Reshaping Insanity in Pakistani Law: The Case of Safia Bano.

IF 0.5 4区 社会学 Q3 LAW American Journal of Law & Medicine Pub Date : 2023-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-12 DOI:10.1017/amj.2023.33
Muhammad Ahmad Munir, Brian Wright
{"title":"Reshaping Insanity in Pakistani Law: The Case of Safia Bano.","authors":"Muhammad Ahmad Munir, Brian Wright","doi":"10.1017/amj.2023.33","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This Article analyzes the 2021 judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Mst. Safia Bano v. Home Department, Government of Punjab. The case has garnered significant local and international attention due to the Court's ruling that a death sentence may not be carried out on a defendant who has a mental illness. Setting the case against the backdrop of Pakistan's Islamic and colonial contexts, this article argues that the Supreme Court has reshaped the insanity defense in Pakistani law by placing the determination of a defendant's mental state mainly in the hands of medical professionals. However, the Court's reliance on medical professionals and the subsequent downplaying of the \"moral capacity\" element of the insanity defense-a determination of law made by courts-has created an obstacle for courts to punish offenders more stringently in future cases due to the popular belief that mental health professionals are ill-equipped to answer broader questions of justice for victims and society. The article recommends that this issue can be remedied by establishing an objective legal test for insanity that considers Islamic law, Pakistani precedent, and advances in medical science.</p>","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"49 2-3","pages":"301-313"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/amj.2023.33","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This Article analyzes the 2021 judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Mst. Safia Bano v. Home Department, Government of Punjab. The case has garnered significant local and international attention due to the Court's ruling that a death sentence may not be carried out on a defendant who has a mental illness. Setting the case against the backdrop of Pakistan's Islamic and colonial contexts, this article argues that the Supreme Court has reshaped the insanity defense in Pakistani law by placing the determination of a defendant's mental state mainly in the hands of medical professionals. However, the Court's reliance on medical professionals and the subsequent downplaying of the "moral capacity" element of the insanity defense-a determination of law made by courts-has created an obstacle for courts to punish offenders more stringently in future cases due to the popular belief that mental health professionals are ill-equipped to answer broader questions of justice for victims and society. The article recommends that this issue can be remedied by establishing an objective legal test for insanity that considers Islamic law, Pakistani precedent, and advances in medical science.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重塑巴基斯坦法律中的精神错乱:萨菲亚-巴诺案》。
本文分析了巴基斯坦最高法院 2021 年对 Mst.Safia Bano 诉旁遮普省政府内政部案的判决。由于法院裁定不得对患有精神疾病的被告执行死刑,该案引起了当地和国际社会的极大关注。本文以巴基斯坦的伊斯兰和殖民背景为背景,论证了最高法院通过将被告精神状态的判定权主要交由医疗专业人员掌握,重塑了巴基斯坦法律中的精神错乱辩护。然而,法院对医疗专业人员的依赖以及随后对精神失常辩护中 "道德能力 "要素的淡化--这是由法院做出的法律认定--为法院在未来的案件中更严厉地惩罚罪犯制造了障碍,因为人们普遍认为精神健康专业人员没有能力回答为受害者和社会伸张正义的更广泛问题。文章建议,可以通过建立一个客观的精神错乱法律检验标准来纠正这一问题,该标准应考虑伊斯兰法律、巴基斯坦的先例以及医学科学的进步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
16.70%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: desde Enero 2004 Último Numero: Octubre 2008 AJLM will solicit blind comments from expert peer reviewers, including faculty members of our editorial board, as well as from other preeminent health law and public policy academics and professionals from across the country and around the world.
期刊最新文献
A Protected Class, An Unprotected Condition, and A Biomarker - A Method/Formula for Increased Diversity in Clinical Trials for the African American Subject with Benign Ethnic Neutropenia (BEN) - CORRIGENDUM. "The Timeless Explosion of Fantasy's Dream": How State Courts Have Ignored the Supreme Court's Decision in Panetti v. Quarterman - ERRATUM. Mental Health Matters: A Look At Abortion Law Post-Dobbs - ERRATUM. Abortion Access for Women in Custody in the Wake of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health. How The "Great Resignation" and COVID Unemployment Have Eroded the Employer Sponsored Insurance Model and Access to Healthcare.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1