Friday, 29 March, 2024
HomeMedico-LegalSections of Mental Health Act ruled unconstitutional by High Court

Sections of Mental Health Act ruled unconstitutional by High Court

Sections of the Mental Health Act that allowed the involuntary detention of patients, as occurred in the Life Esidimeni tragedy, have been declared unconstitutional by the Gauteng High Court, reports The Star.

Although the decision by Acting Judge PN Manamela last Wednesday (11 May) in the North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, might be too late for some, it should, however, help prevent a similar tragedy from occurring in the future.

The matter will now go to the Constitutional Court for confirmation that sections of the Act are unconstitutional.

The ruling comes after the Makana People’s Centre, a civil rights organisation, took the health minister and provincial health MECs to the High Court, where it argued that sections 33 and 34 of the Act were unconstitutional because they did not provide for automatic independent review before or immediately after the involuntary detention of a mental health patient.

The sections violated the right to dignity because they meant a mental health patient could be detained without necessary investigation, the group said.

The Star reports that Makana cited the Life Esidimeni saga as a result of the challenged sections. More than 140 mental health patients died in 2016 after the Gauteng government transferred patients from Life Esidimeni Private Hospital to various, mostly unregistered and inadequate NGO centres.

An inquiry chaired by retired Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang Moseneke concluded that families of the 144 victims should be compensated.

Makana argued in court that the sections it challenged allowed the transfers from Life Esidimeni because they did not stipulate judicial reviews, neither were these reviews needed before and after the placement of the patients at Life Esidimeni.

The group also submitted reports pertaining to the deaths after the removals from Life Esidimeni.

The health minister argued the challenged sections did not infringe any rights because families of the detained patients had a right to approach the courts at any stage.

Acting Judge PN Manamela said: “I have considered the submissions made around the Life Esidimeni tragedy to the extent that it relates to mental health care users, as well as the extent to which the applicant has relied on it to support its case.

“The reports provide sufficient evidence of lack of proper safeguard within the statutory framework in so far as it relates to the detention of involuntary mental health care users.

“The scheme for the involuntary detention of a health care user created under section 33-34 of the Mental Health Act 17 of 2002 is declared to be inconsistent with the Constitution and therefore invalid, to the extent that it does not provide for automatic independent review prior to or immediately following the initial detention of a person involuntarily detained under the Act.”

 

The Star PressReader article – Changes to Mental Health Act (Open access)

 

See more from MedicalBrief archives:

 

SIU sets sights on NGOs that benefited from Life Esidimeni tragedy

 

Life Esidimeni inquest: ‘He vomited for four weeks and then he starved to death’

 

Life Esidimeni inquiry: NGO had grown men sleeping in baby cots

 

Dozens of former Life Esidimeni patients remain missing

 

 

 

 

MedicalBrief — our free weekly e-newsletter

We'd appreciate as much information as possible, however only an email address is required.