Abstract:It is an internationally accepted principle that ethics norms should be applied and enforced in research with humans through ethics review by research ethics committees (RECs). This places RECs at the very heart of the system for protecting participants and enforcing their rights. In the South African ethical-legal framework for child research, there are divergent approaches to consent. That is, section 71 of the National Health Act (No. 61 of 2003) (NHA) requires mandatory parental consent for child research, and limits the authority for proxy consent to parents and legal guardians. However, national ethics guidelines authorised by section 72 of the NHA and issued by the National Health Research Ethics Council (NHREC) acting in terms of its mandate (National Department of Health, 2015) allow a more nuanced approach - i.e. self-consent by older adolescents, provided certain conditions are met, and consent by a range of parental substitutes where there are no available parents or legal guardians. We have argued elsewhere that the consent approach in section 71 is inappropriately restrictive and are of the view that the consent approach endorsed in national ethics guidelines is more defensible. An REC that elects to approve a consent strategy allowable in ethics guidelines is effectively electing to not follow section 71, which raises the question of what the consequences might be for that REC. This article examines the legal liability of RECs through three 'threads' of accountability: the NHREC, the institutions hosting RECs, and the courts. We conclude that: (i) if an REC approves a child protocol with consent strategies allowable in terms of national ethics guidelinesbut not in terms of section 71, it is unlikely that the NHREC would discipline the REC in the face of a complaint - provided the REC acted within national ethics guidelines issued by the NHREC in terms of the latter's section 72 mandate to set national norms and standards; (ii) if an REC approves a consent approach allowed for in ethics guidance, it is also unlikely that the host institution would discipline the REC in the face of a complaint - especially if the institution is aware of the REC's explicit decision to follow national ethics guidelines that are authorised by section 72 of the NHA; and (iii) an REC could only be sued by a participant in terms of the law of delict (and be liable for damages) if several demanding components are proven, such as that the harm suffered by the participant resulted directly from the REC's actions in approving a particular consent strategy for that research. Furthermore, the court may well look to national ethics guidelines in making determinations about whether an REC's conduct was wrongful for the purposes of liability in civil law. RECs are protected from being collectively liable by insurance taken out by their host institutions. We make a series of recommendations to address this issue.

Adult decision-making capacity and health research in Aotearoa New Zealand

Decision-making capacity assessments in New Zealand and Australia: a systematised review

How are adults with capacity-affecting conditions and associated communication difficulties included in ethically sound research? A documentary-based survey of ethical review and recruitment processes under the research provisions of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) for England and Wales

Legal capacity, developmental capacity, and impaired mental capacity in children under 16: Neurodevelopment and the law in Northern Ireland

Processes of consent in research for adults with impaired mental capacity nearing the end of life: systematic review and transparent expert consultation (MORECare_Capacity statement)

Inclusion of adults with conditions that have the potential to affect capacity and or communication in research: triangulation from a mixed-methods study of current practice and values across multiple stakeholders

Exploring the early experiences of assisted dying in Aotearoa New Zealand: a qualitative study protocol

Assisted dying and evidence-based law-making: a critical analysis of an article's role in New Zealand's referendum

The perspectives of Māori on community treatment orders: A thematic analysis

Research ethics committees in a tight spot: Approving consent strategies for child research that are prima facie illegal but are ethical in terms of national guidelines

Getting the Balance Right: Conceptual Considerations Concerning Legal Capacity and Supported Decision-Making

Rethinking the place of compulsory community mental health treatment in Aotearoa New Zealand: Implications of an assemblage theory approach

A meta-synthesis exploring nurses' experiences of assisted dying and participation decision-making

Compulsory Community Treatment Orders and health outcomes for Ma-ori in New Zealand

Doctors' rights to conscientiously object to refer patients to abortion service providers

Adolescent neurocognitive development and decision-making abilities regarding gender-affirming care

Te Tiriti o Waitangi compliance in regulated health practitioner competency documents in Aotearoa

Governance of research involving people with psychosocial disabilities

The use of routinely collected patient data for research: a critical review

The ethical inadequacy of uninformed surrogate consent: advancing respect for persons in clinical research

Artificial intelligence and mental capacity legislation: Opening Pandora's modem