Criminal Justice (Insane Persons) (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201 -: Lodging

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made on 24 October 2014:

Decision Reference: MD-C-2014-0175
Decision Summary Title :	Criminal Justice (Insane Persons) (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201 -		Date of Decision Summary:	20th October 2014
Decision Summary Author:	Executive Officer, Legislation Advisory Panel		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt?	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written		Person Giving Oral Report:	N/A
Written Report Title :	Criminal Justice (Insane Persons) (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201 -		Date of Written Report:	20th October 2014
Written Report Author:	Senior Legal Adviser, Law Officers Department		Written Report : Public or Exempt?	Public
Subject: Criminal Justice (Insane Persons) (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201 -
Decision(s): The Minister approved the Draft Criminal Justice (Insane Persons) (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201- for lodging 'au Greffe'.
Reason(s) for Decision: The purpose of this short amending Law, in advance of a fundamental review of the Criminal Justice (Insane Persons) (Jersey) Law 1964, along with the Mental Health (Jersey) Law 1969, is to remove the existing requirement under the Law of 1964 for the Superior Number of the Royal Court to try questions concerning the fitness of an accused person to plead to a criminal accusation or the ability of such a person to understand the nature of the trial, and instead to enable the Inferior Number to try such questions.
Resource Implications: There are no financial or manpower implications, save that the amendment will reduce the administrative burden on the Bailiff’s Chambers and the Judicial Greffe by no longer having to convene the Full Court.
Action required: The Executive Officer to inform the Greffier of the States that the Chief Minister had approved the draft Law, and to request that the draft Law be lodged “au Greffe” and for the draft Law to be debated by the States Assembly at the earliest opportunity.
Signature:		Position: CHIEF MINISTER
Date Signed:		Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Criminal Justice (Insane Persons) (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201-: Lodging

Jersey Crest

Criminal Justice (Insane Persons) (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201-

European Convention on Human Rights

In accordance with the provisions of Article 16 of the Human Rights (Jersey) Law 2000, the Chief Minister has made the following statement –

In the view of the Chief Minister for, the provisions of the Draft Criminal Justice (Insane Persons) (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201- are compatible with the Convention Rights.

Signed:

Chief Minister

Dated: [ ] October 2014

Report

The Criminal Justice (Insane Persons) (Jersey) Law 1964 (“the Law of 1964”) was enacted 50 years ago, and is undergoing a fundamental review along with the Mental Health (Jersey) Law which was enacted only 5 years later in 1969. The Law of 1964, in the words of its long title, made provision “for the detention of persons charged with offences who are found insane on accusation or trial, or insane at the time of the commission of the offence.” The reference to persons ‘found insane’ will not be replicated when the Law of 1964 is replaced with fresh provisions governing fitness to plead in criminal proceedings.

The purpose of this short amending Law, in advance of the review referred to above, is to remove the existing requirement under the Law of 1964 for the Superior Number of the Royal Court to try questions concerning the fitness of an accused person to plead to a criminal accusation or the ability of such a person to understand the nature of the trial, and instead to enable the Inferior Number to try such questions. It is not entirely clear why, in 1964, it was thought appropriate for the Full Court (of the Bailiff and at least 7 Jurats) to have to convene to determine such questions, but there is consensus that such a procedure is unnecessarily cumbersome, and that there is no reason why this function cannot be discharged by the Inferior Number (i.e. the Bailiff and 2 Jurats).

The Law of 1964 also makes provision requiring the detention of persons in ‘St. Saviour’s Hospital’ in given circumstances. This requirement may be unduly rigid in terms of which hospital is appropriate for this purpose; and therefore the reference to St. Saviour’s Hospital is replaced with a reference to a hospital within the meaning of Article 1 of the Mental Health (Jersey) Law 1969.

Financial and manpower implications

There are no financial or manpower implications, save that the amendment will reduce the administrative burden on the Bailiff’s Chambers and the Judicial Greffe by no longer having to convene the Full Court.

Human Rights

No human rights notes are annexed because the Law Officers’ Department indicated that the draft Law does not give rise to any human rights issues.