PUTRAJAYA: A person who is medically insane is not necessarily absolved from criminal responsibility, the Federal Court ruled recently.
A three-bench panel led by Datuk Zabariah Mohd Yusof outlined the distinction between medical and legal insanity, and clarified the criteria under which mental illness may exonerate an accused.
She said the term 'medical insanity' refers to a disorder of the mind which covers a range of mental health conditions which may impair one's cognitive or emotional functions.
She said these conditions, however, do not necessarily render one as legally insane under section 84 of the Penal Code, to accord a complete defence in criminal law when an offence has been committed.
"In medical insanity, the emphasis is on one's mental health and well-being or psychological disorder, with the primary goal being the diagnosis, treatment and management of the mental disorder.
"Persons experiencing medical insanity may still possess the capability to make informed decisions and can lead a life of normalcy with the appropriate medical intervention.
"A finding of medical insanity will primarily result in medical treatment, therapy, and other interventions focused on managing and improving the individual's mental health," said the court.
Zabariah said this in her ruling, allowing an appeal by the prosecution to reinstate a murder charge against Mohd Rozani Yahaya on Oct 21.
Rozani had previously been acquitted by the High Court, a decision later upheld by the Court of Appeal, for the murder of Ab Halim Che Yusoff near Pasir Mas, Kelantan, on Jan 25, 2018.
The accused had raised the defence of insanity, claiming he was not aware of his actions at the time of the crime.
Meanwhile, the top court said legal insanity involves a distinct set of criteria and considerations within the framework of the legal system.
She said it involves a legal determination that a person, due to a severe mental disorder, is not criminally responsible for their actions.
"Unlike medical insanity, which involves a question of mental health only, legal insanity goes beyond mental health and pertains to one's legal capacity and responsibility for their actions.
"This accords the rationale of legal insanity being a recognised defence in criminal law, as it implies that, at the time when committing an offence, the accused was found to be in a state of not understanding the nature and consequences of his/her actions.
"The consequences of legal insanity may result in the accused being declared not criminally responsible or being committed to a psychiatric institution instead of facing traditional criminal penalties," she said.
Zabariah said legal insanity is determined by legal standards, which may vary by jurisdiction.
She said when the defence of insanity is raised, there is a two-stage process before the defence of legal insanity is available to the accused.
"Firstly, there must be a finding that the accused was medically insane at the time when he committed the alleged offence.
"Secondly, it must be determined whether the accused, due to his psychiatric condition, has lost his cognitive faculties to the extent that he is incapable of understanding the nature of his actions or recognising that what he is doing is wrong or against the law.
"Both the medical requirement of mental illness (first stage) and the loss of reasoning requirement (second stage) would constitute legal insanity, which is a complete defence," she added.
The apex court then ordered Rozani's case to be sent back to the High Court for the continuation of the trial, where the accused will be required to enter his defence on the charge against him.
Other members of the bench were Datuk Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil and Datuk Hanipah Farikullah.