Unfitness to Plead Consultation Responses - Law Commission ...

obligations, it would be much easier to meet the workload in the magistrates courts
through mental health nurses who are currently employed in the criminal justice liaison
teams and who have the expertise to conduct these assessments. This would be
congruent with the significant move to delegation of medical responsibilities to multidisciplinary
team members in the UK.
5. The consultation paper correctly points to the problem of detection of the possibility of
impaired capacity, but offers no solutions other than the proposal that any party in the
proceedings can raise the issue. I fear I have no better idea than this, but detection
remains a major worry, and in my experience defence solicitors cannot always be
relied upon to notice or raise the issue. Indeed, restrictions on legal aid are likely to
create an incentive amongst defence solicitors to encourage their clients to plead
guilty, but this issue is obviously beyond the remit of the consultation paper.
6. The reform of the Section 4a Hearing is complex, and in the consultation paper is
mainly discussed with respect to very serious offences. I am a little uneasy as I am far
from convinced that the distinction between the new special verdicts and conviction per
se is very meaningful. It is clear that the non-involvement of the accused in
proceedings will close off the possibility of some defences. Unfortunately, as with a
number of other issues, I do not have a better idea.
RESPONSES TO PROPOSALS AND QUESTIONS:
Provisional Proposals
9.1 (1) Agree
9.1 (2) Agree
9.1 (3) Agree
9.1 (4) Agree
9.1 (5) Agree
9.1 (6) I have some concerns as set out above.
9.1 (7) I disagree with the use of a defined psychiatric ‘test’, as I do not believe that
this will prove reliable, practical or robust.
9.1 (8) Agree
9.1 (9) Agree
9.1 (10) Agree
9.1 (11) Agree
9.1 (12) Agree
9.1 (13) Agree
9.1 (14) Agree
Part 9 Questions
9.2 (1) Yes
9.2 (2) No