Use of the Judicial Section 9 Certification in the Free State

Meyer, S.; Slabber, M; Rensburg, P H J J van; Nel, Mariëtte

doi:10.4102/sajpsychiatry.v10i4.122

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Accountability – according to Section 78 (accountability) of the Criminal Procedures Act 51 of 1977 and Amendment 1998 – ‘the ability of the accused to appreciate the wrongfulness of his or her actions and whether he or she can act in accordance with an appreciation of the wrongfulness of his or her actions’. 10 , 11 …”

Section: Research Methods and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, if the accused is evaluated as mentally ill, or if there is doubt concerning the accused’s mental state at the time of the offence (accountability or criminal responsibility), the court will order that the accused be observed in a designated psychiatric facility for a period not exceeding 30 days. 10 , 11 Chapter 13 of the Criminal Procedures Act 51 of 1977 10 , 11 contains provisions for this referral, and consists of three sections, Section 77 (trialability), Section 78 (accountability) and Section 79 (psychiatric assessment procedures). On completion of a psychiatric evaluation by psychiatrists or multidisciplinary mental health teams, an accused can either be found accountable for his or her actions, or not accountable as a result of a mental illness or defect.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accountable or not accountable: A profile comparison of alleged offenders referred to the Free State Psychiatric Complex Forensic Observation Ward in Bloemfontein from 2009 to 2012

Plessis¹,

Plessis²,

Nel³

et al. 2017

S. Afr. J. Psych.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe crime rate in South Africa is extraordinarily high. The problem of crime is further complicated when a person, who suffers from a mental illness, becomes involved in a crime. Furthermore, the forensic evaluation of a person suspected of having a mental illness involved in alleged criminal behaviour can be challenging. However, a dearth of information exists in South African literature regarding the link between crime and mental illness.AimTo determine the percentage of alleged offenders, referred to the Free State Psychiatric Complex (FSPC) for observation, found accountable and not accountable, and to compare the biographical, diagnosis and offence profiles of these two groups. The analysis of differences can contribute to a better understanding of the complex process of forensic assessments.SettingForensic Observation Ward, FSPC, Bloemfontein.MethodsIn this comparative, retrospective study, all 505 trial-awaiting alleged offenders (observati) referred from 2009 to 2012 for a 30-day observation period, according to Sections 77 and/or 78 of the Criminal Procedures Act, were included. Results were summarised as frequencies and percentages, and means or percentiles. Significant differences between the groups were determined by sample t-tests or chi-squared tests.ResultsObservati found not accountable were in the majority (64.5%). Significant differences were found regarding marital and employment status, substance abuse, type of offence and diagnoses between the two groups. Almost all of the observati found to be not accountable were diagnosed with mental illness at the time of the assessment, whereas most observati found to be accountable for their actions at the time of the alleged offence were not found to be mentally ill. Observati found not accountable were significantly more likely to be diagnosed with schizophrenia, intellectual disability and substance-induced psychotic disorder, and committed mostly assault, murder and vandalism. Observati found accountable committed mostly rape, murder and theft.ConclusionThe majority of observati were found not accountable, with significant differences found between the two groups regarding demographic characteristics, type of diagnosis and offences committed. The identified differences can be used to assist in establishing criteria for the appropriate referral of alleged offenders by courts. Unnecessary referrals have a serious financial impact on the Department of Health. Furthermore, the high incidence of substance abuse among persons referred to the FSPC highlights the need for more substance rehabilitation centres in the Free State Province.

show abstract

Section: Research Methods and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accountable or not accountable: A profile comparison of alleged offenders referred to the Free State Psychiatric Complex Forensic Observation Ward in Bloemfontein from 2009 to 2012

Plessis¹,

Plessis²,

Nel³

et al. 2017

S. Afr. J. Psych.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If, for example, accused are brought for examinations on a day-visit basis for up to 3 days (depending of individual requirements, of course), the reduction in costs to the relevant state departments, namely, health and justice, could be substantial. While current costs are not available, a 30-day forensic mental health observation was estimated to cost about R30,000 several years ago (Meyer, Slabber, van Rensburg, & Nel, 2004). At current rates, the use of a day-visit approach could result in substantial savings in direct costs.…”

Section: Can the S77 And S78 Accused Be Examined As A Day-visitor?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Competency to stand trial and criminal responsibility examinations: are there solutions to the extensive waiting list?

