A Sketch of the Offenses Committed under the Provoked Temporary Insanity in Common Law Countries

● In common law countries, which as a rule do not have codified criminal legislation, or where it exists, offenses committed under the provoked temporary insanity are not treated as a separate type of wrongdoing (delictum sui generis). Criminal theory and practice consider them as a particular example of privileged homicide related to manslaughter but not murder. ● Actus reus of offenses committed under the provoked temporary insanity (as a kind of privileged homicide) consists of the following objective elements: a) conduct, result (i.e. death), causal link between them and any other facultative element; b) provocative behavior committed by the victim; c) causal link between the victim’s behavior and the perpetrators provoked conduct (double causation). ● Mens rea of the offenses in question pertains to both subjective elements characteristic to manslaughter: a) recklessness and b) extreme temporary emotional excitement, which might be either explained or justified on a rational basis. The verification of rationality depends on the “reasonable man” standard and how would he behave in the same situation. ● As a starting point, for the classification of mental elements traditionally is applied M’Naghten case. Although it focuses on the perpetrator’s capacity to understand the wrongfulness of conduct, to be responsible for his crimes, it can be directly applied to the offenses, committed under the provoked temporary insanity considered as a serious situational disorder of activity of psychic or state of mind. ● Legal regulation of offenses committed under the provoked temporary insanity is entirely differently constructed within the common law countries in comparison with other legal systems, including the Georgian Penal Code. The common law approach is hard to be considered as a successful one, as it is not always efficient in terms of theoretical and practical considerations. ● The main shortcoming of the common law system is related to its ambiguity, derived from the abundance of value judgments, tests, fictions, and criteria