CAT/C/68/D/852/2017 possible way of achieving accountability for the ill-treatment suffered. Another avenue of investigation would be to require the medical authorities to investigate a former practitioner, even if that person had resigned.8 Dr. Leeks would have faced serious disciplinary measures if he had had to face the Medical Councils in either New Zealand or Australia. State party’s observations on admissibility and the merits 4.1 On 18 May 2018, the State party submitted observations. It first notes that the only aspect of the complaint which is not inadmissible ratione temporis is that the alleged main perpetrator of the abuse at Lake Alice Psychiatric Hospital, Dr. Selwyn Leeks, has not been held to account for his actions. However, the complainant’s claims against Dr. Leeks have been investigated and reviewed by the police. The decision not to prosecute Dr. Leeks was taken because there was a lack of evidence to support a prosecution and because of the determination that there was no other countervailing public interest in proceeding with a prosecution. The decision was taken following previous police investigations of similar complaints and the contemporaneous examination of complaints by the police, a Commission of Inquiry and the Chief Ombudsman in the 1970s. In those circumstances, not prosecuting Dr. Leeks is not a breach of the State party’s obligations under the Convention. It is now too late for a prosecution to be undertaken and there would be valid concerns for the maintenance of rights to a fair trial. 4.2 The State party took action in the 2000s to consider the claims of former patients, including the complainant, and to compensate and apologize to them for what they had experienced. Furthermore, extensive reform of the legislative regime of the rights of patients in general and of the use of electroconvulsive treatment in particular, means that similar events are exceedingly unlikely to occur again. If there is anything further to be explored in relation to the treatment of children and adolescents in the Child and Adolescent Unit at Lake Alice, then this may be achieved by the Royal Commission of Inquiry into historical abuse in State care, which was announced in February 2018. 4.3 The State party notes that complaints began to emerge in or around 1976 and 1977 concerning the Child and Adolescent Unit at Lake Alice Psychiatric Hospital: in 1977, a Commission of Inquiry was set up to investigate the treatment of an adolescent boy who had been a patient in 1975 and 1976;9 in 1977, a report was issued of an investigation by the Ombudsman regarding the treatment of a boy between 1973 and 1976; 10 in 1977, a complaint was lodged with the Hospital Inspectorate about the treatment of two patients in 1974;11 in 1977, a complaint was lodged with the “mental health authorities” about the electroconvulsive treatment of a boy;12 in 1991, a former patient complained to the Medical Practitioners Disciplinary Committee; 13 in 2006 disciplinary proceedings were brought 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 According to the complainant, the Law Society in the State party will still investigate a lawyer even if he or she has resigned from practice. The complainant provided submissions to the Commission of Inquiry, which in the end did not find evidence of any criminal wrongdoing. Following the Chief Ombudsman’s investigation, the Child and Adolescent Unit was closed by 1978. These complaints were subsequently referred to the police, which recorded that in a media article in January 1978, the Commissioner of Police had stated that there was no evidence of criminal misconduct. There was a similar comment from the then Director of Mental Health. It is understood that Dr. Leeks left New Zealand for Australia around 1978, prior to the release of the result of the police inquiry. Police recorded that the allegations were investigated by the Medical Council and the police. Dr. Leeks did not deny applying shocks to the patients in three of the four allegations, but characterized them as aversion therapy. He denied the allegation that two boys were strapped together and given electric shocks. The Medical Council considered the possibility of a disgraceful conduct allegation against Dr. Leeks, but discontinued its investigation after hearing from Dr. Leeks. The Medical Council did not find evidence of criminal behaviour. This complaint was received after Dr. Leeks had left New Zealand. After reviewing the medical file, the Chairman of the Committee determined that there were no grounds for any enquiry into the conduct of Dr. Leeks.