Pillay

2014

South African Journal of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mental health examinations (colloquially referred to as '30-day observations') required to assist the courts in determining competency to stand trial and criminal responsibility are governed by sections 77, 78, and 79 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. Unfortunately, there is a significant backlog of these cases in South Africa, which puts pressure on mental health facilities and the courts. The article discusses some of the narrow approaches to these enquiries that may be contributing to the problem and raises possible alternatives that need to be examined in addressing the matter. Among these is the practice of hospitalization for examination periods up to 30 days, rather than day-visit examinations. Another barrier is the restriction of the examinations to psychiatrists, even though the legislation provides for the appointment of clinical psychologists to the enquiry panels.

show abstract

“…5 The process of a 30-day inpatient assessment is labour intensive, time consuming and expensive. 6 , 7 The Department of Health’s turnaround strategy to reduce the long waiting list found that it was legally compatible for psychiatric forensic observations to be conducted by only one psychiatrist in correctional centres, or on an outpatient basis in specific health establishments. 5 As of March 2010, single psychiatrist observations were conducted in the Northern Cape, North West, Limpopo and the Free State provinces, 5 which were helpful in reducing the number of awaiting-trial detainees requiring forensic assessment, as everyone did not require 30-day inpatient assessments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Few studies have reported on such assessments in South Africa, with most assessments being carried out on an inpatient basis, 8 , 9 , 10 those being conducted on a preliminary outpatient basis having taken place in rural, under-resourced settings. 6 , 11 A number of countries have explored the option of outpatient forensic observations, including Israel, where Olmer found that in 65.2% of the court-ordered psychiatric assessments, the assessing psychiatrist felt that there was no need for hospitalisation or inpatient forensic assessment. The author contended that an outpatient unit dedicated to writing these reports could significantly reduce the rates of hospitalisation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The profile of suspected criminal offenders referred for psychiatric evaluation on an outpatient basis at Ngwelezana Hospital

Mngadi

Tomita

Khanyile

et al. 2021

South African Journal of Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Some suspected criminal offenders in South Africa are required to undergo forensic psychiatry assessments before or during the trial, which can be delayed as a result of the shortage of psychiatrists and inpatient forensic psychiatry beds. In KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) province, only one hospital (Fort Napier Hospital [FNH]) is designated for the 30-day inpatient forensic psychiatry assessments and there is a long waiting list for suspected criminal offenders awaiting assessment. There is a need to find ways of alleviating the backlog in the waiting list, with the use of outpatient forensic assessments being a possible adjunctive method.Aim: To determine the demographic, clinical and forensic profile of suspected criminal offenders referred for outpatient preliminary assessment to Ngwelezana Hospital, and identify the profile of those who most likely require referral to FNH for a 30-day inpatient assessment.Setting: The study was conducted at Ngwelezana Tertiary Hospital, in KZN, South Africa.Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of 207 suspected criminal offenders referred for outpatient forensic assessment from January 2009 to June 2015.Results: The majority of the participants were males (94.2%), with a diagnosis of substance use disorder (28.2%), intellectual disability (23.4%) or psychotic disorders (21.8%). Forty three per cent were charged with sexual crimes and 10.7% with murder. Fifty seven per cent were recommended for referral to FNH for a 30-day inpatient forensic assessment, whilst 43% were not recommended for referral. Those recommended for inpatient assessment were significantly more likely to have a lower level of education (p = 0.02), to be on a disability grant (p 0.01), and to have been diagnosed with intellectual disability (p 0.01), than those not recommended for referral.Conclusion: Identifying the characteristics of suspected criminal offenders who are most likely to be recommended for referral to FNH will potentially reduce the number of unnecessary referrals.

show abstract

Use of the Judicial Section 9 Certification in the Free State

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Accountable or not accountable: A profile comparison of alleged offenders referred to the Free State Psychiatric Complex Forensic Observation Ward in Bloemfontein from 2009 to 2012

Accountable or not accountable: A profile comparison of alleged offenders referred to the Free State Psychiatric Complex Forensic Observation Ward in Bloemfontein from 2009 to 2012

Competency to stand trial and criminal responsibility examinations: are there solutions to the extensive waiting list?

The profile of suspected criminal offenders referred for psychiatric evaluation on an outpatient basis at Ngwelezana Hospital

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About