Boyle Sam, Walsh Tamara
Faculty of Law, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2020 Jun 2;28(2):163-184. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2020.1767715. eCollection 2021.
Mental health review tribunals face the difficult task of balancing an obligation to be efficient and accessible against the obligation to provide procedural fairness. We conducted focus groups with lawyers and advocates who support people with matters before the Queensland Mental Health Review Tribunal to ascertain their views on issues relating to procedural fairness in this particular forum. Consistent with similar studies in other jurisdictions, our participants expressed concerns about how well informed their clients were about the proceedings, the probative value of the evidence relied upon and the extent to which medical evidence is effectively challenged. We analyse the concerns raised by our participants in light of the limited Australian case law on procedural fairness in mental health review tribunals.
心理健康审查法庭面临着一项艰巨的任务，即要在高效且便于使用的义务与提供程序公正的义务之间取得平衡。我们与律师及倡导者进行了焦点小组访谈，这些人在昆士兰心理健康审查法庭处理相关事务时为人们提供支持，以确定他们对于在这个特定法庭中与程序公正相关问题的看法。与其他司法管辖区的类似研究一致，我们的参与者对其客户对诉讼程序的了解程度、所依赖证据的证明价值以及医学证据受到有效质疑的程度表示担忧。我们根据澳大利亚关于心理健康审查法庭程序公正的有限判例法，分析了参与者提出的担忧。
