ANALYSIS OF SECTION 24 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE IN RELATION TO MENS REA AND CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY IN SOUTHERN NIGERIA

Abstract

The general objective of criminal law is punishment of offenders. Punishment is said to be meted out on persons whocommitted an act or omission that is criminal. An offence which is also used interchangeably with crime is defined asa wrongful act or omission which is prohibited by law with some penal consequences. However, punishment foroffences is not done for the fun of it. At least, there was the need to ascertain the actual commission of the offence orthe doing of the act or omission which constitutes a crime (actus reus) by a person(s) (parties to an offence), theexistence of some blame on the part of the person (mens rea). This requirement of blameworthiness on the part of thedoer also expressed in the axiom ‘no liability without fault’ becomes the hallmark of the common law doctrine ofmens rea, that is, the guilty mind which constitutes the mental element of an offence. This philosophical concept of ‘noliability without fault’ is the foundational basis of the defenses (general and special) to criminal responsibilities.However, Nigeria criminal law has now dispensed with the much complicated and confusing doctrine of mens rea byspecifically and expressly enacting various defenses especially section 24 of the Criminal Code which providesdefenses for independent acts or omissions, or events which occur by accident. This work examined Section 24 of theCriminal Code in relation to mens rea, genetic determinism, artificial intelligence, vicarious liability, thin skull/eggshell rule and strict liability as it relates to criminal responsibility in Nigeria. For an in-depth analysis, the researcherused referential materials, statutes, case laws, textbooks, articles and journals, internet materials, opinion of scholars.At the end of this academic exercise, the researcher discovered that in spite of the salutary provisions of section 24 ofthe Criminal Code; little considerable attention has been paid to that provision in the determination of criminalresponsibilities in Nigeria. Rather, Nigerian courts and legal practitioners continued to invoke the much confusingcommon law principle of mens rea in determining criminal responsibility. The researcher recommended that section24 of the Criminal Code be given its position as the foundational corner stone of defenses in Nigeria criminal law.