CRPD/C/22/D/18/2013 Evidence from independent psychologists and other relevant professionals suggests that constant supervision and care is necessary to support the author and keep himself and others safe. Moreover, the author’s detention at the secure care facility is not arbitrary as it is reasonable, necessary and proportionate given the circumstances, and represents a least restrictive environment for accommodating the author, a person with complex needs who is not otherwise able to be supported by his family or in the community. The State party contests the allegation that the author is not being provided with adequate mental health services. Certain aspects of the author’s treatment and care may from time to time be administered involuntarily, such as medication on an emergency basis during manifestations of behaviours of concern but, in accordance with its interpretive declaration to the Convention lodged upon ratification on 17 July 2008, the State party considers that this is reasonable, necessary and proportionate and is used only as a last resort. Therefore, the fact that the author is sometimes subjected to involuntary treatment does not amount to harsh and unreasonable conditions of detention. 4.20 Finally, the length of time in custody does not of itself amount to a violation of article 15. If or when it becomes feasible for the author to be cared for in a less restrictive setting, the legislation requires that the Court put those arrangements in place. Therefore, the period of time the author has spent in custody has not been disproportionate. 4.21 The author has failed to demonstrate how article 19 is relevant to his claims, as he is a person subject to a custodial supervision order who was subsequently housed in a new purpose-built facility and who was in receipt of a very high level of disability-related care and support services. When taken into custody, he was living in a supported accommodation situation, with full-time disability support workers to assist him. His needs, however, proved too complex to be managed successfully in that less restrictive setting. Furthermore, the State party does not accept that it is not doing everything it can, to the maximum extent of its available resources, to make progress in the realization of the rights set out in article 19 and refers to the significant expenditure made by Australia on both health and disability support services. 11 4.22 The State party does not accept the author’s claim under article 26 that he received no habilitation or rehabilitation services, or that the services he received were inadequate. The services available to him at Alice Springs Correctional Centre included regular medical and psychological assessments, support from disability support workers, occupational therapy, community access and recreational visits. Residents at the secure care facility are encouraged to develop or maintain daily living skills, such as caring for themselves, preparing meals and cooking, cleaning and other household tasks, to enable them to live as independently as possible, in anticipation that they may be able to leave the facility and live in a less restrictive environment. There are a range of recreational activities provided, including access to sports equipment and musical instruments, to ensure that persons living there do not become passive, dependent or institutionalized. The State party also does not accept the assertion that the secure care facility has been unable to recruit appropriate staff. 4.23 Finally, article 28 does not require States to provide housing to all on demand. Even though the author has expressed a desire to be accommodated in his community, this does not mean that his accommodation at the secure care facility results in his rights under article 28 being breached. The author was living in supported accommodation at the time of his arrest, a situation that proved to be inadequate for his needs and that placed those caring for him in danger when he exhibited behaviours of concern. Accommodation in the community would result in a reduction in the level and quality of care, supervision and disabilityrelated services provided to him, as well as in a significant and unacceptable increase in the risk of harm to the author, to those caring for him and to the wider community. While the author’s previous accommodation at the Correctional Centre was not ideal, the author has, nonetheless, at all times been provided with an adequate level of disability-related services and support. Soon after the Northern Territory government became aware of the author’s situation and his accommodation at the Correctional Centre, it decided to build – and 11 8 During 2012 and 2013, there was significant expenditure – which also represented a notable increase on previous expenditure – on disability-related services. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Australia’s Health 2012, (Canberra, 21 May 2012), p. 473.