{"id":30834,"date":"2022-03-09T10:13:00","date_gmt":"2022-03-09T06:13:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/prwb.am\/2022\/01\/14\/%d5%b4%d5%ab%d5%a5%d5%a4-%d5%a8-%d5%a2%d5%b8%d5%a9%d5%b8%d5%b5%d5%a1%d5%b6%d5%b6-%d5%a8%d5%b6%d5%a4%d5%a4%d5%a5%d5%b4-%d5%b0%d5%a1%d5%b5%d5%a1%d5%bd%d5%bf%d5%a1%d5%b6%d5%ab-%d5%a3%d5%b8%d6%80%d5%ae\/"},"modified":"2022-12-05T10:24:01","modified_gmt":"2022-12-05T06:24:01","slug":"%d5%b4%d5%ab%d5%a5%d5%a4-%d5%a8-%d5%a2%d5%b8%d5%a9%d5%b8%d5%b5%d5%a1%d5%b6%d5%b6-%d5%a8%d5%b6%d5%a4%d5%a4%d5%a5%d5%b4-%d5%b0%d5%a1%d5%b5%d5%a1%d5%bd%d5%bf%d5%a1%d5%b6%d5%ab-%d5%a3%d5%b8%d6%80%d5%ae","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/prwb.am\/en\/2022\/03\/09\/%d5%b4%d5%ab%d5%a5%d5%a4-%d5%a8-%d5%a2%d5%b8%d5%a9%d5%b8%d5%b5%d5%a1%d5%b6%d5%b6-%d5%a8%d5%b6%d5%a4%d5%a4%d5%a5%d5%b4-%d5%b0%d5%a1%d5%b5%d5%a1%d5%bd%d5%bf%d5%a1%d5%b6%d5%ab-%d5%a3%d5%b8%d6%80%d5%ae\/","title":{"rendered":"The ECHR Recorded a Violation of the Conventional Right by the case Botoyan v. Armenia"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>The European Court of Human Right (herein referred as\nthe ECHR) confirmed the violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on\nHuman Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Convention) by the decision adopted on\nFebruary 8 of 2022. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In 2008, the Applicant underwent a foot surgery through\ninstallment of metal implant, which was carried out inappropriately and led to\nthe disability of the Applicant. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Application was filed to the ECHR back in 2016 on\nthe ground that the state failed to provide relevant medical services to the\npatients and on the ground that the lack of medical care and treatment of the\napplicant led to deterioration of health conditions of the patient causing\ndisability. Moreover, the Applicant did not properly inform about the process\nof the providing medical care and its possible risks. By the application filed\nto the ECHR, an issue whether there are relevant mechanisms in the Republic of\nArmenia enabling compensation of damage was raised. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Having examined the submitted application, the ECHR\nrecorded, that there is an issue of the violation of the conventional rights of\nthe Applicant. The Court also recorded that the states have positive\nobligations in terms of defining regulatory grounds for defining effective\nmedical services.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The ECHR, accepting the presented facts and\ncircumstance, considered that the surgeries carried out in Artik medical center\nwere performed by a specialist, who did not have relevant specialization of\nperforming the given surgery; moreover, the installed metal implant was not\nacquired officially. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The ECHR also confirmed that the facts presented by\nthe Applicant on the appropriateness of the provided medical care were serious\ncircumstances. Similarly, the lack of compensation for the damage caused in the\noutcomes of the surgery was also problematic. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Court stated, that the Republic of Armenia legislative regulations\nwere sufficient for informed consent, however, according to the findings of the\nCourt, the concrete issues raised by the Applicant about his\/her informed\nconsent were not made a subject for proper investigation during the examination\nof the criminal cases making the later inefficient. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>At the same time, the Court made a reference to other protection means for\nmedical error available in the Republic of Armenia firstly mentioning that the\npossibility for compensation of moral damage, disciplinary sanctioning against\ndoctor, as well as the possibility to appeal the consultation of the RA\nMinistry of Healthcare, which were reviewed by the RA Government, are\ninefficient and inapplicable. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Therefore, the ECHR confirmed, that the above mentioned led to the\nviolation of Applicant\u2019s right to private and family life under Article 8 of\nthe Convention. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Araks Melkonyan, the President of the Protection of Rights without\nBorder NGO, Haykuhi Harutyunyan and Ani Aghagulyan, previous lawyers of the\nOrganizaiton, represented the interests of M. Botoyan at the European Court of\nHuman Rights. <\/p>\n\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The European Court of Human Right (herein referred as the ECHR) confirmed the violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Convention) by the decision adopted on February 8 of 2022. In 2008, the Applicant underwent a foot surgery through installment of metal implant, which was carried out inappropriately [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":38700,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[258,29,245,190,252,74],"tags":[],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/prwb.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30834"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/prwb.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/prwb.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prwb.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prwb.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=30834"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/prwb.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30834\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":34056,"href":"https:\/\/prwb.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30834\/revisions\/34056"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prwb.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/38700"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/prwb.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=30834"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prwb.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=30834"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prwb.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=30834"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}