INTERPRETATION OF GRAVE AND SUDDEN PROVOCATION IN MALAYSIA
Keywords:
Provocation, defence, grave, sudden, murder, culpable homicideAbstract
Provocation as a defence to murder is recognised under Exception 1 to section 300 of
the Penal Code. One of the conditions that has to be met for a successful provocation is
that the provocation must have been grave and sudden. Since murder is regarded as one
of the most violent crimes, the requirements of graveness and suddenness are crucial to
prevent the defence of provocation from being abused. These two requirements are
cumulative, whereby if any of these elements is lacking, the defence will fail. However, a
cautious reading of this Exception shows some ambiguity in the interpretation of the
terms grave and sudden. This ambiguity has resulted in several interpretations by the
courts. This paper aims to analyse the court’s approach towards the interpretation of
these words. The paper consists of a detailed critical analysis of the Penal Code, case
law and scholarly writing related to this area. The paper concludes that there still exists
some ambiguity in the interpretation of grave and sudden provocation. This leaves the
interpretive task solely to the court, thus resulting in a possible risk to the accused who
relies on this line of defence.
References
Allen, M. J. (2015). Textbook on Criminal Law. (13th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Berman, M. N., & Farrell, I. P. (2010). Provocation Manslaughter as Partial Justification and Partial
Excuse. Wm. & Mary L. Rev., 52, 1027.
Bhatia, KL. (2010). Textbook on Legal Language and Legal Writing. New Delhi: Universal Law
Publishing Co.Pvt. Ltd.
Ferguson, P. R., & McDiarmid, C. (2014). Scots Criminal law: A Critical Analysis. (2nd ed.). Glasgow:
Edinburgh University Press.
Flowers, R. B. (2013). The Dynamics of Murder: Kill or be Killed. New York: CRC Press.
Horder, J. (1992). Provocation and Responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kok, L. P., Cheang, M., & Chee, K. T. (1994). Mental Disorders and the law. Singapore: Singapore
University Press, National University of Singapore.
Loughnan, A. (2012). Manifest Madness: Mental Incapacity in the Criminal Law. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Morris, T., & Blom-Cooper, L. (2011). Fine Lines and Distinctions: Murder, Manslaughter and the
Unlawful Taking of Human Life. United Kingdom: Waterside Press.
Parrillo, V. N. (2008). Encyclopedia of Social Problems, Volume 1. California: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Renke, W. N. (2010). Calm Like a Bomb: An Assessment of the Partial Defence of
Provocation. Alberta Law Review, 47(3), 729.
Rosen, M. (1999). Offences against the Person. London: Cavendish Publishing.
Siti Zubaidah Ismail. (2001). Provocation as a Defence in Malaysia: A Re- Examination of Its
Applicability. 1 Malayan Law Journal cxciii-cxcviii.
Wan Arfah Hamzah. & Ramy Bulan. (2005). An Introduction to the Malaysian Legal System. Kuala
Lumpur: Penerbit Fajar Bakti.
Yeo, S. M. (2011). India. In Heller & Dubber (Eds.), The Handbook of Comparative Criminal Law (pp.
-319). California: Stanford University Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2017 Journal of Academia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
