PART TWO CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
CHAPTER IX INITIATION OF INVESTIGATIONS AND CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
SUB – CHAPTER IV INITIATION OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
C. TAKING PRE-INDICTMENT EVIDENCE
Article 144
Psychological Analysis
5. The pretrial judge may order the psychological evaluation of a defendant only if there is a
sound probability that the defendant committed a criminal offense, there is grounded cause to
believe that the psychological condition of the defendant is impaired or was impaired at the time
of the criminal offense, and that impairment of his psychological impairment is either relevant to
the criminal proceeding or to the defendant’s right to a fair trial. The psychologist or physician
shall issue an expert report with their findings in compliance with Article 136 of this Code.

PART FOUR SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS
CHAPTER XXXIII CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING PERPETRATORS WITH A MENTAL DISORDER
Article 506
Definitions
For the purposes of this chapter:
1. ‘’Mental disorder” means any disability or disorder of mind or brain, whether permanent or
temporary, which results in an impairment or disturbance of mental functioning;
2. “Mental incompetence” has the meaning set forth in paragraph 1 of Article 18 of the Criminal
Code;
3. “Diminished mental capacity” has the meaning set forth in paragraph 2 of Article 18 of the
Criminal Code; and
4. “Measure of mandatory psychiatric treatment” means a measure of mandatory psychiatric
treatment and custody in a health care institution or a measure of mandatory psychiatric
treatment at liberty.

Article 507
Measures of Mandatory Treatment under Criminal Code
1. A perpetrator with a mental disorder, or a person being treated as such, is accorded the rights
and measures of mandatory treatment under Chapter V of the Criminal Code.
2. Against a perpetrator who committed the criminal offence in a state of mental incompetence
or substantially diminished mental capacity, the state prosecutor, in addition to filing the proposal
or indictment, submits a written confirmation that no other criminal proceeding is conducted
against the perpetrator for a criminal offence committed in a state of mental incompetence or
diminished mental capacity. If other proceedings are being conducted, the state prosecutor
submits in the proposal or indictment a motion to join the proceedings conducted in that court
against the perpetrator.
3. When several proceedings are ongoing against the defendant, the court, according to the
motion of the state prosecutor or ex officio, joins such proceedings and conducts a single
criminal proceeding, in which the court decides with one ruling and imposes on the perpetrator
the punishment or measure pursuant to the legal provisions.
4. If the criminal offence committed by a perpetrator in a state of mental incompetence or
substantially diminished mental capacity has been committed in co-perpetration with other
perpetrators who are not in such a state of mental disorder, the state prosecutor orders the
severance of criminal proceedings and separate proceedings is conducted against the
perpetrator with mental disorders.
5. If an indictment has been filed against an accused with substantially diminished mental
capacity, the court holds a main trial. Whereas, if the state prosecutor files a proposal, no main
trial is held.
Article 508
Conduct of Psychiatric Examination
1. At any time during the proceedings including during the main trial, if there is a suspicion that
the defendant was in a state of mental incompetence or diminished mental capacity at the time
of the commission of the criminal offense or if he has a mental disorder, a court may, ex officio
or upon the motion of a state prosecutor or defense counsel, appoint an expert under Article 144
of the present Code to conduct a psychiatric examination of a defendant in order to determine
whether:
1.1. at the time of the commission of the criminal offense, the defendant was in a state of
mental incompetence or diminished mental capacity; or
1.2. the defendant is incompetent to stand trial.
2. The order states the time by which the psychiatric examination is to be completed, which
shall be within two (2) weeks of the issuance of the order. If the defendant does not already
have a defense counsel the court issues an order appointing defense counsel at public expense
for the defendant.
3. The defense counsel may attend a psychiatric examination conducted to determine the
competence of the defendant to stand trial, unless the expert determines that such attendance
would impede a fair assessment of the defendant.
4. If the expert determines that the psychiatric examination of the defendant requires observation
at a health care institution or if the defendant refuses to comply with the psychiatric examination,
the expert submits a reasoned request for a ruling on custody in a health care institution to the
court. The court may, after hearing the state prosecutor and the defense counsel, issue a ruling
to hold the defendant in the custody of a health care institution for up to two (2) weeks. An
appeal against this ruling does not stay its execution.
5. If the expert determines that the psychiatric examination of the defendant pursuant to paragraph
1 of the present Article or observation at a health care institution pursuant to paragraph 4 of the
present Article requires more time, he submits a reasoned request for an extension to the court.
The court may order the extension for up to two (2) weeks.
6. If observation at a health care institution pursuant to paragraph 4 of the present Article is
imposed on a person already subject to detention on remand, the time spent in a health care
institution is included in the period of detention on remand.
7. In the case of a psychiatric examination ordered pursuant to paragraph 1 sub-paragraph 1.1
of the present Article, the expert indicates in the opinion the following elements: the nature, type,
degree and duration of the mental disorder of the defendant; the kind of influence this mental
disorder has had and still does have on the comprehension and actions of the defendant, and
whether and to what degree this mental disorder existed at the time when the criminal offense
was committed.
8. In the case of a psychiatric examination ordered pursuant to paragraph 1, sub-paragraph
1.2 of the present Article, the expert indicates in the opinion the following elements: the nature,
type, degree and duration of the mental disorder of the defendant and the kind of influence this
mental disorder has on the comprehension and actions of the defendant, in particular, on his
ability to defend himself, to consult with others including defense counsel and to understand
the charge.
9. When the court orders a psychiatric examination under this Article, and the defendant is at
liberty, the order for psychiatric examination may stipulate that the defendant be held in custody
in order to be examined by the health care institution, if such examination may not be performed
with the defendant at liberty. The time spent in examination counts towards the duration of the
imposed measure or punishment.
Article 509
Detention on Remand of Persons with a Mental Disorder
1. Apart from cases in Article 184 of the present Code where detention on remand may be
ordered, the court may order detention on remand against a person if:
1.1. there is a grounded suspicion that such person has committed a criminal offense;
1.2. according to a psychiatric examination ordered under Article 508 of the present
Code, the person was in a state of mental incompetence or diminished mental capacity
at the time of the commission of the criminal offense; and
1.3. the person currently has a mental disorder and as a result, there are grounds to
believe that he will endanger the life or health of another person.
2. Detention on remand is served in a heath care institution and may last for as long as the
defendant is dangerous but does not exceed the prescribed periods of time for detention on
remand set forth in Article 187 of the present Code.
3. If the defendant is already in detention on remand and is subsequently determined to have
been in a state of mental incompetence at the time of the commission of the criminal offense,
the court orders the defendant to serve the detention on remand in a health care institution if he
currently has a mental disorder.
4. The court renders a ruling pursuant to paragraph 1 or 3 of the present Article only after
hearing the state prosecutor, the defense counsel and the defendant, if his condition permits,
and after reviewing the opinion of an expert. Such ruling is served on the state prosecutor,
defendant and his defense counsel, the health care institution and the detention facility. The
appeal does not stay the execution of the order.
5. The health care institution decides upon measures to ensure public safety and security
and the security and safety of the defendant after consultation with the competent detaining
authority, taking into account both security and therapeutic needs.
6. Provisions under the present Code on detention on remand shall apply mutatis mutandis to
detention on remand served in a health care institution.