Unfitness to Plead Consultation Responses - Law Commission ...

UNFITNESS TO PLEAD
Response by the Law Reform Committee of the Bar Council
and the Criminal Bar Association of England and Wales
The Bill provides for the regular review of unfitness, there is no similar
provision in the law as it stands. The Bill provides for the case to be
brought to a conclusion ion within a specified period. ...
[A]nyone, nyone, however reviled or lowly or disabled, has a right to be treated
fairly and that anyone has the right to be considered innocent before guilt
is proved.
79. Thus, the outcry was not in relation to the Pritchard test, or the determination that
Mr Pearson was unfit to plead, or that too many persons were treated by the Courts
as fit to plead when they ought not to be, but rather that the disposal was perceived
as being draconian, namely, the prospect of lifelong hospitalisation.
80. The fate of Mr Leigh’s Bill is not known to the authors of this Response (and no
reference is made in the CP to the Bill or what became of it) but, , six years later,
substantial amendments were made to the 1964 Act by the Criminal Procedure
(Insanity and Unfitness ess to Plead) Act 1991.
81. Relevant to this part of the discussion is section 5 of the 1964 Act, as amended by
the 1991 Act, and then by the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004,
which empowers the Court to make the following orders in respect of an offender
who is unfit to plead and it is found (under s.4A of the 1964 Act) that he did the
act or made the omission charged against him him: 111
Relevant to this part of the discussion is section 5 of the 1964 Act, as amended by
and then by the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004,
n offender
that he did the
(a) a hospital order (with or without a restriction order);
(b) a supervision order; or
(c) an order for his absolute discharge discharge.
82. A significant reform brought about by the amending legislation is that the
“Secretary Secretary of State no longer has a role in deciding whether or not the defendant is
admitted to hospital and that a court can no longer order the defendant' defendant's admission
to a psychiatric hospital without any medical evidence evidence” 112 is that the
Secretary of State no longer has a role in deciding whether or not the defendant is
s admission
.
83. In cases where a finding of unfitness to plead has been determined, we are not
aware of cases in which the options for disposal under s.5(2) are inadequate or
unsatisfactory.
111
See s.5(1) and s.5(2), 1964 Act, as amended.
112
See Mental Healthcare Online:
http://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/Domestic_Violence_Crime_and_Victims_Act_2004
30