Continued preventive detention of convicted paedophile in view of risk of reoffending did not breach Convention but Administrative Court ought to have held hearing in his case (ECtHR)

The case of B.M. v. Switzerland (application no. 50227/21) concerned the rejection of the application for release on licence made by the applicant, a paedophile who had been in preventive detention since 2005 following his conviction for sexual assault of minors, and the Administrative Court’s failure to hold a hearing in his case.

In Chamber's judgment dated 12.5.2026, the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been no violation of Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Court found, in particular, that the Federal Supreme Court had adopted an approach consistent with the principles set out in its case-law on the justification for deprivation of liberty under paragraph 1 (a) of Article 5 of the Convention when it had held that the legal interests at stake were of high importance because they involved the physical and mental well-being of children, who were vulnerable individuals. The continuation of the preventive detention measure had therefore been the only way to counter the high risk that the applicant would reoffend, as the measures provided for in the event of his release on licence were not sufficient for that purpose.

The Court further held, by a majority (5 votes to 2), that there had been a violation of Article 5 § 4 (right to a speedy decision on the lawfulness of detention) of the Convention. It found that it had been necessary for the Administrative Court to examine the applicant at a hearing in view of the judicial authority’s duty to assess his personality, his vulnerability and the lack of a recent expert assessment. The Court held that Switzerland was to pay the applicant 10,000 euros (EUR) in respect of nonpecuniary damage and EUR 3,000 in respect of costs and expenses. (source https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/ photo pixabay.com)