CHAPTER 1
General Explanations
24. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at the time of doing it is by reason of being in a certain state of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that it may be contrary to law. This provision shall not be applicable to a person who creates that state of mind on his own volition or with his consent or by doing an act with knowledge that it will or may be likely to cause that state of mind.
CHAPTER 50. EXCUSE DEFENSES
Section 53 – Immaturity
(a) A person is excused for his offense if, at the time of the offense:
(1) he lacks the maturity of an adult, and
(2) as a result, he lacks substantial capacity:
(i) to accurately perceive the physical consequences of his
conduct constituting the offense, or
(ii) to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct
constituting the offense, or
(iii) to control his conduct constituting the offense so as to
be justly held accountable for it.
(b) Immaturity Presumed. A person:
(1) less than 15 years old at the time of the offense shall be
conclusively presumed to have satisfied the requirements of this excuse
defense.
(2) less than 18 years old at the time of the offense shall be
presumed, subject to rebuttal by the prosecution, as provided in Section
15 (Burdens of Proof; Rebuttable Presumptions), to have satisfied the
requirements of this excuse defense.
(3) At least 18 years old at the time of the offence, shall be
presumed, subject to rebuttal by the offender, to posses the maturity of
an adult.
(c) A person who is 18 years old at the time of the offence, and who is
excused for his offence under subsection (a) and (b) shall be culpable for
offences for which punishments are predetermined under Islamic Sharia.
(d) Transfer to Juvenile Court. A person who is less than 18 years old at
the time of the offense and who is excused for his offense under
Subsections (a) and (b) shall be referred to the Juvenile Court, which
shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all further proceedings in the
matter.
CHAPTER 50. EXCUSE DEFENSES
Section 56 – Impaired Consciousness
(a) A person is excused for his offense if, at the time of the offense:
(1) he suffers a physiologically confirmable disease or defect not
specifically recognized or rejected as a basis for exculpation by another
excuse provision in this Chapter, and
(2) as a result, he lacks substantial capacity:
(A) to accurately perceive the physical nature or physical
consequences of his conduct constituting the offense, or
(B) to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct
constituting the offense, or
(C) to control his conduct constituting the offense so as to
be justly held accountable for it.
(b) Antisocial Personality Excluded. For the purposes of Subsection (a),
a physiologically confirmable disease or defect does not include an
abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise antisocial
conduct.
1. In addition to other grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute, a person shall not be criminally responsible if, at the time of that person's conduct:
(a) The person suffers from a mental disease or defect that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law;
(b) The person is in a state of intoxication that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law, unless the person has become voluntarily intoxicated under such circumstances that the person knew, or disregarded the risk, that, as a result of the intoxication, he or she was likely to engage in conduct constituting a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;
(c) The person acts reasonably to defend himself or herself or another person or, in the case of war crimes, property which is essential for the survival of the person or another person or property which is essential for accomplishing a military mission, against an imminent and unlawful use of force in a manner proportionate to the degree of danger to the person or the other person or property protected. The fact that the person was involved in a defensive operation conducted by forces shall not in itself constitute a ground for excluding criminal responsibility under this subparagraph;
(d) The conduct which is alleged to constitute a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been caused by duress resulting from a threat of imminent death or of continuing or imminent serious bodily harm against that person or another person, and the person acts necessarily and reasonably to avoid this threat, provided that the person does not intend to cause a greater harm than the one sought to be avoided. Such a threat may either be:
(i) Made by other persons; or
(ii) Constituted by other circumstances beyond that person's control.