La fin du non-lieu judiciaire et son incidence sur le but des institutions psychiatriques médicolégales

Abstract

The main issues characterizing the links between psychiatry and justice in France, or better between psychosis and law, are dealt with relevance and pragmatism in the bill on security detention and on the declaration of penal irresponsibility due to mental disorder, adopted by the National Assembly on January 10th, 2008. The principle of irresponsibility due to mental disorder is, of course, maintained (as it inscribes the principle of free will in legal practice and is therefore the basis of forensic psychiatry) but dismissal of cases is not upheld; dismissal of cases kept the mentally ill criminals or delinquents out of courts (which could be appropriate) and concurrently kept them out of the reach of justice (which was not necessarily appropriate). Therefore the Penal Code remains as is, it is the criminal procedure code which is adapted in view of setting up dispositions concerning security measures. From now on, psychiatrists will be able to treat antisocial tendencies without having to prevent acting out and without having to keep the patients confined in psychiatric institutions after treatment. Due to this lack of a scientific prediction of second offences, it is the legal authority which will take charge of the situation of people who are legally irresponsible due to mental disorders. The issue is more complicated concerning preventive detention while awaiting trial and the obligation of care to dangerous responsible offenders, as this measure is not considered as a sentence, it is added to the penal sentence after it has been totally completed in order to prevent a second offence and this for a relatively undetermined length of time. This is where the problem lies: indeed, this measure can appear as a totally undetermined sentence for an unspecified length of time. This system has never been accepted in France, though it is accepted in some Anglo-American countries. France is confronted with two positions: one of social defence and the other of judiciarization of admission under constraint in psychiatric hospitals or in sociomedical detention centres for dangerous subjects.