The verdict term 'not guilty due to mental incompetence' will be removed and replaced as part of a move to better reflect both the experience of victims and the findings of the court.
There has been concern amongst victim advocates that the term 'not guilty' in this context is no longer appropriate as it can lead to distress and confusion in the community, and fails to adequately encapsulate the court's findings.
Under reforms that have now passed State Parliament, the term will be replaced with a finding of 'conduct proved, but not criminally responsible' due to mental incompetence.
This amendment has been advocated for by victims that the Government has met with and the current and previous Commissioner for Victims' Rights.
The Government will be working with the Courts Administration Authority and police to commence the reforms as soon as possible.
As put by Kyam Maher
While the term 'not guilty due to mental incompetence' may be technically accurate, it's easy to misinterpret.
Victims of crime could feel as though their experiences are being downplayed with a verdict that the perpetrator was 'not guilty' of the offence, despite the agreed facts of them committing the act in question.
While this amendment will not result in any new laws or procedures, this change is a fairer and more accurate way to reflect victim sentiment and describe the court's findings.
As put by Sarah Quick, Commissioner For Victims' Rights
Victims have long expressed their distress and frustration with the terminology 'not guilty due to mental incompetence.' For them, this minimises the seriousness of the offence and their suffering and contributes to a sense of injustice.
This reform better reflects victims' experiences and their need for recognition and validation whilst still acknowledging the defendant's mental health needs.
Language is powerful and this change of terminology will contribute to a greater sense of justice for victims.
