General Part
Section 2.
Crime.
Chapter 4.
Persons subject to criminal liability.
Article 25. Insanity.
1. The person who was in the state of insanity when committing a socially dangerous crime is not liable to criminal liability, i.e., the person could not understand the dangerous nature of one’s actions (inaction) or control one’s actions as a result of chronic mental illness, temporary mental disorder, mental retardation or other mental disease.
2. Forced medical measures can be imposed by the court with respect to the person who committed socially dangerous actions in an insane state.
3. Also not subject to punishment, is the person who committed a crime in the state of insanity, however, had fallen mentally ill before sentencing by the court, which deprived him of the capability of understanding the actual nature and significance of his actions (inaction) or controlling them. Forced medical measures can be imposed by the court with respect to such a person, and after recovery this person can be subjected to punishment.
General Part
Section 2.
Crime.
Chapter 4.
Persons subject to criminal liability.
Article 26. Limited sanity.
1. A sane person who, due to mental disorder, when committing the crime could not entirely understand the actual nature of one’s action (inaction) and its social danger, or control one’s actions, is subject to criminal liability.
2. Limited sanity is taken into account as a mitigating circumstance when imposing the punishment and can become the ground for the enforcement of medical measures, parallel to the punishment.
SPECIAL PART
SECTION 9. PROCEEDINGS IN FIRST INSTANCE COURT
CHAPTER 45. ADOPTING THE VERDICT
Article 361. Discussion of the defendant's imputability
When during investigation, preliminary investigation or court trial the issue of the defendant's imputability has arisen and the issue of feeling responsibility for his actions, on which occasion a medical and mental examination was appointed, the court must discuss that issue again when adopting the verdict.
Finding that the defendant was in the imputable state at the moment of performing the actions, or after committing the crime he became mentally ill, which deprived him of the capacity to be responsible for his actions, the court adopts an appropriate decree.
Article 19. The Subject of Criminal Liability
2. The person who has reached the age of 14 before the moment of committing the criminal offence is subject to criminal liability for committing criminal offences prescribed under the Articles 155-161, Articles 166-170, Article 191, Article 198, Article 252, Parts 2 and 3 of the Article 253, Parts 2 and 3 of the Article 254, Article 258, Parts 2 and 3 of the Article 264, Article 297, Article 338, Article 339, Article 397 or Article 398 of this Code.
3. If a person has reached the age envisaged in Parts 1 and 2 of this Article, but due to mental retardation was not capable of realising the illegitimacy of his/her act or to control his/her act, then he/she shall not be subject to criminal liability.
4. If a person has reached the age envisaged in Parts 1 and 2 of this Article, but due to mental retardation was not capable to fully realise the illegitimacy of his/her act or to control his/her act, then this shall be taken as a mitigating circumstance when assigning the sentencе.
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.