2020The International Islamic University Malaysia Repository (The International Islamic University Malaysia)Requires access

Not guilty by reason of insanity: a critical examination of Section 84 of the Brunei Penal Code

Ahmad Masum, Muhamad Hassan Ahmad, Seeni Mohamed Nafees

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

It has been ethically, legally and socially accepted that a person who is suffering from insanity cannot and should not be criminally responsible for his actions or inactions. A mentally ill person is not punished for his crime, as he is devoid of free will, intelligence and knowledge of the act. The defence of insanity provides protection to persons with insanity. It plays a vital role in giving protection from criminal liability to such persons who cannot understand the nature of their acts due to their insanity. The basis of the defence of insanity lies in the maxim Actus reus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea which means that no man can be proved guilty unless he has a guilty mind. Whenever an insane person commits a crime due to the effect of his insanity, he does not have a guilty mind to understand that what he is doing is prohibited by law. The Brunei criminal law system has laid down the defence of insanity under s 84 of the Brunei Penal Code (Cap 22). This paper critically examines the law relating to the defence of insanity under the Bruneian criminal law system by making reference to the Penal Code. The methodology adopted in this paper is legal library-based research focusing mainly on primary and secondary legal sources. The paper concludes that the extent to which the defence of insanity may hold is not certain. In Brunei, judges are not readily moved by such defence neither is the society. In addition, legal scholars and jurists are greatly limited in the knowledge of psychology behind abnormality and the behavioural altitudes that could pass the definition of insanity. The paper recommends that there is a need to return to a more common sense and humane interpretation of legal insanity by paying closer attention to the severity of the emotional disturbance of the individual committing the disturbed and illogical act.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

It has been ethically, legally and socially accepted that a person who is suffering from insanity cannot and should not be criminally responsible for his actions or inactions. A mentally ill person is not punished for his crime, as he is devoid of free will, intelligence and knowledge of the act. The defence of insanity provides protection to persons with insanity. It plays a vital role in giving protection from criminal liability to such persons who cannot understand the nature of their acts due to their insanity. The basis of the defence of insanity lies in the maxim Actus reus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea which means that no man can be proved guilty unless he has a guilty mind. Whenever an insane person commits a crime due to the effect of his insanity, he does not have a guilty mind to understand that what he is doing is prohibited by law. The Brunei criminal law system has laid down the defence of insanity under s 84 of the Brunei Penal Code (Cap 22). This paper critically examines the law relating to the defence of insanity under the Bruneian criminal law system by making reference to the Penal Code. The methodology adopted in this paper is legal library-based research focusing mainly on primary and secondary legal sources. The paper concludes that the extent to which the defence of insanity may hold is not certain. In Brunei, judges are not readily moved by such defence neither is the society. In addition, legal scholars and jurists are greatly limited in the knowledge of psychology behind abnormality and the behavioural altitudes that could pass the definition of insanity. The paper recommends that there is a need to return to a more common sense and humane interpretation of legal insanity by paying closer attention to the severity of the emotional disturbance of the individual committing the disturbed and illogical act.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

It has been ethically, legally and socially accepted that a person who is suffering from insanity cannot and should not be criminally responsible for his actions or inactions. A mentally ill person is not punished for his crime, as he is devoid of free will, intelligence and knowledge of the act. The defence of insanity provides protection to persons with insanity. It plays a vital role in giving protection from criminal liability to such persons who cannot understand the nature of their acts due to their insanity. The basis of the defence of insanity lies in the maxim Actus reus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea which means that no man can be proved guilty unless he has a guilty mind. Whenever an insane person commits a crime due to the effect of his insanity, he does not have a guilty mind to understand that what he is doing is prohibited by law. The Brunei criminal law system has laid down the defence of insanity under s 84 of the Brunei Penal Code (Cap 22). This paper critically examines the law relating to the defence of insanity under the Bruneian criminal law system by making reference to the Penal Code. The methodology adopted in this paper is legal library-based research focusing mainly on primary and secondary legal sources. The paper concludes that the extent to which the defence of insanity may hold is not certain. In Brunei, judges are not readily moved by such defence neither is the society. In addition, legal scholars and jurists are greatly limited in the knowledge of psychology behind abnormality and the behavioural altitudes that could pass the definition of insanity. The paper recommends that there is a need to return to a more common sense and humane interpretation of legal insanity by paying closer attention to the severity of the emotional disturbance of the individual committing the disturbed and illogical act.

Key concepts: Insanity, Insanity defense, Mens rea, Criminal liability, Law, Criminal law, Criminal code, Political science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Not guilty by reason of insanity: a critical examination of Section 84 of the Brunei Penal Code — Research Paper | ScholarLens