The Supreme Court of Spain ruled in favor of the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) in a high-profile case against the Spanish Society of Psychiatry (SEP), affirming the importance of public debate on psychiatric practices.
The Court highlighted that discussions on psychiatric treatments, including involuntary institutionalization and use of psychotropic drugs, particularly for children and adolescents, are of undoubted general interest.
The CCHR's criticisms, although harsh, were deemed pertinent to public discourse, defending the association's right to free expression against SEP's claims of defaming the psychiatric profession.
Key Points
--------------
- The Supreme Court of Spain ruled that public debate on psychiatric practices is of "undoubted general interest."
- The Spanish Society of Psychiatry's lawsuit to suppress criticisms by CCHR was dismissed.
- CCHR’s criticisms include accusations against psychiatrists involving unethical practices and human rights violations.
- The Court emphasized the importance of freedom of expression in discussing European elections controversial psychiatric treatments.
- Documentation provided by CCHR supported the existence of significant social and political debate on psychiatric issues.
- European politics UK politics Harsh criticisms by CCHR were protected as part of essential public discourse in a democratic society.
- The Court's decision aligns with European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence on freedom of expression, even for offensive or disturbing opinions
Article in Spanish here: https://europeantimes.news/es/2024/07/unsilenced-psychiatric-abuses-watchdog-wins-supreme-court-battle-in-spain/