences:
– The case concerns Moldova’s failure to protect an intellectually disabled woman from trafficking and servitude after her removal from State care and placement with a family on a farm through a “deinstitutionalization” procedure. The Court found violations of Article 4 (prohibition of slavery and forced labor) due to the State’s failure to prevent trafficking/servitude and conduct an effective investigation, Articles 3 and 8 (prohibition of inhuman treatment and right to private life) regarding ineffective investigation of rape allegations, and Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) due to discriminatory treatment of the applicant as a woman with disabilities. The Court awarded the applicant €35,000 in non-pecuniary damages and €8,587 in costs.
2. Structure and main provisions:
– The decision examines four main aspects:
1) Whether the circumstances amounted to trafficking/servitude under Article 4
2) State’s positive obligations to prevent trafficking and protect victims
3) Effectiveness of investigation into rape allegations
4) Discriminatory treatment based on gender and disability
Key changes/provisions compared to previous decisions:
– Clarifies that trafficking cases involving persons with disabilities require special procedural accommodations
– Establishes that consent is irrelevant when abuse of vulnerability is involved
– Emphasizes need for systemic approach to deinstitutionalization beyond just closing institutions
– Highlights intersection of gender and disability discrimination in trafficking cases
3. Most important provisions for use:
1) On trafficking and vulnerability:
– Abuse of vulnerability of persons with disabilities can constitute trafficking even without physical coercion
– States must ensure proper risk assessment and monitoring in deinstitutionalization cases
– Consent is irrelevant when abuse of vulnerability is involved
2) On investigations:
– Special procedural accommodations required for victims with disabilities
– Need to assess all elements of vulnerability, not just physical evidence
– Investigators must avoid stereotypes and secondary victimization
3) On discrimination:
– Intersectional discrimination based on gender and disability requires special attention
– States must provide reasonable accommodation in legal proceedings
– Institutional passivity regarding violence against women with disabilities constitutes discrimination
4) On remedies:
– States must provide both preventive and compensatory remedies
– Need for effective criminal law mechanisms
– Importance of support services and monitoring after deinstitutionalization
The decision provides important guidance on protecting persons with disabilities from trafficking and exploitation, particularly in the context of deinstitutionalization reforms.
