recognisingpersons needing procedural accommodationprofessor gautam gulati md phd frcpiadjunct clinical full professor (school of medicine) & forensic psychiatristmadrid, 17 june 2024why do we need accommodations?1.exercise legal capacity (art. 12)2.access to justice (art. 13)3.prevent deprivation of liberty (art. 14)commonly used approaches to recognition –and challenges arisingself-report on receptionscreening toolscapacity based approachesa universal approachself-report/advocacy at any stage of proceedingstraining for all stakeholdersa universal approachoffer 3 basic safeguards to all deprived of liberty – each presents an opportunity to elicit need for accommodationsgautam.gulati@ul.iethe crpd & the insanity defencebob fleischnerthe insanity defence is controversialethe jurisprudence relating to the defence has long been “in a state of chaos͘”*eproponents argue that the defence is fundamentally important to the criminal justice process, ecritics argue the defence is discriminatory, results in lengthy psychiatric detention and includes the possibility of involuntary treatment.*christopher slobogin, “an end to insanity: recasting the role of mental disability in criminal cases,” 86 virginia law review 1199 (2000)capacity based laws and the crpdethe crpd is interpreted to forbid laws are based on capacity.ethis includes guardianship, incapacity to plead, and the insanity defence.why the crpd applies to the insanity defenceethe orpd does not specifically address criminal justice͕ but͙eitis based on the social model of disability not a medical model;earticle 13 provides for a broad right of access to justice; earticle 12 provides that people with disabilities are entitled to equal recognition before the law and requires “that persons with disabilities enjoy legal capacity on an equal basis with others in all aspects of life”͖ etherefore, the orpd implies a “prohibition of separate processes for people with disabilities in criminal law͘”**piers gooding and tova bennet͕ “the abolition of the =nsanity defense in sweden and the united nations oonvention on the rights of persons with disabilities͗ :uman rights brinksmanship or evidence it does not work?” 6 new criminal law review 21 (2108)why the insanity defence violates the crpdethe defence is based on a medicalized concept of disability.eit distinguishes between persons who are have capacity and persons that do not͕ thereby preventing the those “without capacity” from participating equally in the criminal legal process. eit prevents persons from proving their innocenceeit prevents them from confronting witnesses against themeit deprives them of defences available to other defendants. eit deprives them of procedural guarantees.ethus, it creates a two-tiered criminal legal system institutionalization also violates the crpdethe common outcome of a successful insanity defence is institutionalization in a mental facility or a prisonethe term of confinement is usually indeterminant.earticle 14 ensure the right to liberty on an equal basis with others. eit does not permit persons to be detained on the grounds of their actual or perceived impairment.what can replace the insanity defence?eabolitioneswedenesome states in the useuniversal use of mens rea defenceesome mixture of models
