Leila Samodien
TWO psychiatrists, two reports and two conflicting opinions of Shrien Dewani’s mental health.
This is what has led the State to believe that in order to “definitively” resolve the issue of whether he is fit to stand trial, Dewani would have to be referred for mental observation.
His defence team has also not opposed the application for the referral.
The extradited British businessman faces charges relating to the murder of his bride Anni Dewani. She was killed while the newlyweds were on honeymoon in Cape Town in November, 2010.
He has been detained at psychiatric facility Valkenberg Hospital for treatment since his arrival in South Africa on April 8.
It emerged in the Western Cape High Court yesterday that there were two reports on Dewani’s mental state but that these offered conflicting opinions.
The reports, which have been submitted to the court, are both date June 3, 2014, one by Dr Sean Baumann and the other by Professor Tuviah Zabow.
Baumann was of the opinion at the time of writing his report that Dewani was not suffering from a mental illness.
He recommended that Dewani be discharged from the unit, advising further counselling.
According to Baumann’s report, there was consensus among the members of their multi-disciplinary team that Dewani was not depressed.
He also "deferred" Dewani's diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder, saying that while he appeared to meet the standard criteria for this diagnosis, the context should be taken into account. The symptoms of anxiety, he said, could “more probably be accounted for by his current predicament rather than past events”
“The avoidance displayed could be less an inability to recall past traumatic events than an understandable anxiety with regard to needing to appear in court to account for circumstances leading to him being charged with the murder of his wife,” the report read.
In a separate report, Zabow was of the opinion that Dewani remained mentally ill and that he was in need of appropriate management, care and supervision.
While his mental state had improved since his admission to Valkenberg and his participation in a fair trial could “reasonably be expected with minimal disruptions” if the improvement was maintained, Dewani had fluctuations and variations that were “cause for concern”.
“Due to fluctuations there is difficulty to decide the degree of the mental illness but possible relapse will incur significant implications,” Zabow’s report read. “The pattern of short term improvement supports my opinion and reasonable belief for achievement of satisfactory level of recovery.”
National Prosecuting Authority spokesman Nathi Mncube said Dewani would remain at Valkenberg for the observation period.
He believed the matter would go to trial this year, the earliest being on the provisional trial date of October 6.
Dewani’s defence counsel Francois van Zyl, SC, said during court proceedings yesterday that they had “no doubt” that Dewani was fit and that the trial would proceed.
The case has been postponed to August 15 when the court is expected to hear the outcome of the observation.