Codification: Mental Disorder and Intoxication under the Draft Criminal Code
| Author | Martin Wasik |
| DOI | 10.1177/002201838605000407 |
| Published date | 01 November 1986 |
| Date | 01 November 1986 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
CODIFICATION:
MENTAL
DISORDER
AND
INTOXICATION
UNDER
THE
DRAFT
CRIMINAL
CODE
Martin Wasik*
Both these areas are ones of great complexity within the existing
criminal law. Underpinning both is the perennial problem of
reconciling traditional legal methods of assessing culpability,
particularly in the presence or absence of mens rea, with
requirements of social defence against manifestly dangerous
individuals. I have interpreted my remit to cover the draft Code's
proposals on a new verdict of
"not
guilty by reason of mental
disorder", to replace the insanity "special" verdict, the associated
area of diminished responsibility and the proposals on the legal
relevance of voluntary and involuntary intoxication of the
defendant. Since it is so clearly linked with the above, I have also
looked briefly at the proposals on the defence of automatism. In
order
to keep the article short, I have omitted virtually all reference
to existing controversies which would be avoided by the Code, if
implemented. Also, I have tried to find things in the draft Code to
disagree with. Disagreement has not been easy, since I am in
sympathy with the team's objectives and accept the logic of most of
their proposals.
Mental Disorder
This topic is dealt with in clauses 37 to 42 of the draft Bill and in
paras. 12.1 to 12.30 of the Report. With minor exceptions and
modifications the Code follows the recommendations of the Butler
Committee on Mentally Abnormal Offenders1. These proposals
have, in general, been well received by commentators. The Code
•Lecturer in Law, Manchester University.
1. Cmnd.6244, (1975) HMSO. See Ashworth,
'The
Butler Committee and
criminal responsibility" [1975]Crim.L.R. 687.
393
To continue reading
Request your trial