Intoxication

Question 1

What is the definition of “intoxication” under the Penal Code?

Answer 1

Section 86(3) of the Penal Code defines “intoxication” as a state caused by narcotics or drugs. This is an inclusive provision, meaning it also includes alcohol-induced intoxication.

Question 2

Can intoxication generally be used as a defense under the Penal Code?

Answer 2

No, intoxication is generally not a defense under Section 85(1). However, under Section 85(2), it can be a defense if the accused:

1. Did not know the act or omission was wrong.
2. Did not know what they were doing at the time of the act.

Question 3

What are the two types of intoxication covered under the Penal Code

Answer 3

1. Involuntary intoxication under S.85(2)(a) and 86(1)
2. Voluntary intoxication under s.85(2)(b) and 86(1)

Question 4

In the case of PP v Tan Ho Teck [1988], why was the defense of intoxication allowed?

Answer 4

In this case, the accused consumed Hennessy before stabbing his brother and sister. The Singaporean High Court held that at the material time, the accused was suffering from delirium due to acute alcoholic intoxication, which rendered him insane. He did not know what he was doing, and therefore, the defense of intoxication was allowed.

Question 5

How did the court determine the success of the intoxication defense in Chan Kwee Fong [2010]?

Answer 5

The court considered the accused’s conduct immediately before and after the offense. In this case, the accused recalled many details and was able to walk home unaided. This showed he was conscious of his surroundings and capable of forming the intention required under Section 300(c). Therefore, the defense of intoxication failed.

Question 6

What does Section 86(2) stipulate about the application of the intoxication defense?

Answer 6

Section 86(2) states that the intoxication defense applies only to offenses requiring mens rea (intention). It does not apply if the accused had formed the intention to commit the offense before becoming intoxicated. For example, if someone consumed alcohol to gain courage to murder their husband, the defense of intoxication would not apply.

Question 7

What mental condition was considered in the case of Aldwin Rojas Saz [2003], and why did the intoxication defense succeed?

Answer 7

The court considered the accused’s mental disorder, certified as “Methamphetamine Use Disorder,” caused by illegal drug use. This condition rendered him mentally incapacitated during the offense, allowing the defense of intoxication to succeed.