ABSTRACT
Vulnerability replaces autonomy as the essential characteristic of the human person. Recognition of the inherent vulnerability of detainees led to the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture being explicitly mandated to visit persons deprived of their liberty so as to ensure their protection from torture and from inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The Court’s approach to victim vulnerability is very individualised and it rarely makes categorical statements about victims, with the exception, perhaps, of victims of torture and ill-treatment. The Court has addressed the experience of vulnerability of trafficked victims. Some commentators have criticised the Court’s case law for being discernibly pro-state when it comes to immigration cases. Members of the Roma community have been recognised as ‘vulnerable’ in over twenty rulings of the Strasbourg Court. Using prejudice, stigmatisation, social disadvantage and exclusion as factors in the assessment of group vulnerability, it could be argued that there are certain gaps in the Court’s approach to vulnerable groups.
