Sponsored by National Collaborative Innovation Center of Judicial Civilization, organized by the Law and Psychiatry Research Center at China University of Political Science and Law (LPRC@CUPL), the 4th forum on law and psychiatry was held on 12 Nov. 2016 at Fada Institute of Forensic Medicine & Science. The theme for this year's forum is the Outstanding Problems and countermeasures in law and psychiatry. More than 20 scholars, forensic psychiatrists, lawyers, procurators, judges and police officers attended to discuss this topic in details. Prof. Hu Jinian, Director of LPRC@CUPL and Professor Tang Hongyu, President of Chinese Psychiatrist Association co-presided over the forum. Prof. Wang Xu, Vice Director of Institute of Evidence Law and Forensic Science, CUPL, attached great importance to the topic of the forum and warmly welcomed the attendants when making opening speech.

The first section of the forum discussed the outstanding problems and countermeasures from different perspectives. Professor Hu Jinian introduced the currant situation of research in this intersectional area in China and made comparison from an international perspective. Mr. Pan Guangjun, Head of Zhejiang provincial justice administrative department, introduced the prominent problems from the perspective of management of forensic psychiatric expertise and gave his reflections and recommendations on solving these problems. Dr. Cai Weixiong with Institute of Forensic Science, Ministry of Justice, introduced the current situation and prominent problems in standardization of forensic psychiatric expertise and proficiency testing for judicial expertise institutions. Dr. Yang Fude, Head of Beijing Huilongguan Hospital, introduced prominent problems faced by mental health service providers, mainly psychiatric hospitals and psychiatric clinicians and nurses, in the protection of the legal rights of mental patients. Professor Zhang Pinze with Law School of People's Public Security University of China introduced the prominent problems and countermeasures in fulfilling the role of public security authorities in protection of psychiatric patients’ legal rights. Professor Guo Zhiyuan with College of Criminal Justice, CUPL, introduced prominent problems and countermeasures in compulsory medical treatment. Professor Wang Xin with China Youth University of Political Studies introduced the theoretical and judicial disposal problems in handling cases involving internet addiction in adolescents. Huang Taotao, Judge of criminal division of Beijing municipal Daxing district people’s court, Li Yongzhi, Judge with civil division of Beijing municipal Shunyi district people’s court respectively introduced the outstanding problems from the perspective of criminal proceedings and civil actions. Chang Zhen, criminal defense lawyer from Beijing Shangquan Law Firm introduced the problems in fulfilling the role of criminal defense lawyers in the decision of compulsory medical treatment. 

The second section of the forum focused on one of the most controversial problems, namely, the forensic psychiatric assessment of a special type of cases where an individual who falls into psychiatric state and then breaks criminal law under such state after voluntarily drug-intake. Professor Tang Hongyu pointed out the current prominent problems while introducing the specialist consensus on synthetic drug-induced mental disorder related legal problems in China jointly released by the Addiction Medicine Committee and Law and Ethnic Committee under Chinese Psychiatrist Association. Dr. Cai Weixiong introduced the focuses of dispute and the latest research development in this area while introducing the development and implementation of the Guideline for the Assessment of Capacity for Criminal Responsibility for the Mentally Disordered by the Bureau of Judicial Expertise Administration, Ministry of Justice (referred to as the Guideline thereafter). Professor Guo Hua with Central University of Finance and Economics explored the legal requirements for psychiatric assessment for this type of cases from criminal proceedings. A heated discussion around this topic was followed. The following disagreements still remained after the discussion: First, according to the Guideline, under the current circumstances, it is not recommended for psychiatrists to assess the capacity for criminal responsibility for individuals who suffers from drug-induced mental disorders because of voluntarily drug-intake. However, there are still great disagreements both in theory and in practice. Secondly, there are still great disagreements in whether or not to provide a criminal punishment in the criminal law for such individual’s behaviors based on the theory of actio libera in cause. Thirdly, the diagnosis of drug-induced mental disorders is of etiological diagnosis. It is difficult for psychiatrists to make clear the cause of the sufferer’s mental disorder in practice, especially in some difficult and complex cases. What presumption and standard of proof should be taken while performing the forensic psychiatric assessment? These questions need further studies.

The forum was successful according to the attendants. They said, the interdisciplinary discussion helped the practice circle to know the current situation and latest development of theoretical research, meanwhile, helped the theory circle to know the research emphasis for future study.