Human rights, human services and the law Report 2022

HUMAN RIGHTS, HUMAN SERVICES AND THE LAW
1
Ì
Human rights, human services and the law
Name
Institution
Date

HUMAN RIGHTS, HUMAN SERVICES AND THE LAW
2
Introduction
This report will analyse the treatment of offenders with mental disorders in a court
proceeding. Mental disorder is a mental pattern responsible for great distress or impairment
of individual operation. Such pattern may be consistent, inconsistent and reknitting, or may
take place singularly. It has been a global observation and concerns that criminal law and
especially criminal proceedings treat a certain category of people with mental disorders
distinctively at each point of the crime process. This is seen from the onset whereby the very
competence of such persons to stand trial is questionable (Shelton 2013).
. More often than not, the people being tried still have mental disorders even during the
trial. It is therefore my intention to identify various ways which the people with mental
disorders subjected to the criminal justice system may be treated more humanely.
Literature Review
The term mental health refers to the absence of mental illness in a person, ie, the level of
psychological wellbeing that a person has. It includes the ability of a person to enjoy life
while they achieve psychological resilience. A person who is healthy mentally realises their
abilities and are able to cope with daily life stresses. They are usually productive and
participate in activities that contribute to the community. Mental disorders, also known as
mental health illness occurs when a person does not experience mental health. They might
arise due to loneliness, stress, anxiety, depression grief or addiction. There are several
fundamental characteristics through which mental disorders can manifest. The diagnosis of
mental disorder is entirely, grounded on behavioural elements including actions, desires,
thoughts, perceptions, beliefs and feelings. There are no standards external be it biological or
psychological by which mental disorders are determined. The determining factor is pegged
on whether or not two impartial diagnosticians can be on the same page on the diagnosis, the

HUMAN RIGHTS, HUMAN SERVICES AND THE LAW
3
same being referred to as inter-rate reliability and can be brought out in terms of numeric, to
be preceded by correcting for chance agreement.
Criminal law is keen on actus reus (forbidden action) and mens rea (guilty mind), aside
from circumstantial evidence. Diagnostic characteristics prevalent amongst offenders with
mental disorders within the criminal justice system, both of inmates and those subjected to
criminal proceedings include: Antisocial personality disorder, where the diagnosis in this
regard is by virtue of persistent disregard of other people’s rights. It is manifested through
non-conformity with social norms, deceitfulness, impulsivity, irritability, lack of regard for
others’ safety, irresponsibility, and ack of remorse (Bloom 2017).
Addiction is sientifically termed as substance use disorders.its diagnosis takes place where
there is consistent use of a substance that later on manifest in health issues and/or
irresponsibility. (Brody et. al 2012). The diagnosis differs with individual in respect to the
specific drugs being abused and is sub-categorized as severe, mild or moderate. The
qualifying determinant has been seen to be aggressive search for and use of substances
regardless of dire consequences, in the often accompaniment of insatiable cravings.
Sexual disorders are manifested through sexual desires that are out of the ordinary and are
satisfied or cause adverse distress. Persons arrested or convicted of sexual offences such as
voyeurism, paedophilia and exhibitionism are prime subjects of this diagnosis (Bardett et. al
2013).
People with mental disorders who are exposed to the legal system are not properly cared for.
They are treated like any other offender and many of them do not get access to rehab
facilities. One they go to prison their condition becomes worse since they are exposed to
violence, isolation and do not have the opportunity to engage in meaningful or social
activities

HUMAN RIGHTS, HUMAN SERVICES AND THE LAW
4
Observations
The offender was not represented. In response to this fact, the Magistrate explained that
the offender might lack the requisite mental capacity to represent himself and warranted that
he be accorded legal representation, even if it was at the State’s expense. The offense
involved robbery. On that note, the matter was adjourned to a later date with the requirement
of due legal representation of the offender.
The offender was identified as a disadvantaged person. The court took due cognisance of
the fact that the offender suffered from a mental disorder and illuminated on the need to
afford him legal representation as explained earlier. The same was affirmed by judicial
precedents highlighted by the Court, which, on this strength, stated that it was duty-bound to
follow the same. The offender had a lesser hand in the matter as opposed to the victim who
was duly represented. In the interest of justice and in line with the laws of natural justice, the
offender, though charged with a grave offense, was no less a person and entitled to just
treatment at the very least by the judicial system.
I gathered that the offender had, in previous proceedings, been established to have had
mental health issues. In particular, the offender was a drug-addict. It was as well apparent
from his demeanour in the courtroom. The offender stammered and could not keep still. He
drooled occasionally and had blood-shot eyes. In addition to this, the offender projected a
particular distinct stench which boldly hovered the courtroom. He wore tattered clothes and
was wounded on his left leg. This was evidenced by a bandage that had been tied on the
upper thigh of his left leg.
The Court pointed out the object of criminal proceedings being:
1. Reformative
2. Restitutive
3. Restorative