1. The rights to privacy and to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion are closely interconnected and constitute the foundation of the claimant’s capacity for healthcare self-determination in the present case. The right to therapeutic self-determination stands in opposition to the imposition of medical treatment without consent, even in emergency situations, as religious beliefs pertain to the profoundly individual sphere of the person and must be acknowledged by state institutions without interference.
2. The procedural course followed by national authorities in determining whether or not to administer medical treatment must necessarily take into account the patient’s decision-making autonomy, regardless of whether the treatment constitutes a life-saving intervention. The patient is, in fact, free to choose – according to their beliefs and religious affiliation – whether or not to accept the procedures proposed by healthcare professionals. Any treatment administered without respecting the individual's personal sphere constitutes a violation of Article 8 of the ECHR and, in this case, given the religious nature of the beliefs involved, also of Article 9 of the ECHR.
3. The applicant, living in Spain and a Jehovah’s Witness, refuses to undergo blood transfusions due to her religious affiliation – a stance duly recorded in both a living will and a durable power of attorney accessible via the electronic health system. Suffering from severe anemia, the applicant is subjected – following authorization by the competent judge – to a blood transfusion without prior notification. Thus, she lodges an application before the European Court of Human Rights, alleging violations of Articles 8 and 9 of the ECHR.
