Mental Health Act 20266

• Permanent Page URL

Amendment of section 4 of Act of 2006

211. Section 4 of the Act of 2006 is amended—

(a) in subsection (3)—

(i) in paragraph (aa), by the substitution of “a consultant psychiatrist” for “an approved medical officer”, and

(ii) by the substitution of the following paragraph for paragraph (b):

“(b) Subject to subsections (7) and (8), where in a case to which paragraph (a) relates, the Court determines that an accused person is unfit to be tried, the Court shall adjourn the proceedings until further order, and may—

(i) if it is satisfied, having considered the evidence of a consultant psychiatrist adduced pursuant to subsection (6)(b) and any other evidence that may be adduced before it that the accused person has a mental disorder (within the meaning of the Act of 2026) that fulfils the criteria for involuntary admission and is in need of in-patient care or treatment in a designated centre, commit him or her to a specified designated centre until an order is made under section 13 or 13A, or

(ii) if it is satisfied, having considered the evidence of a consultant psychiatrist adduced pursuant to subsection (6)(b) and any other evidence that may be adduced before it that the accused person has a mental disorder or has a mental disorder (within the meaning of the Act of 2026) that fulfils the criteria for involuntary admission and is in need of out-patient care or treatment in a designated centre, make such order as it thinks proper in relation to the accused person for out-patient treatment in a designated centre.”,

(b) in subsection (5)—

(i) in paragraph (bb), by the substitution of “a consultant psychiatrist” for “an approved medical officer”, and

(ii) by the substitution of the following paragraph for paragraph (c):

“(c) Subject to subsections (7) and (8), if the judge determines that the accused person is unfit to be tried, he or she shall adjourn the proceedings until further order, and may—

(i) if it is satisfied, having considered the evidence of a consultant psychiatrist adduced pursuant to subsection (6)(b) and any other evidence that may be adduced before it, that the accused person has a mental disorder (within the meaning of the Act of 2026) that fulfils the criteria for involuntary admission and is in need of in-patient care or treatment in a designated centre, commit him or her to a specified designated centre until an order is made under section 13 or 13A, or

(ii) if it is satisfied, having considered the evidence of a consultant psychiatrist adduced pursuant to subsection (6)(b) and any other evidence that may be adduced before it, that the accused person has a mental disorder or has a mental disorder (within the meaning of the Act of 2026) that fulfils the criteria for involuntary admission and is in need of out-patient care or treatment in a designated centre, make such order as it thinks proper in relation to the accused person for out-patient treatment in a designated centre.”,

and

(c) in subsection (6)—

(i) in paragraph (a), by the substitution of “a consultant psychiatrist” for “an approved medical officer” in both places that it occurs, and

(ii) by the substitution of the following paragraph for paragraph (b):

“(b) Within the period authorised by the court under this subsection, the consultant psychiatrist who examined the accused person pursuant to subparagraph (ii) of paragraph (a) shall report to the court on whether or not in his or her opinion the accused person—

(i) has a mental disorder (within the meaning of the Act of 2026) that fulfils the criteria for involuntary admission and is in need of in-patient care or treatment in a designated centre, or

(ii) has a mental disorder or has a mental disorder (within the meaning of the Act of 2026) that fulfils the criteria for involuntary admission and is in need of out-patient care or treatment in a designated centre.”.