XN000022-1988-06-22 — Page 13

11

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 22, 1988

FURTHERMORE, THE POLICE OFFICER WAS GIVEN THE POWER ONLY TO TAKE THE SUSPECTED MENTALLY SICK PERSON TO THE NEAREST HOSPITAL WHERE HE WOULD BE PLACED IN THE AUTHORITY OF A REGISTERED MEDICAL PRACTITIONER AND BE EXAMINED WITHIN 24 HOURS.

HE STRESSED THAT SECTION 71B DID NOT GIVE THE POLICE ENTER PRIVATE PREMISES TO ARREST SUSPECTED MENTALLY SICK THEY COULD ENTER ONLY BY INVITATION OR IN PURSUANCE OF A DUTY.

POWER ΤΟ

PERSONS. STATUTORY

DR HO EXPLAINED THAT THE REASON WHY THE PROVISION OF THIS SECTION WAS NOT RESTRICTED TO PUBLIC PLACES WAS TO ENABLE A MENTAL PATIENT OR A NON-OFFENDER MENTAL PATIENT WHO WAS INCAPABLE OF RECOGNISING HIS NEED FOR MEDICAL AND PSYCHIATRIC TREATMENT IN HIS OWN INTEREST, OR FOR THE PROTECTION OF OTHERS, TO RECEIVE EARLY CARE AND TREATMENT,

"I MUST EMPHATICALLY

POINT OUT THAT SECTION 718 DOES NOT PROVIDE A POLICE OFFICER WITH GREATER POWER THAN THE EXISTING ORDINANCE," HE SAID.

"IT GIVES STATUTORY POWERS TO A POLICE OFFICER TO TAKE THE SUSPECTED MENTAL PATIENT DIRECTLY TO THE THAN TO THE POLICE STATION.

"

TO ENABLE HIM HOSPITAL RATHER

NOTING THAT FEARS HAD BEEN EXPRESSED THAT DETENTION IN A MENTAL HOSPITAL FOR A PROLONGED PERIOD MIGHT BE USED AS A READY EXCUSE TO DENY A PERSON HIS CIVIL LIBERTIES, DR HO SAID THAT CLAUSE 22 OF THE BILL PROVIDED FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A MENTAL HEALTH REVIEW TRIBUNAL.

HE SAID THE TRIBUNAL WAS EMPOWERED TO REVIEW CASES AUTOMATICALLY OR BY APPLICATION IN RELATION TO DETENTION, CONDITIONAL DISCHARGE, AND GUARDIANSHIP.

IT WAS ALSO AUTHORISED TO DEAL WITH ALL APPEALS LODGED WITH IT AND WAS EMPOWERED TO DISCHARGE PATIENTS ABSOLUTELY OR CONDITIONALLY, DR HO SAID.

HE SAID THAT GIVEN THE WIDE POWERS TO DECIDE ON THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE PATIENT'S NEED FOR DETENTION, THE PROPER OPERATION AND COMPOSITION OF THE TRIBUNAL WERE VITAL.

"THE OPERATION IS GOVERNED BY A SET OF RULES FORMULATED BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE UNDER SECTION 59G. THESE RULES WILL BE SUBSIDIARY LEGISLATION AND THUS SUBJECT TO THE SUPERVISORY JURISDICTION OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL UNDER SECTION 34 OF THE INTERPRETATION GENERAL CLAUSES ORDINANCE,

HE SAID.

DR HO SAID HE WAS GLAD THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAD INCLUDED SOCIAL WORKER AS A MEMBER OF THE MENTAL HEALTH REVIEW TRIBUNAL.

AND

A

"THE INPUT