human rights and legislation who resource book on mental health

made up of a number of people <strong>who</strong> themselves are able to fulfil all the criteria <strong>and</strong> produce the
draft. Other countries may appoint only one or two people to draft the <strong>legislation</strong>, with a m<strong>and</strong>ate
to draw on the skills of others with the relevant expertise <strong>and</strong> representing different interests to
ensure that the above criteria are met. A mix of these models is also possible.
Such decisions will depend on factors such as the availability of expertise, costs of different
approaches relative to funds available, <strong>and</strong> an assessment of which approach is likely to be most
effective in that country. The scope of the proposed <strong>legislation</strong> will also determine the
composition <strong>and</strong> breadth of consultation. For example, a country which chooses to have
comprehensive <strong>legislation</strong> covering all issues of relevance to persons with mental disorders will
require experts <strong>who</strong> can advise on aspects such as housing, employment, social benefits,
welfare <strong>and</strong> justice.
In most countries, the drafting body will need to draw on the expertise of the following:
• a representative from the ministry of health, usually the professional in charge of mental
health, <strong>who</strong> can chair the committee, coordinate the process or act as executive secretary;
• representatives from the other ministries involved (e.g. finance, education, employment,
housing, social security <strong>and</strong> justice);
• mental health professionals;
• lawyers with expertise in mental health <strong>and</strong> other sectors;
• people (legal or other) with expertise in <strong>human</strong> <strong>rights</strong>;
• representatives of users, family <strong>and</strong> carers;
• nongovernmental organizations representing the interests of people with mental disorders;
• experts with experience of working with minorities <strong>and</strong> other vulnerable groups (e.g. women,
children <strong>and</strong> the elderly);
• legislators with an interest in mental health issues.
Despite the inclusiveness proposed for this stage of development of the <strong>legislation</strong>, the draft
produced should still be subjected to a number of further processes through which additional
(or the same) stakeholders will have the opportunity to provide input <strong>and</strong> influence the final
<strong>legislation</strong> (see subsection 3.3 below).
3.2 The need for consultation
Once <strong>legislation</strong> is drafted, it should be put forward for consultation to all the key stakeholders
in the mental health field. Through the consultation process, potential weaknesses of the
proposed <strong>legislation</strong> can be ironed out, conflicts with existing <strong>legislation</strong> <strong>and</strong> local customary
practices rectified, issues that have been inadvertently left out can be added <strong>and</strong> solutions to
practical difficulties in implementation can be corrected.
If well planned <strong>and</strong> executed systematically, consultation also has the potential to influence
positively the adoption of the proposed <strong>legislation</strong> <strong>and</strong> its implementation, once enacted.
Consultation provides an opportunity to raise public awareness about the needs of people with
mental disorders <strong>and</strong> the prevention of such disorders. It also involves the community <strong>and</strong> thus
enhances the visibility of the burden of mental disorders. All these factors increase the likelihood
of effective implementation of the <strong>legislation</strong> once it is enacted.
3.3 Inviting consultation
In many countries there will be a statutory as well as a slightly less formal consultation process.
Before <strong>legislation</strong> is submitted to the legislature, many countries publish a draft copy in a formal
publication such as a government gazette. The public is then given a particular time frame (e.g.
three months) for comment. All comments received must be carefully considered <strong>and</strong>
appropriate changes made. However, at this point, extensive consultation should already have
taken place. The following paragraphs deal with this non-statutory stage of the consultation
process.
97