decide to sit in a courtroom specially laid out in a hospital; and finally, the judge may resort to videoconferencing154 if the doctor is not opposed to it and if the director of the institution has verified the absence of opposition on the part of the patient. The analyses of the Ministry of Justice show that, so far, the great majority of hearings take place inside courts 155. We have already referred to this information: as the Contrôleur général noted in its annual report for 2011 156, videoconferencing is unsuitable for the full exercise of rights to defence under ordinary law which cannot be questioned, and is even less suitable in the case of psychotic illnesses. Without it being necessary to further expand this point, we here refer the reader to the assessment issued by the Contrôleur général on this question and published in the Journal officiel157. This approach should be used if, and only if, the judge is faced with a situation of force majeure (blizzard etc.). Apart from the fact that the transporting of patients before courts may give rise to journeys that are hardly conducive to the serenity of hearings, it also exposes patients, who are in most cases hospitalised in the geographical area from which they come (therefore, in an institution near to their home), to the view of other people, since all courts of first instance are far from possessing dedicated access routes separated from those provided for the public. The journey to the court, the solemnity of the place and the circumstance of appearing before a court are factors that are a source of confusion for patients. Not to mention the sensitive problems with regard to certain patients accommodated in units for difficult psychiatric patients. Therefore, notwithstanding established habits, it is recommended that the coming law should amend current provisions concerning hearings and reserve the courtroom of the court, like videoconferenci ng, solely to cases where force majeure prevents the judge from going to the hospital. The other side is obviously that a courtroom fulfilling the necessary criteria (serenity, the public nature of proceedings and, when necessary, confidentiality) should exist in each of these institutions. The funds which are currently used for the installation of costly videoconferencing equipment could be put to better use for the fitting out of such rooms. 2.5.1.3 The Limits of the Act In the third place, the Act of 5th July 2011 has a far from negligible impact upon the functioning of hospital treatment. Without here returning to the mobilisation of staff necessary in order to hold hearings in hospital158, one can only note that the Act of 2011 gives rise to a great deal of additional red tape, in particular due the increase in the number of certificates for which it makes provision. In one institution inspected by the Contrôleur général in 2012, five hundred measures relating to placement in treatment without consent gave rise to almost five times that number of instruments. In a context of shortage of public sector psychiatrists 159, this increase not only reduces availability160 but, more seriously, leads to attitudes that may create doubt with regard to 154 Under the conditions provided for under article L.111-12 of the code of judicial organisation. The data gathered by the ADESM – the association of directors of psychiatric institutions (association des directeurs d’établissements psychiatriques) – plays down that of the Ministry of Justice, but is based on questionnaires which were not always completed. 156 p. 79 157 th Journal officiel of 9 November 2011, no. 0260. 158 In a situation where, as established in numerous inspection reports from the contrôle général , the reduction of levels of staff has the inevitable consequence of reducing the number of outings for patients supervised by nursing staff, often drastically (walks, meals, purchases at the market etc.). Patients will thus no longer go out except in order to go to court… 159 On this point see the Report of the Chief Inspector of places of deprivation of liberty for 2011, p. 79-85. 160 During the inspection of one UMD, for example, it was pointed out that “the time that psychiatrists are present has been drastically cut due to their being assigned to the carrying out of psychiatric assessments.” Admittedly, a 155 67